Zippo
opq said: strange that v2 got less pts, as it gained like +9pts avg than v1 in test league, but anyway :)
What do you mean?
crizeKOS said: ty alot!

You're welcome.

Also, please note... there's no need in putting every single thing under a spoiler. :) because it makes harder for people to read your posts, they are constantly forced to click on spoilers to read your posts and I must say that isn't a very pleasant thing to do.

You really need to use spoilers where it would be appropriate, for example, in posts containing a lot of information and screenshots where without spoilers it would be a complete mess.
crizeKOS said: ok, I ll try

I've edited the OP and added the information about few tactics for you. I'm sure you do the rest yourself. :)

It's really isn't hard and should take few minutes.

Cheers.
@crizeKOS, please look this - https://fm-arena.com/thread/2733-how-fm-arena-picks-tactics-for-the-testing/

You need to add the information about the tactics in this thread to the OP or at least add links to the posts that have information about each tactic to the OP.

Thank you.
Solaris said: I guess the translation for 4-3-3 would look like this

AMC -> MCL
DMCR -> MCR
DMCL -> DM

Yes, that would work


crizeKOS said: Can u guys upload the set pieces file please? Ty
As I said importing the set pieces form a file would work incorrectly most of time so the only way to do get them properly in your tactic is recreating from the screenshots.
opq said: Is it a way to fix positions when transferring routines from one formation to another?
E.g. I've transferred SPs routines from 433 to 343 and they were all messed up: attacking right corner at 433 were dcr to near post and dcl marking GK, and when transferred its dmc staying on gk mark and not one of 3 centre defs
as a result I had to fix almost all positions in SP's setup


Unforutanlty, very often transferring set pieces routines from one tactic to another doesn't work properly and to be safe you always need to check and then adjust the set pieces if needed.
Hi,

The way set pieces works has changed in FM23 comparing to FM22.

We've tested many different set pieces in FM23 and picked the most reliable of them.

I want to warn you in advance of thinking that these set pieces greatly boost the score of your tactic in the testing, they won't because the most of highly rated tactics already have very good set pieces and using these set pieces won't make any significant difference.

These set pieces are mostly for those people who don't have much experience in creating good set pieces but want to have reliable set pieces in their tactics to be sure that the set pieces don't drag it down.

Please note, when you import set pieces from other tactic or change the formation of your tactic then it usually breaks the set pieces so you should always check the set pieces and adjust them if needed.



Left Attacking Throw-In | ( Delivery - Short ) | Taker - DL



Right Attacking Throw-In | ( Delivery - Short ) | Taker - DR



Left Attacking Corner | ( Delivery - Near Post ) | Taker - AML



Right Attacking Corner | ( Delivery - Near Post ) | Taker - AMR



Left Defensive Corner



Right Defensive Corner





We find other set pieces aren't important and they can be set or reset to Default.


Also, please notice that the set pieces above is for 4-2-4 DM formation but they can be easily adjusted to any formation. Here are few examples how to adjust the set pieces for different formations:

4-2-3-1 DM Formation:
STCR -> STC
STCL -> AMC
@crizeKOS, I've edited the info of the uploaded tactics in this thread.

Just a heads-up here, when you tweak someone else's tactic then you can't put the original author's name on it because you changed it ( even the changes might be very small ), you should put your own name.

Cheers.
I'll put it here for more visibility.

At the moment our testing algorithm looks like this:

Every tactic gets 2 testing rounds by default ( 1 round is 320 matches so 2 rounds would be 640 matches ) then our testing server calculates the result and if after 2 first testing rounds the result is below 48 points then the test is over and the testing server uploads the result but if after 2 first testing rounds the result is above 48 points then it gets an additional testing round ( 1 round = 320 matches ) and after that additional testing round the testing server calculates the result again and if it hits below 48 points then the test is over and the testing server uploads the result but if it hits above 48 points then it gets another additional testing round and that continues up to maximum 9 rounds ( 2,880 matches ).

The purpose of the algorithm above is to keep the results at the top as accurate as possible and the same time consume the resources of our testing server at reasonable rate.

Please note, that we can "tune" the numbers in our testing algorithm at any moment depending on the situation. For example, at this moment we have reduced the maximum testing rounds from 9 rounds ( 2,880 matches ) to 6 rounds ( 1,920 matches ) because there are lot of tactics in the queue await to be tested at the moment.
pixar said: why are some tactics being tested more often? Is there a standard for this? How do you decide for how many matches a tactic will be tested?

for example why was this tactic tested for 1920 matches?

or why is this super crazy tacticc tested for 2880 matches?


At the moment our testing algorithm looks like this:

Every tactic gets 2 testing rounds by default ( 1 round is 320 matches so 2 rounds would be 640 matches ) then our testing server calculates the result and if after 2 first testing rounds the result is below 48 points then the test is over and the testing server uploads the result but if after 2 first testing rounds the result is above 48 points then it gets an additional testing round ( 1 round = 320 matches ) and after that additional testing round the testing server calculates the result again and if it hits below 48 points then the test is over and the testing server uploads the result but if it hits above 48 points then it gets another additional testing round and that continues up to maximum 9 rounds ( 2,880 matches ).

