ta2199 said: Yeah I know, the only difference is the set pieces and the "Force opponent outside" TI (*). I think it will be a little bit better than the previous Asymmetric but not that much. Because the only difference between the Blue DM and Blue 3.2 is (*) and the tactic score increase about 2 points. So basically with all the changes of 3.2 and the same Asymmetric formation I think the tweak will score about 64 to maybe 65. I think people just want to know if It's better than Blue 3.2 or not xD. Expand I suggest you checking the changes between Blue DM and Blue 3.2.
@ZaZ put them under a spoiler ( the opening post ).
Blue DM -> Blue DMBlue 3.2: - Default throw-in attack routine. - Force Opposition Outside.
ta2199 said: If @Zippo ok with it, I will create a new thread. Or maybe if @ZaZ can add this one to OP, It will be tested automatically. Expand Hey,
What do you want to test in that tactic ? I mean what is the difference between that tactic and 4-2-3-1 DM Asymmetric ( ZaZ - Blue DM Tweak ) ? If it's only some of the defensive set pieces then unlikely it would make any meaningful difference. Both tactics have similar attacking throw-ins ( default "mixed" ) and corners ( near post ) routines which are the main set pieces. Am I missing something here?
@ZaZ, I've checked and it seems that removing "Play Out Defense" TI and adding "Distribute To Specific Team-Mate" TI doesn't make much difference, at least it can't be clearly seen after a 1,824 matches test for ZaZ - Blue DM.
ZaZ said: I just deleted it. It had zero downloads, so no big deal. Thanks for testing that, it was really bugging me because everyone is using and I couldn't see it working for me. Expand You know how many factors that increase RNG are eliminated in our testing methodology, not to mention that all the teams including the AI controlled teams and the human controlled teams use the same staring elven in all matches but still it requires testing 1,824 matches to clearly see the difference. Oh, gosh... I can only imagine how many matches it requires testing if there are huge RNG factors present like changing morale, conditions and different players in the starting eleven and so on.
ZaZ said: It would be nice to know, but I don't want to botter you with every small thing. Should I delete the tactic that I upload to reupload after you come with that answer? Expand Based on our tests, I can say that adding the default attacking throw-ins instead of long throw-ins and adding "Force Opponent Outside" TI improves the result of any tactic including ZaZ - Blue DM. Also it's possible that removing "Play Out Of Defense" TI and adding "Distribute To Specific Team-Mate" TI might further improve the result of ZaZ - Blue DM but I need to check it and I can report you back only later today, if you want to know my opinion then waiting a bit would be the best choice.
ZaZ said: P.S.: One more question, @Zippo. I see the top tactics removed the instruction "Play Out Of Defense", but it doesn't seem to give me better results when I remove it in my tests. Did you do any experiments to know if it's good or bad? Expand
Removing "Play Out Of Defense" TI only make sense when you also add "Distribute To Specific Team-Mate" TI because it only works properly in tandem.
I've been noticing that for some tactics it improves the result and for some tactic it doesn't if you're interested how it would work for ZaZ - Blue DM then I can check it and report you back later today.
ZaZ said: with the new set pieces. Expand Regarding the set pieces I suggest changing only the attacking throw-ins because it seems other set pieces work great.
ZaZ said: P.S.: What about "Force Opponent Outside"? I see people using it and making defense better, but it doesn't show much difference in my tests. Expand
We've tried adding "Force Opponent Outside" TI in different tactics and it always improved the result but it requires testing 1,824 matches to see that.
@ZaZ, I just want to let you know that we tested your ZaZ - Blue DM tactic with the default attacking throw-ins routine and got 65 points vs 61 points ( the current ZaZ - Blue DM score ).
But I want to add that we tested 1,824 matches because only on the 1,824 matches distance the difference started to appear clearly.
WALTON1981 said: Just made a tweak of this tactic with the IWB's pushed further forward, it scored less than the original and conceded more but got 1 more point in my test league. Expand
@WALTON1981, if you want we can test it but you need to create a new thread for it.
"Team A" and "Team B" were using the same tactic and had the same players but "Team A" got 139 points and "Team B" got only 83 points.
We found you start getting more or less accurate results ( 5%-7% Accuracy ) only when you test about 912 matches and if you want about 2.5% Accuracy then you need to test about 1,824 matches. Anything less than that is a very approximate estimate.
nator said: Tactic based on @Albert's one. I have made only two changes so all the credits have to go to him. The changes :
I change the cb to bpd I remove the "Force Opposition Outside" team instruction v4 Expand
Hi,
I just want to let you know that if you're looking for it gets tested then the changes are too small to make any meaningful difference. Speaking other words, the changes make such small difference that is less than the error margin of the test so we find there's no point in testing such small changes.
We've tested a left footed player as the right winger and a right footed player as the left winger in this tactic and there wasn't any significant difference so I guess you can safely play Salah on the right and Mane on the left.
