Changes: actual SP routines WB (su) -> CWB (a) IF (a) -> IF (su)
TIs Removed flanks + overs for clean approach play Mixed crosses Standard D-Line Get Stuck In removed
PIs added Sit narrower to IFs (CWBs got Stay wide by passive) added tight marking to AF and two IFs added Get further forward to volantes removed "take fewer risks" from GK
next move from v6 1af to AM (a) CM to DM SV + forward runs and shoot less WB (a) just to have passive cross from byline staying at the same mentality as on sup
Sane said: @opq Hey, test plz mess v4 with 2IF-at, 2CM-at and DM-def Expand
It won't give much difference. Double CM just sucks at this ME. For instance you can even check the table of 4231 with double CMs instead of double DM, and how low score they got. And seems there's really not much difference between IW and IF. I change between them from save to save. They still score and assist a lot Same goes to WB/CWB and I use them both.
Itsyaboy420 said: isn't this the same as the original 424 Alhamdulillah II, I mean at least make something different like its mentality. Tired of seeing balanced tactics just all over the scoreboard, need a true and good score points attacking tactics, cuz sometimes balanced mentality doesn't cut it out when you're the underdog. Expand
It is. And whole point of this test is not tweaking one exact tactic, but trying things inside certain template. And since mentalities are changed by SI, you have to use another approach on attacking mentality, which still probably would score less overall due to its directness
ZaZ said: They usually are second goal scorers (after strikers) and first in assists, and they have a good number of crosses per match. You can think of them as a mix between wingers and strikers. Expand
ZaZ said: It makes sense that wider players work better with focus play through the flanks. Many people think that focus play through the flanks increase chance for players to pass the ball to them, but it actually just makes central midfielders get closer to the flanks so the ball flows more around that area. Expand
yeah, but many, include me, think of IF/IW as some just slightly outside the box forward, who needs to be as close to it, as he can
anyway, we can't see G/A distribution between players from test results, and mb IFs just supports more then finishing moments themselves, so it benefits for overall team result
I don't get on what attributes it really depends, but some GKs can distribute short with "clean" distribution even being pressed, and some just stupidly kicks the ball somewhere
ZaZ said: I'm not a fan of DoF for hiring, they never get the player I want, and when they do, they pay double the price. Expand
Yep, but with transfers fully on my side things are too easy and game becomes boring after 3-4 seasons when I find enough cheap wonderkids DoF works much better at 23, but still tends to overpay for players on sub Shortlist is in-the-middle variant, but again, I let chief scout to arrange what to scout, else I'd just push scouts for certain players from my search filters
ZaZ said: Going to start my journey on FM, sharing step by step what I am doing, with the reasoning behind every decision. I couldn't do earlier because my wife had a surgery and needed help recovering, so I couldn't make the commitment to play regularly to share. Anyway, I accept suggestions on the initial setup of this journey.
- Transfers: Only control scouts through scout meetings, and only hire between players they recommend. Yes or no?
- Club: start from lower division of England and climb to win Champions League, or start with weakest side from a top division and try to win during first season?
- Tactic: Play with a generic tactic, or a specific style or formation?
So, any suggestions? Expand
I usually play on full DoF or with shortlist from my scouts for A-grade recommends, from which I can suggest players for DoF to buy. Shortlist doesn't help if you're climbing from low-leagues tho, cuz it's always "out of date" if you climb fast enough.
tackle hard for all players, IFs - stay wide, WBs - stay narrow, BPD - dribble more
Changes:
actual SP routines
WB (su) -> CWB (a)
IF (a) -> IF (su)
TIs
Removed flanks + overs for clean approach play
Mixed crosses
Standard D-Line
Get Stuck In removed
PIs
added Sit narrower to IFs (CWBs got Stay wide by passive)
added tight marking to AF and two IFs
added Get further forward to volantes
removed "take fewer risks" from GK
Results:
1af to AM (a)
CM to DM
SV + forward runs and shoot less
WB (a) just to have passive cross from byline staying at the same mentality as on sup
+ Work ball into box TI
IFs to AFs
WBs to stay wide as the only players creating width now
It won't give much difference. Double CM just sucks at this ME.
For instance you can even check the table of 4231 with double CMs instead of double DM, and how low score they got.
And seems there's really not much difference between IW and IF. I change between them from save to save. They still score and assist a lot
Same goes to WB/CWB and I use them both.
change of width PIs on flanks as lately tested with 424
IF -> IW
underlaps -> overlaps
passing back to shorter
v3
inverted central trio to adapt to present ME
volantes on sup, CM att + move into channels
v4 - think the last try with classic 433 setup until possible ME update
mez -> CM (1st on sup, 2nd on att + move into channels)
Anchor -> DM sup
original one has narrow IF and wide WB, 0.3-0.10 are just playing with width PIs of these 2 roles
and yeah, Smorodskaya would be pleased, lul
I prefer inverted ones, because they usually score more and make same amount of assists, just by through balls and not crosses, due to their movement
It is. And whole point of this test is not tweaking one exact tactic, but trying things inside certain template.
And since mentalities are changed by SI, you have to use another approach on attacking mentality, which still probably would score less overall due to its directness
I'm just biased cuz of Salah ))
yeah, but many, include me, think of IF/IW as some just slightly outside the box forward, who needs to be as close to it, as he can
anyway, we can't see G/A distribution between players from test results, and mb IFs just supports more then finishing moments themselves, so it benefits for overall team result
and it's not even about result but for my stupidity to put the most intrigue variant such deep xD
p.s. but I'll laugh hard if good old variant with narrow + narrow works better
Yep, but with transfers fully on my side things are too easy and game becomes boring after 3-4 seasons when I find enough cheap wonderkids
DoF works much better at 23, but still tends to overpay for players on sub
Shortlist is in-the-middle variant, but again, I let chief scout to arrange what to scout, else I'd just push scouts for certain players from my search filters
Anyway, I accept suggestions on the initial setup of this journey.
- Transfers: Only control scouts through scout meetings, and only hire between players they recommend. Yes or no?
- Club: start from lower division of England and climb to win Champions League, or start with weakest side from a top division and try to win during first season?
- Tactic: Play with a generic tactic, or a specific style or formation?
So, any suggestions?
I usually play on full DoF or with shortlist from my scouts for A-grade recommends, from which I can suggest players for DoF to buy.
Shortlist doesn't help if you're climbing from low-leagues tho, cuz it's always "out of date" if you climb fast enough.