The purpose of the algorithm above is to keep the results at the top as accurate as possible and the same time consume the resources of our testing server at reasonable rate.

Please note, that we can "tune" the numbers in our testing algorithm at any moment depending on the situation. For example, at this moment we have reduced the maximum testing rounds from 9 rounds ( 2,880 matches ) to 6 rounds ( 1,920 matches ) because there are lot of tactics in the queue await to be tested at the moment.
crizeKOS said: @MemorizableUsername @kjarus  well, its seems that the DM has a high value here despite the same amount of goals scored/conceded

Hey,

I would like to note that even when we test a tactic for 2K-3K matches there still might be +/- 1 or 2 points RNG, which can't be eliminated even when we test that many matches.

More info - https://fm-arena.com/thread/2713-10-944-matches-tested-fm-rng-measured/
tom100000000000 said: Makes sense, cheers for the response! Your computers are in for a busy weekend :D

The first results should be available within an hour. :)
tom100000000000 said: Are existing tactics going to slowly be ran through the tests? Or only the top ones?

We'll try to find a balance between testing existing tactics and new tactics but of course, the top tactics will be tested on a priority basis.
Alan Bessa said: Thank you! Edited.

Hi,

Please, provide results from a normal game save. Any custom leagues result doesn't count.

Also, if this tactic is a tweaked version of a tactic that has been tested already then we need to know what tweaks were made to evaluate them if they're worth testing.

Thank you.
tom100000000000 said: So if 2.5CA will get you 1 point in acceleration but 8 points in teamwork, its still probably worth it. 1 acc > 8 teamwork probably, which is crazy
For example, 'Decisions' attribute is very expensive for every position and it costs almost the same as 'Acceleration' or 'Pace' attributes but 'Decisions' attribute almost doesn't have any significant impact on the result unlike the 'Acceleration' or 'Pace' attributes, which have a great impact on the result.
Hi,

I'm sure you guys are aware that we've been testing player attributes to find out which of them make the most difference - https://fm-arena.com/table/18-fm23-attribute-testing/

But I think there might be people who don't fully understand why we're doing that and how it can be used in their saves.

So I just want to reveal you the power of the player attributes testing. :)

Here's a striker from our tactic testing league. He is about 145CA:



If you look at the results of our attribute testing then you'll notice that some attributes such as 'Acceleration' or 'Pace' makes a huge difference and some attributes such as 'Teamwork' or 'Off The Ball' almost doesn't make any difference.

Of course, it's important to understand that 'Acceleration' and 'Pace' attributes are much more expensive in terms of CA(Current Ability) than 'Teamwork' or 'Off The Ball' attributes. For example, 1 Point of Acceleration costs about 2.5CA when 1 Point of Teamwork costs only 0.3CA.

But what if take our striker and redistribute his CA from less important attributes such as Composure, Teamwork, Off The Ball, Long Shots to very important important attributes such as Acceleration and Pace keeping the same CA:


 

Notice that the CA of our striker hasn't changed, it's still 145CA, we just redistributed it.

Now, let's do a similar redistribution for other positions keeping the same CA and then test it:


Default Attributes Result:




Redistributed Attributes Result:







As you can see the points have skyrocketed from 53 to 90 and the G.D. has skyrocketed  from +3 to +62 but the CA of the players hasn't changed!

From the result above we can conclude if players have the same CA then it doesn't mean they are equal quality, some of them might be much better than others. Obviously, in FM some attributes such as Acceleration and Pace are game-changing attributes, they make a huge difference and you should prioritize them.
Sane said: Guys, how to understand this test?

Would the performance difference be 15% worse for a player ranked in position 17 than a player ranked 20? Or 1.36% for one player and 15% if everyone has 17 instead of 20?


In this test the playing position rating of all the players was decreased from Natural(20) to Accomplished(17).

Obviously, if only one player had the playing position rating decreased then the result would be much better.
Falbravv said: Zippo, any news about attributes testing ? I'm curious about this, even if you think it's very close to 22*results

We're going to start testing the attributes soon, unfortunately, I can't give you any ETA.
crizeKOS said: This is something that I was not expecting. All the top tier tatics in the table have Counter-Press on. lmao. This must have influence of ther other defensive variables, and probably width.

There is no contradiction between the result of this test and the results of the tactic testing.

The result of this test actually shows that if you remove 'Counter-Press' then nothing changes or a micro improvement happens.

The difference between "ON" and "OF" is so small that it could be just a statistical noise.
Base Tactic:
Team Instructions: Counter-Press
Player Instructions: None







The tactical instruction was tested for 2,880 matches and then the result was translated into a standard season of 38 matches: