dzek said: I don't believe that will ever occur because it would essentially negate the concept of roles. In my view, the most crucial aspect is to ensure complete transparency regarding the impact of every instruction in the game, allowing us full control over our team. Currently, we are left to speculate about the effects of each instruction and the roles or positions they influence.
It reminds me of Call of Duty, where each weapon is accompanied by a detailed box with bars. This could be implemented for each role, with the ability to adjust each instruction by altering the Player Instructions or Team Instructions.
For instance, if I use two winger roles with a predefined "Dribble More" instruction and I apply a "Dribble Less" team instruction that affects them, it should be reflected by a corresponding decrease in the Dribbling attribute bar. Expand
That's a shout. I was thinking of a PES-style tactic creator (I don't know if they still use it now). This would get rid of the point of roles but I think roles have very limited usage in real life too, terms have been coined (i.e. inverted full-back) but nobody ever looks at people like Haaland and say "oh he's clearly an advanced forward". Somehow, FM is both too complicated and not complicated enough.
But yeah there absolutely needs to be more transparency about how the game actually works, people should not have to look online to gain a basic idea of how to play it.
dzek said: I always wondered about the double instructions and I always wanted to try them but one day I forgot and the next day I didn't have time. Now I think things are a bit clearer.
I too hope that in FM25 a lot of things will change and indeed the meta instructions have been a bit monotonous in recent years. But I'm keeping a low profile until we see them in action. Expand
The dream is to have an OOP system and an in-possession system with all of the roles fully customisable. We sort of have that now but there are many limitations to it
I have run more tests on this experiment (8.800 matches in total) and it seems to repeat with very little variation in values. I didn't see any changes from what I wrote in my previous post.
Here is the final table: (including the one above along with it)
FINAL DATA TABLEDribbles Made / 90
I have made also some experiments with "Get Stuck In" and "Tackle Harder". Here are the results:
DATA TABLETackles Made / 90
As you can see from these tests I come to the following conclusions:
1. Both instructions do nothing to GKs. 2. "Get Stuck In" maximizes tackling for defensive positions (DC/DRL/DM), so there is no need for "Tackle Harder". 3. Having both instructions enabled you will not see significant changes at any position except AMRL positions and even at those positions there will be little to no difference. Expand
Fascinating. I'm somewhat glad that tackle harder doesn't appear to make much of a difference as it has always appeared to me that TIs and PIs that do the same thing should not be able to add together and 'maximise' things like aggression and dribbling.
Hopefully for FM25 we see plenty of tactical changes as I am a little bored of the way that the meta has been working for the last few years, but I'm not holding out a lot of hope on that front.
I was curious to know what positions Run At Defense and Dribble More affects, as well as if you enable both instructions together, if they have any more effect on players.
Here are the results I found.
DATA TABLEDribbles Made / 90
As you can see from these tests Ι come to the following conclusions:
1. Both instructions do work. 2. 'Run At Defence' does not affect the DC position and the DM position very little. 3. Only 'Dribble More' works on DC position. 4. DM position is not significantly affected by the two instructions. 5. Having both instructions enabled will not see significant changes in any position except AMRL positions.
dzek said: 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. Expand
dzek said: 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. Expand
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.
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
SK - tackle harder FBs - Sit narrower, tackle harder CBs - Dribble more, tackle harder DMs - Take more risks, tackle harder AM - take more risks, hold up ball, move into channels, tackle harder IFs - hold up ball, sit narrower, tackle harder AF - take more risks, tackle harder
Was searching the website for ages for a tactic with this specific configuration mainly because nobody really uses "sit narrower" on FBs other than the Cosmos tactics
This tactic has taken a lot of inspiration from @Gerrard, mainly his lack of PIs on FBs so I thought I would try one while adding in some other 'meta' instructions.
Revised the 4-2-3-1 which has been doing so well lately and made a few notable changes: - Run at defence - Focus on flanks - Overlaps Massive clean-up on player instructions as well, leaving dribble more only on defenders and also getting rid of the whole 'stay wider' and 'sit narrower' thing on the wings.
