Avenger22 said: I am curious the ME will be from scratch ? because ofc Unity is a whole different level and stuff, very interesting how it will behave for me graphics are just a bonus but is the movement, intelligence, i mean EA and PES have amazing graphics but are horrible horrible in AI and intelligence, tactics etc FM outclasses them in terms of simulation by far Expand FIFA and PES use different engines and also have difficulty in managing players by users, so with this element it is more difficult to code. Unity is definitely a step forward, but to be a step forward you have to manage it properly. To be honest, I don't know the capabilities of Unity but we'll see. I'm keeping my expectations low as I do every year
Avenger22 said: Well i love seeing the 3-5-2 without WB the offensive play is beatiful and it scored 47 with GF 71 so much more than the WB version prb is ofc you defend with 3 ... the point is you attack better when wide players attack the box and that proved it, so imagine WB attacking like DW but staying more wide in buildup and attacking the crosses the WB version would get easily 70+ goals and be meta but hoping SI will fix that ticket someone raised so there is hope for the 3-5-2 WB, imagine the 3-4-3 with that fix ... Expand Avenger22 said: And if you see all tactic which have more goals scored in FM22, FM 23 are 3 ATB with DW,WM stuff like that which proved that if they defended in back 5 it would be meta but ofc having a defensive phase with 3 players is a meme Expand Having more players at the back means (somehow) that you play more defensively. Now with Positional Play maybe things will change and we will see different systems coming to the surface as is happening now with the asymmetrics. To be honest the last time that a 3ATB system makes wonders was in FM18. I was winning UCL with a team on my country from the first season. I won every big team for easy.
There was a bug on defensive phase and AI couldn't handle 3 strikers.
Avenger22 said: They always released buggy games since FM 12 first game i played there, always dunno why, but every FM is good to play 1-2 months after release then you can enjoy best out of the game, i have high hopes for fm 25 i only care about ME and Unity will be a huge upgrade to the old engine, the movements and coding can be much more better we will see, i think FM apart from few stuff need to focus on ME because it is the most important and the thing which can be improved more and more Expand Probably the reason why it's good to play it in the first 1-2 months is because ME and the things that happen in it in general are a matter of probability. What do I mean? For example, the developers have set goalkeepers to have a 5% chance of injury, and when you fall within that chance (in whatever part of the game you're in) that's where the bugs start to appear. Number and case is just an example here.
It is true that every year they release buggy games because there are problems unsolved from previous versions that SI never talks about. Did you imagine FM25 with the Unity Engine to be just a variation of the same UI and ME?
ME is the core element of the game. Without it there is no FM. All the groundwork (team building, training, player improvement, staff appointment, etc) is to get a better result within the ME so I too therefore totally agree that they should put more emphasis on the ME.
Avenger22 said: 5 points drop with just S instead of A in MEZZ role, the 2-3 PI i don't think have an effect at all wow but logical the CWB who stays like a retard in super wide position in crosses and don't attack the box makes it just 2 players in the box 2 in wide and 2 outside ... Expand I think ME loves roles which attack half spaces/through channels but you have to ensure that there are also players out wide for crossing opportunities and 1 or 2 players outside the box for long shots
letsgo9 said: 3 points by removing take more risks from wing backs and dms? It's that real? Expand This may be because of the RNG but it was something from last year that I wanted to try because some positions tend to accept some PIs and some don't. I tried many ways to track down the error/fix but so far ME is not helping me
Based on 424 QuadroWave X-4 created by @sponsorkindest. - Changed mentality from "Balanced" to "Attacking". - Moved IFs to AM position as SS and tweak their PIs accordingly. Also I have changed WB(At) to FB(At) and added "Hold Position" to DMCL. - Added "Distribute To Centre-Backs" and "Slow Pace Down". - Removed "Focus Play" and "Get Stuck In".
MeanOnSunday said: A bit sad for those that remember when SI had a policy to only release when the game was ready. Last year we find out that they removed features so they could launch on time. This year they launch with the most bugs I can remember. It’s the price of becoming a larger company, more overhead, more employees to get disgruntled if they don’t get their bonus $$$. Expand My thought in the last few days is that SI intentionally made the game easier this year with more goals in matches (i.e. 6-4, 5-5, etc.) so that new players to the game could enjoy it more.
