FaltaM said: Hi @dzek , Can the free version of FMRTE freeze players? I tried step 7 and it seem like I need the paid version to do so. Expand Hi FeltaM,
I’m not sure about this because I’m using the paid version. Maybe someone in the forum can help you on this or just ask this question inside FMRTE forum.
Steelwood said: It did okay as it still included various things such as hard tackling and high pressing and got 105 points with Celtic in the Scottish Prem. However, it did struggle when I tested it with Manchester City. I do totally agree that results improve when you affect it yourself (i.e. adding a team bonding session every week increases team cohesion which improves results) but I think it is likely that the top tactics here would perform best in the game too, taking RNG into account. Expand The more you "influence" an environment, the more you will get certain results that sometimes lead down the wrong paths.
This sentence was for those who create databases to test tactics. So I mean that the results of the FM Arena testing league and others (including mine) do not replicate a regular season at all. It is simply the "score" of a tactic within the test league and nothing more. I'm with you on this one.
Steelwood said: I've practically spent the last week playing a Xabi Alonso 3-4-3 type of tactic without all of the added instructions such as dribble more or focusing the ball down the flanks. While it is fun on a single-player save, it would never be as effective as the highest 4-2-3-1 and 4-2-4 tactics on here. I do love FM, but the tactical rigidity of the "meta" irritates me Expand What were your results with this tactic?
The reason I'm asking is because, I think this year there are more combinations you can do to get results and/or trophies. And another reason is that I'm not so sure about FM Arena results compared to a regular season game. The more you "influence" an environment, the more you will get certain results that sometimes lead down the wrong paths. To be fair and not to be misunderstood this applies to my database and many others.
I also find a practice that TFF (for those who know him) used to do in his own databases, he tested his tactics, at max in 500 matches and his tactics were 95% equivalent to the normal game environment.
In recent years, I can't say the same thing has been happening. As well as not forgetting that since FM23, the game developers have changed/upgraded the AI within the ME and it's more reactive.
Ralle said: The season has ended, they used the above-mentioned methods halfway through the season, the result is okay, could have hoped for a bit more. but overall, a really good performance, definitely an opportunity to play the game.
All matches have been played. Expand Nice. What results did you get? Wins, draws and losses? Can you share them please?
Inside the link I provided in the first post you will find an excel sheet (Testing Sample.xlsx) with which you can measure the results of your tactics up to 3 times. You need to enter the GF, GA and PTS into the "white" tables and the results will be in the table just to the right in the "yellow" table. If you run into any problems or difficulties I am here.
The results that my excel sheet produces are translated to a season that has 38 matches. With that in mind I would say if your tactic gets over 60 points I would consider it very good.
Zeyad said: What's the thinking behind using AMCs against IWBs (central against central) and vice versa for Wingers and FBs, my first instinct is that the opposite makes sense actually I would love to know more about the theory behind this? thanks Expand Seems kind of weird, right?
The logic behind this is simple. When you create a tactic (look the image below), what you see is when your team is NOT in possession.
Example:// There are exceptions 1. If we take for example that the opponent is using IWBs on both sides and based on the Positional Play they introduced this year in the game, the opposing IWBs (when their team has possession of the ball) will rotate from their D R/L or WB R/L positions and go to DMC R/L respectively.
Exceptions: 1. If the opponent uses 2 IWBs and at the same time has 2 DMs (which do not rotate to other positions - I explain in the exception 2), then one of the two IWBs will be rotated to the DM position and the other will remain in its position.
2. If the opponent is using 2 IWBs and again at the same time has 2 DMs but one or both DMs are Segundo Volante and/or Roaming Playmaker and/or Half Back then the first example applies where BOTH IWBs are rotated to the DMC R/L positions respectively. But in such a case you will have 3 opponents in the DMs positions and there you could use a tactic like this - TON 4231 N TH P99 by @Gerrard.
Knowing this I would rather have 2 AMCs than 2 AMRLs. By the same logic for the opposite scenario or the scenario where only one side uses IWB.
Ralle said: What do you think about OI's, would these also have an effect? Expand Personally I never use them so I recommend to not use them too and dont delegate them to your staff because OIs can make changes to your formation and how it behaves inside the match. It’s better to stick with this plan.
Ralle said: So, a few more matches have been played, although it's still early, I personally think it looks very promising! Expand I believe that this practice will work, it just remains to be seen from various examples. Yours is an example.
Added Be More Disciplined, Pass Into Space
Removed Be More Expressive, Play Out Of Defence
Added Be More Expressive, Fairly Narrow
PI tweaks
Hi FeltaM,
I’m not sure about this because I’m using the paid version. Maybe someone in the forum can help you on this or just ask this question inside FMRTE forum.
The more you "influence" an environment, the more you will get certain results that sometimes lead down the wrong paths.
This sentence was for those who create databases to test tactics. So I mean that the results of the FM Arena testing league and others (including mine) do not replicate a regular season at all. It is simply the "score" of a tactic within the test league and nothing more. I'm with you on this one.
What were your results with this tactic?
The reason I'm asking is because, I think this year there are more combinations you can do to get results and/or trophies. And another reason is that I'm not so sure about FM Arena results compared to a regular season game. The more you "influence" an environment, the more you will get certain results that sometimes lead down the wrong paths. To be fair and not to be misunderstood this applies to my database and many others.
I also find a practice that TFF (for those who know him) used to do in his own databases, he tested his tactics, at max in 500 matches and his tactics were 95% equivalent to the normal game environment.
In recent years, I can't say the same thing has been happening. As well as not forgetting that since FM23, the game developers have changed/upgraded the AI within the ME and it's more reactive.
FB to WB
Hold Position on DMs
IW to IF
WB to FB
Removed Distribute To Centre-Backs, Slow Pace Down
PI tweaks
Added BE MORE EXPRESSIVE
Removed BE MORE DISCIPLINED
Removed Focus Play, Run At Defence, Underlaps
All matches have been played.
Nice. What results did you get? Wins, draws and losses? Can you share them please?
Inside the link I provided in the first post you will find an excel sheet (Testing Sample.xlsx) with which you can measure the results of your tactics up to 3 times. You need to enter the GF, GA and PTS into the "white" tables and the results will be in the table just to the right in the "yellow" table. If you run into any problems or difficulties I am here.
The results that my excel sheet produces are translated to a season that has 38 matches. With that in mind I would say if your tactic gets over 60 points I would consider it very good.
Thanks a lot!
Added Be More Expressive
Seems kind of weird, right?
The logic behind this is simple. When you create a tactic (look the image below), what you see is when your team is NOT in possession.
Example: // There are exceptions
1. If we take for example that the opponent is using IWBs on both sides and based on the Positional Play they introduced this year in the game, the opposing IWBs (when their team has possession of the ball) will rotate from their D R/L or WB R/L positions and go to DMC R/L respectively.
Exceptions:
1. If the opponent uses 2 IWBs and at the same time has 2 DMs (which do not rotate to other positions - I explain in the exception 2), then one of the two IWBs will be rotated to the DM position and the other will remain in its position.
2. If the opponent is using 2 IWBs and again at the same time has 2 DMs but one or both DMs are Segundo Volante and/or Roaming Playmaker and/or Half Back then the first example applies where BOTH IWBs are rotated to the DMC R/L positions respectively. But in such a case you will have 3 opponents in the DMs positions and there you could use a tactic like this - TON 4231 N TH P99 by @Gerrard.
Knowing this I would rather have 2 AMCs than 2 AMRLs. By the same logic for the opposite scenario or the scenario where only one side uses IWB.
Personally I never use them so I recommend to not use them too and dont delegate them to your staff because OIs can make changes to your formation and how it behaves inside the match. It’s better to stick with this plan.
I believe that this practice will work, it just remains to be seen from various examples. Yours is an example.
I am 95% sure
I've released an update to my test league that includes some minor fixes.
For those who wish, you can download it from the first post here.
Happy FMing
This practice seems to be working but it's too early to come to a conclusion. I'm curious to see what happens next in your season. Keep it up!
This is a good method of having more defenders than your opponent has attackers. You can easily apply both methods to a tactic.
If you want and have time, share your results with us 😉