EvensenFM said: I get the feeling that there might be a better way to weigh training sessions than what Max has set up in the EBFM schedule. I think he set it up to try to increase all attributes equally. However, now that we know for sure that not all attributes are created equal, we should be able to play the min and max game to get the ultimate results. Expand
There has been a lot of discourse on this recently (which I'll admit I haven't read most of it) but what I run is essentially attacking sessions, defending sessions, physical sessions and match practices lumped in too. An addition that I also like is adding team bonding to that
It reminds me of Call of Duty, where each weapon is accompanied by a detailed box with bars. This could be implemented for each role, with the ability to adjust each instruction by altering the Player Instructions or Team Instructions.
For instance, if I use two winger roles with a predefined "Dribble More" instruction and I apply a "Dribble Less" team instruction that affects them, it should be reflected by a corresponding decrease in the Dribbling attribute bar.
That's a shout. I was thinking of a PES-style tactic creator (I don't know if they still use it now). This would get rid of the point of roles but I think roles have very limited usage in real life too, terms have been coined (i.e. inverted full-back) but nobody ever looks at people like Haaland and say "oh he's clearly an advanced forward". Somehow, FM is both too complicated and not complicated enough.
But yeah there absolutely needs to be more transparency about how the game actually works, people should not have to look online to gain a basic idea of how to play it.
I too hope that in FM25 a lot of things will change and indeed the meta instructions have been a bit monotonous in recent years. But I'm keeping a low profile until we see them in action.
The dream is to have an OOP system and an in-possession system with all of the roles fully customisable. We sort of have that now but there are many limitations to it
I have run more tests on this experiment (8.800 matches in total) and it seems to repeat with very little variation in values. I didn't see any changes from what I wrote in my previous post.
Here is the final table: (including the one above along with it)
FINAL DATA TABLEDribbles Made / 90
I have made also some experiments with "Get Stuck In" and "Tackle Harder".
Here are the results:
DATA TABLETackles Made / 90
As you can see from these tests I come to the following conclusions:
1. Both instructions do nothing to GKs.
2. "Get Stuck In" maximizes tackling for defensive positions (DC/DRL/DM), so there is no need for "Tackle Harder".
3. Having both instructions enabled you will not see significant changes at any position except AMRL positions and even at those positions there will be little to no difference.
Fascinating. I'm somewhat glad that tackle harder doesn't appear to make much of a difference as it has always appeared to me that TIs and PIs that do the same thing should not be able to add together and 'maximise' things like aggression and dribbling.
Hopefully for FM25 we see plenty of tactical changes as I am a little bored of the way that the meta has been working for the last few years, but I'm not holding out a lot of hope on that front.
I was curious to know what positions Run At Defense and Dribble More affects, as well as if you enable both instructions together, if they have any more effect on players.
Here are the results I found.
DATA TABLEDribbles Made / 90
As you can see from these tests Ι come to the following conclusions:
1. Both instructions do work.
2. 'Run At Defence' does not affect the DC position and the DM position very little.
3. Only 'Dribble More' works on DC position.
4. DM position is not significantly affected by the two instructions.
5. Having both instructions enabled will not see significant changes in any position except AMRL positions.
Data of the table
Thoughts?
Only just seen this, fantastic work
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.
Ahhhh I get you
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.
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.
+ Short passing
+ Positive Mentality
SK - tackle harder
FBs - Sit narrower, tackle harder
CBs - Dribble more, tackle harder
DMs - Take more risks, tackle harder
AM - take more risks, hold up ball, move into channels, tackle harder
IFs - hold up ball, sit narrower, tackle harder
AF - take more risks, tackle harder
Was searching the website for ages for a tactic with this specific configuration mainly because nobody really uses "sit narrower" on FBs other than the Cosmos tactics
- Run at defence
- Focus on flanks
- Overlaps
Massive clean-up on player instructions as well, leaving dribble more only on defenders and also getting rid of the whole 'stay wider' and 'sit narrower' thing on the wings.
There has been a lot of discourse on this recently (which I'll admit I haven't read most of it) but what I run is essentially attacking sessions, defending sessions, physical sessions and match practices lumped in too. An addition that I also like is adding team bonding to that
+ Sit narrower on IFs
+ IF(A)