I wrote above that one reason more people bought the game was because they were/are not satisfied with FIFA or PES and this one with lots of goals would keep them more excited rather than seeing 1-0, 2-1 scores etc.
I also continue to think that the dates they release updates to the game to be the wrong approach. A better approach in my opinion would be the following: - Separate the ME with the data updates (fixes/upgrades to the database such as new signings, league rules, improvements to player skills etc.). - Push out more frequently new small updates/improvements all at once that fix minor issues that are compatible with existing saved games.
Another thing they didn't understand though I think is that by increasing their customers, the pressure will also increase. I'm not sure SI was ready for this and it's already showing in the game release that it's below expectations.
Avenger22 said: I have seen someone opening a ticket in bug forum in SI and they are working to fix it to make WB(a) to attack the box from crosses and make runs in behind like IRL in a back 3 not just stay and freeze wide and wait for a rebound or just cross from byline WB that FM has, but have not seen a ticket for defending forwards which are horrible in the game they are basically not defending once ball is past high press.
This was football tbf pre 2014, Atletico changed the game when both their strikers defended like crazy deep high mid better than most players and all teams now have their strikers defending which has changed game completely Expand First let's fix the problems the defense is facing and then move on to the forwards, although that is part of the defense as well. Atletico generally play a tough game and they all defend together as a team and indeed that is what most teams are doing today.
Avenger22 said: I mean logically for example a 3-5-2 DM WB CM version makes no sense to be better high press than mid block i have never in my life seen a good pressing 3-5-2 full intensity only moments of high press but not full klopp esque style best example irl is Inter, prob will test a midblock here Expand To be honest we can't compare real football with FM football because as much as SI wants to represent real football through their game, it's still a game and not reality. For example, Gegenpress within FM has nothing to do with real life.
In real football you can press high with most shapes regardless of whether you have 3 at the back etc. It always depends on the skills of your players but in the game each position/role is coded to do certain things.
Avenger22 said: i think strikers are badly coded defensively in mid and low block that is ME since 2012 never seen them defend good like in real life, you see Lautaro or Thuram tracking back like crazy and marking defending very close to their own box that is why irl works 10 defending here in FM not because 2 strikers even on low block are still not defending Expand Indeed the forwards are very bad at defensive play even in high pressing based systems. They don't get back to help nor do they mark their near positions like double pivots either to win the ball or to cut off open spaces for passing. It's something that others are writing on the official forum but we don't have an official answer from SI to date.
Avenger22 said: Has there been any meta tactic like ever in FM Arena with mid or low block ? i mean what is the average drop in points from going high press to these ? Expand Good question!
I had tried some systems last year and 2 this year(links below for this year) but they didn't go so well. I think these styles of play need a different approach and I really don't have the time to try them.
Delicious said: Btw idk how you changing your words, "Brother I must step in here.. 424 deformation II has been tested in at least 6000 matches"
Fail to see where i did said that you said the tactic was tested 4k, whatever.
Let's say your tweaks are cosmetic so the tactic is the same right?
"stable" or "favor" the test is different btw that's not the point.
On every of your run you never hitted 65, none did, so if we can assume 65 ain't the true "power" of the tactic.
Now tell me the average over those runs : i didn't check yet but you said already there is a 59 which we can assume is the bad luck run. Now tell me what happened if you are unlucky and get 2 times 59 and go on. By doing that you can even calculate how luck/RNG hitted your test. How do you know if you were in luck spree or medium. The example that i brought it in is very easy to understand same tactic 3 points different, no changes, just the name and author/tactic which are not influencing the results.
so what you can assume, 64/63/62/61/60/59 are the possible results, i literally didn't even see if there anything else similar "according" to your logic of "fake" tweaks. Now question is do you know the % chance of those runs? Maybe ain't just 3 scenario but more. Maybe the true number is 62 or 61 and RNG is playing his part as well. If you are considering a -+3/5 on every tweak you doing, you can "guess" if you don't you are committing wrong assumption.
If you call that stable, we diverge from the main point is "what stable" means :
Hope it's clear Expand Brother I really cannot continue this discussion any further. I can't sit down and explain word by word what I mean. In every reply I post (not just here - in this discussion) I try to be as clear as I can be to anyone. We all agree that there is a factor called RNG. That's it!
If you really want to understand what I have said then I am here to discuss at your convenience. Until then, good luck!
sponsorkindest said: 100% agree with your interpretation of over/underlap. That's my finding too and I don't use em when I am playing FM lower leagues. Maybe because of the player attribute distribution in FM test league, overlap tend to be powerful, so I believe it requires players above certain caliber. Expand The only thing you have to know is if your opponent is weak on defensive attributes actually. They can't stop you most of the time
Avenger22 said: Also noticed in this tactic every position has dribble more and take more risks so basically like having TI of both ? what is the difference of doing this ? also in this ME overlaps do they affect much cause it doesn't seem Expand I'm not sure (yet) but I don't think the AI can read the player instructions given to a player. Generally they can't read your tactic but team instructions are moves that are programmed to work in a certain way within ME. Player instructions on the other hand give a different behavior to each role if used correctly.
Take More Risks is a bit of a misunderstood instruction because of the UI and is about risk in general and not just about passing. I just thought I'd try it since without Pass Into Space my team would hold the ball better in the final third. The same goes for Dribble More.
Now for the overlaps I think they slow the game down because it forces the winger to hold the ball more and wait for an overlap from the WB to pass it to him which ends up losing it in a dangerous position most of the time since your WB will be out of position and it turns into a dangerous counter attack. I recommend the Overlap/Underlap instructions in situations where you are a much superior team to your opponent and are going to dominate everywhere on the field.
Delicious said: Bring those 6k runs then, if you saying that the same tactic was tested 6k times we can make the average. Expand I didn't say the same tactic was tested for 6000 matches. Please don't call me a liar and you can read again my last sentence before the asterisk here.
Delicious said: how do you know if those tweaks are "small" or "big" ; you still on an environment of 1200 games which each run has his own RNG. Expand I'm almost certain. Time will tell.
Delicious said: This can't be counted as the "original" one, even tho doesn't make sense since is just "mirrored" we don't know why on FM Arena Test this tactic went this nuts. Expand I never speak about this tactic.
I am not testing manually nothing, it's all automatized, so i am not even influencing anything in any way.
But for example i did tested many roles on Striker (zone) and immagine the record on negative was - 5 for Trequartista. I did literally changed one role and i got a -5.. If you believe those minus tweaks are doing nothing that's your own judgement. Expand Everything you show here is tested in your own environment which is probably not like that of FM-Arena. This has a huge impact on the outcome.
Delicious said: I didn't say you can't "guess" ; the tactic is indeed good, but not 4 points from the others luck or no luck included. You can understand even from 1200 games, there were tons of cases on the previous that tactic dropped 3-4 points on 4k runs, or even get gain points on 4k runs.
Luck/RNG is a part of the game as well, but if you want to measure micro-aspect factors that's not the way to conclude that the "M.E" is crazy or not or the tweaks are minus or not. Expand I have already said that this year the FM-Arena Testing League has changed. I've never said there is no RNG factor in every test, but if the runs sucked and it got 65 points on random numbers it would show up in all the other tweaks with much lower scores. Further up I sent you 4 of mine which they have very small tweaks and as I said above I'm almost certain but we can wait and see. There are still 15+ other tweaks tactics on the table from others with minimal changes and if you notice they are all on a scale of 60-65 so how much can the score change? Could it become 45 after 4000 matches? Also did you notice a little bit the difference in points from the controlled teams to the AI teams in each test of the original? The results all together show me that the original tactic is stable.
I'm providing you with the pictures here.
Let's take an example of another tactic that seems to be less stable:
The only difference in this tactic is the "Dribble Less" on the center backs. I don't think this tactical change is considered a big enough change to make an 11 points difference. If you consider it a big change then the game is completely broken. But what I understand here is that because there is a wide range in the scale of the two scores means that the score is somewhere in the middle +/-.
In the majority of things we agree but I hope you get my point.
Delicious said: Will try to explain it again, it was explained like idk many times, there is a thing called RNG (random number generated) imagine on 1200 games can be +-5/7 (don't know yet on FMarena test), means the original tactic from Smile didn't really scored 65 but it's more around 61-2 maybe even 60. We can know only when 4000+ games will be runned. And even there is a possibility to get RNG.
Basically if you get some crazy lucky runs on the test then tactic will fly better the another. But if your goal is to check micro-aspect, you need to "hit" the same RNG that was hitted on "deformation II"
Beside the fact that there should be at least some rule on writing change-logs so at least people don't waste their time and we don't hold a queue for no reason.
So if we are guessing, this setup is the same as the original and it's in "line" with the RNG as well.
Basically this tactic didn't won the gamble. Expand Brother I must step in here.. 424 deformation II has been tested in at least 6000 matches so far.
I've also seen some other tactic (can't remember which it was) that was tested at 1200 matches and got 57 points (if I'm not mistaken) and then when the minor update came out and was tested again for another 1200 matches it went up 1 point. The minor update did not change anything substantial in ME.
Sure there is RNG in every test but with so many tests with small to very small tweaks for each shape then we can roughly figure out the score a tactic will bring to the table.
* I want to remind everyone that this year's FM-Arena Testing League has changed a bit from last year.
Avenger22 said: Have you done any test removing low crosses ? also what about mark tighter PI i have done some tests not big change imo, but with much higher line and step up more ofc it is illogical to use as in real life too Expand The reason for the existence of low crosses in my opinion is not what it seems. It's mainly to make fewer crosses because they are low percentage(succeed) crosses and then most of the time you will see the player cut inside or come back to play the simple pass.
Mark Tighter on aggressive systems like the Gegenpress, is to help with counter-press and pressing in general but SI has reworked the way pressing works since FM22 and year after year they make tweaks so the way it works now has changed. Nowadays the defensive part of ME is not very good and one part of it is the Mark Tighter. I hope SI to address these issues asap. Until then, the Mark Tighter instruction is useless unless you set it specifically and individually for each opponent, but again with great caution.
FIFA and PES use different engines and also have difficulty in managing players by users, so with this element it is more difficult to code. Unity is definitely a step forward, but to be a step forward you have to manage it properly. To be honest, I don't know the capabilities of Unity but we'll see. I'm keeping my expectations low as I do every year
There was a bug on defensive phase and AI couldn't handle 3 strikers.
It is true that every year they release buggy games because there are problems unsolved from previous versions that SI never talks about. Did you imagine FM25 with the Unity Engine to be just a variation of the same UI and ME?
ME is the core element of the game. Without it there is no FM. All the groundwork (team building, training, player improvement, staff appointment, etc) is to get a better result within the ME so I too therefore totally agree that they should put more emphasis on the ME.
I think ME loves roles which attack half spaces/through channels but you have to ensure that there are also players out wide for crossing opportunities and 1 or 2 players outside the box for long shots
- Changed mentality from "Balanced" to "Attacking".
- Moved IFs to AM position as SS and tweak their PIs accordingly. Also I have changed WB(At) to FB(At) and added "Hold Position" to DMCL.
- Added "Distribute To Centre-Backs" and "Slow Pace Down".
- Removed "Focus Play" and "Get Stuck In".
My thought in the last few days is that SI intentionally made the game easier this year with more goals in matches (i.e. 6-4, 5-5, etc.) so that new players to the game could enjoy it more.
I wrote above that one reason more people bought the game was because they were/are not satisfied with FIFA or PES and this one with lots of goals would keep them more excited rather than seeing 1-0, 2-1 scores etc.
I also continue to think that the dates they release updates to the game to be the wrong approach. A better approach in my opinion would be the following:
- Separate the ME with the data updates (fixes/upgrades to the database such as new signings, league rules, improvements to player skills etc.).
- Push out more frequently new small updates/improvements all at once that fix minor issues that are compatible with existing saved games.
Another thing they didn't understand though I think is that by increasing their customers, the pressure will also increase. I'm not sure SI was ready for this and it's already showing in the game release that it's below expectations.
An updated version of iBox V1.8d.
Changes:
Tweak PIs on defensive line and double pivot.
An updated version of iBox V1.9a.
Changes:
Team Instructions
- Added: Run At Defense
Tweak PIs on all positions.
This was football tbf pre 2014, Atletico changed the game when both their strikers defended like crazy deep high mid better than most players and all teams now have their strikers defending which has changed game completely
First let's fix the problems the defense is facing and then move on to the forwards, although that is part of the defense as well. Atletico generally play a tough game and they all defend together as a team and indeed that is what most teams are doing today.
To be honest we can't compare real football with FM football because as much as SI wants to represent real football through their game, it's still a game and not reality. For example, Gegenpress within FM has nothing to do with real life.
In real football you can press high with most shapes regardless of whether you have 3 at the back etc. It always depends on the skills of your players but in the game each position/role is coded to do certain things.
Avenger22 said: i think strikers are badly coded defensively in mid and low block that is ME since 2012 never seen them defend good like in real life, you see Lautaro or Thuram tracking back like crazy and marking defending very close to their own box that is why irl works 10 defending here in FM not because 2 strikers even on low block are still not defending
Indeed the forwards are very bad at defensive play even in high pressing based systems. They don't get back to help nor do they mark their near positions like double pivots either to win the ball or to cut off open spaces for passing. It's something that others are writing on the official forum but we don't have an official answer from SI to date.
Good question!
I had tried some systems last year and 2 this year(links below for this year) but they didn't go so well. I think these styles of play need a different approach and I really don't have the time to try them.
iBox V1.7a - https://fm-arena.com/thread/7104-fm24-ibox-v1-7a-by-dzek/
iBox V1.7b - https://fm-arena.com/thread/7106-fm24-ibox-v1-7b-by-dzek/
Fail to see where i did said that you said the tactic was tested 4k, whatever.
Let's say your tweaks are cosmetic so the tactic is the same right?
"stable" or "favor" the test is different btw that's not the point.
On every of your run you never hitted 65, none did, so if we can assume 65 ain't the true "power" of the tactic.
Now tell me the average over those runs : i didn't check yet but you said already there is a 59 which we can assume is the bad luck run. Now tell me what happened if you are unlucky and get 2 times 59 and go on. By doing that you can even calculate how luck/RNG hitted your test. How do you know if you were in luck spree or medium. The example that i brought it in is very easy to understand same tactic 3 points different, no changes, just the name and author/tactic which are not influencing the results.
so what you can assume, 64/63/62/61/60/59 are the possible results, i literally didn't even see if there anything else similar "according" to your logic of "fake" tweaks. Now question is do you know the % chance of those runs? Maybe ain't just 3 scenario but more. Maybe the true number is 62 or 61 and RNG is playing his part as well. If you are considering a -+3/5 on every tweak you doing, you can "guess" if you don't you are committing wrong assumption.
If you call that stable, we diverge from the main point is "what stable" means :
https://fm-arena.com/thread/7007-424-deformation-ii-tweak-narrow/
https://fm-arena.com/thread/7009-424-deformation-ii-tweak-fairly-narrow/
Hope it's clear
Brother I really cannot continue this discussion any further. I can't sit down and explain word by word what I mean. In every reply I post (not just here - in this discussion) I try to be as clear as I can be to anyone. We all agree that there is a factor called RNG. That's it!
If you really want to understand what I have said then I am here to discuss at your convenience. Until then, good luck!
The only thing you have to know is if your opponent is weak on defensive attributes actually. They can't stop you most of the time
I'm not sure (yet) but I don't think the AI can read the player instructions given to a player. Generally they can't read your tactic but team instructions are moves that are programmed to work in a certain way within ME. Player instructions on the other hand give a different behavior to each role if used correctly.
Take More Risks is a bit of a misunderstood instruction because of the UI and is about risk in general and not just about passing. I just thought I'd try it since without Pass Into Space my team would hold the ball better in the final third. The same goes for Dribble More.
Now for the overlaps I think they slow the game down because it forces the winger to hold the ball more and wait for an overlap from the WB to pass it to him which ends up losing it in a dangerous position most of the time since your WB will be out of position and it turns into a dangerous counter attack. I recommend the Overlap/Underlap instructions in situations where you are a much superior team to your opponent and are going to dominate everywhere on the field.
I didn't say the same tactic was tested for 6000 matches. Please don't call me a liar and you can read again my last sentence before the asterisk here.
Here are at least 5 tests with very minor tweaks from me along with the original:
1st run - https://fm-arena.com/thread/6879-424-deformation-ii/
2nd run - https://fm-arena.com/thread/7010-424-deformation-ii-tweak-fairly-wide/
3rd run - https://fm-arena.com/thread/7009-424-deformation-ii-tweak-fairly-narrow/
4th run - https://fm-arena.com/thread/7011-424-deformation-ii-tweak-wide/
5th run - https://fm-arena.com/thread/7007-424-deformation-ii-tweak-narrow/
Delicious said: how do you know if those tweaks are "small" or "big" ; you still on an environment of 1200 games which each run has his own RNG.
I'm almost certain. Time will tell.
Delicious said: This can't be counted as the "original" one, even tho doesn't make sense since is just "mirrored" we don't know why on FM Arena Test this tactic went this nuts.
I never speak about this tactic.
Delicious said: Just giving you and example on my test :
Deformation etc did :
Example of bad starting and conclude on decent :
This is 41131 Centrifuge :
I am not testing manually nothing, it's all automatized, so i am not even influencing anything in any way.
But for example i did tested many roles on Striker (zone) and immagine the record on negative was - 5 for Trequartista. I did literally changed one role and i got a -5.. If you believe those minus tweaks are doing nothing that's your own judgement.
Everything you show here is tested in your own environment which is probably not like that of FM-Arena. This has a huge impact on the outcome.
Delicious said: I didn't say you can't "guess" ; the tactic is indeed good, but not 4 points from the others luck or no luck included. You can understand even from 1200 games, there were tons of cases on the previous that tactic dropped 3-4 points on 4k runs, or even get gain points on 4k runs.
Luck/RNG is a part of the game as well, but if you want to measure micro-aspect factors that's not the way to conclude that the "M.E" is crazy or not or the tweaks are minus or not.
I have already said that this year the FM-Arena Testing League has changed. I've never said there is no RNG factor in every test, but if the runs sucked and it got 65 points on random numbers it would show up in all the other tweaks with much lower scores. Further up I sent you 4 of mine which they have very small tweaks and as I said above I'm almost certain but we can wait and see. There are still 15+ other tweaks tactics on the table from others with minimal changes and if you notice they are all on a scale of 60-65 so how much can the score change? Could it become 45 after 4000 matches? Also did you notice a little bit the difference in points from the controlled teams to the AI teams in each test of the original? The results all together show me that the original tactic is stable.
I'm providing you with the pictures here.
Let's take an example of another tactic that seems to be less stable:
Tactic 1 (60 points) - https://fm-arena.com/thread/6923-4231-death-star/
Tactic 2 (49 points) - https://fm-arena.com/thread/6924-4231-death-star-ii/
The only difference in this tactic is the "Dribble Less" on the center backs. I don't think this tactical change is considered a big enough change to make an 11 points difference. If you consider it a big change then the game is completely broken. But what I understand here is that because there is a wide range in the scale of the two scores means that the score is somewhere in the middle +/-.
In the majority of things we agree but I hope you get my point.
We can know only when 4000+ games will be runned. And even there is a possibility to get RNG.
Basically if you get some crazy lucky runs on the test then tactic will fly better the another. But if your goal is to check micro-aspect, you need to "hit" the same RNG that was hitted on "deformation II"
Example i didn't know that https://fm-arena.com/thread/7174-cameron-4-2-3-1-bal/ made the change on DMs as well and removed Hold position as well.
And guess what? it's the same as https://fm-arena.com/thread/7194-4231-death-star-balanced/ . 3 points different.
Beside the fact that there should be at least some rule on writing change-logs so at least people don't waste their time and we don't hold a queue for no reason.
So if we are guessing, this setup is the same as the original and it's in "line" with the RNG as well.
Basically this tactic didn't won the gamble.
Brother I must step in here.. 424 deformation II has been tested in at least 6000 matches so far.
I've also seen some other tactic (can't remember which it was) that was tested at 1200 matches and got 57 points (if I'm not mistaken) and then when the minor update came out and was tested again for another 1200 matches it went up 1 point. The minor update did not change anything substantial in ME.
Sure there is RNG in every test but with so many tests with small to very small tweaks for each shape then we can roughly figure out the score a tactic will bring to the table.
* I want to remind everyone that this year's FM-Arena Testing League has changed a bit from last year.
The reason for the existence of low crosses in my opinion is not what it seems. It's mainly to make fewer crosses because they are low percentage(succeed) crosses and then most of the time you will see the player cut inside or come back to play the simple pass.
Mark Tighter on aggressive systems like the Gegenpress, is to help with counter-press and pressing in general but SI has reworked the way pressing works since FM22 and year after year they make tweaks so the way it works now has changed. Nowadays the defensive part of ME is not very good and one part of it is the Mark Tighter. I hope SI to address these issues asap. Until then, the Mark Tighter instruction is useless unless you set it specifically and individually for each opponent, but again with great caution.