ZaZ said: You guys could make that info easily available somewhere! So many cool things you tested, but since there is no pinned post in the forums, we just don't see it! Expand
At some point when I have a bit more more free time I'll make a detailed post about the players development and training.
I remember we did some tests trying to figure out what factors(except the attributes) make players to develop faster and we found the following factors had the most influence:
- The intensity of the training. The higher intensity, the higher development rate. - The quality of the training facility. - The quality of the coaches. - The amount of competitive matches a player participates during a season. - The quality of competitive matches (the competition reputation). - The ratings a player gets in matches.
Different training schedules didn't have any significant influences on the development rate, they just were responsible for the distribution of points between the attributes.
Just a heads-up, if your tactic is based on someone else's tactic or you take some elements from other tactic then you should state that the description and give proper credit otherwise it won't get tested.
NERU said: The assistent put defensive midfilders at Shadow striker That explains some results in the tactic test... if you want to use this tactic it take some time to train your striker or your wingers to play at CAM and shadow striker.
If you play in a underdog team, change to the mentality to positive or cautious Expand
Dino said: Maybe I should go back and look at the save files for my strikerless might explain why test scores are what they are. Expand
Because the only difference between the Blue DM and Blue 3.2 is (*) and the tactic score increase about 2 points. So basically with all the changes of 3.2 and the same Asymmetric formation I think the tweak will score about 64 to maybe 65.
I think people just want to know if It's better than Blue 3.2 or not xD.
I suggest you checking the changes between Blue DM and Blue 3.2.
@ZaZ put them under a spoiler ( the opening post ).
Blue DM -> Blue DMBlue 3.2:
- Default throw-in attack routine.
- Force Opposition Outside.
4-2-3-1 DM Asymmetric ( ZaZ - Blue DM Tweak ) tactic by @Albert already has those changes. It uses "Default throw-in attack routine" and has "Force Opposition Outside" TI.
Hey,
What do you want to test in that tactic ? I mean what is the difference between that tactic and 4-2-3-1 DM Asymmetric ( ZaZ - Blue DM Tweak ) ? If it's only some of the defensive set pieces then unlikely it would make any meaningful difference. Both tactics have similar attacking throw-ins ( default "mixed" ) and corners ( near post ) routines which are the main set pieces. Am I missing something here?
You know how many factors that increase RNG are eliminated in our testing methodology, not to mention that all the teams including the AI controlled teams and the human controlled teams use the same staring elven in all matches but still it requires testing 1,824 matches to clearly see the difference. Oh, gosh... I can only imagine how many matches it requires testing if there are huge RNG factors present like changing morale, conditions and different players in the starting eleven and so on.
Based on our tests, I can say that adding the default attacking throw-ins instead of long throw-ins and adding "Force Opponent Outside" TI improves the result of any tactic including ZaZ - Blue DM. Also it's possible that removing "Play Out Of Defense" TI and adding "Distribute To Specific Team-Mate" TI might further improve the result of ZaZ - Blue DM but I need to check it and I can report you back only later today, if you want to know my opinion then waiting a bit would be the best choice.
Removing "Play Out Of Defense" TI only make sense when you also add "Distribute To Specific Team-Mate" TI because it only works properly in tandem.
I've been noticing that for some tactics it improves the result and for some tactic it doesn't if you're interested how it would work for ZaZ - Blue DM then I can check it and report you back later today.
Regarding the set pieces I suggest changing only the attacking throw-ins because it seems other set pieces work great.
We've tried adding "Force Opponent Outside" TI in different tactics and it always improved the result but it requires testing 1,824 matches to see that.
But I want to add that we tested 1,824 matches because only on the 1,824 matches distance the difference started to appear clearly.
@WALTON1981, if you want we can test it but you need to create a new thread for it.
I just want to add that FM is random as hell.
Just look at the result of Test #2 - https://fm-arena.com/tactic/2546-reaper-41212-ultimate/
"Team A" and "Team B" were using the same tactic and had the same players but "Team A" got 139 points and "Team B" got only 83 points.
We found you start getting more or less accurate results ( 5%-7% Accuracy ) only when you test about 912 matches and if you want about 2.5% Accuracy then you need to test about 1,824 matches. Anything less than that is a very approximate estimate.
I change the cb to bpd
I remove the "Force Opposition Outside" team instruction v4
Hi,
I just want to let you know that if you're looking for it gets tested then the changes are too small to make any meaningful difference. Speaking other words, the changes make such small difference that is less than the error margin of the test so we find there's no point in testing such small changes.
If this is the same tactic - https://fm-arena.com/thread/2295-godball-does-it-live-up-to-the-hype/#comment-11771 then there wasn't any need in creating a new thread, you could just update the opening post in the previous thread and add the necessary information.
Btw, this thread still doesn't meet the requirements, more info - https://fm-arena.com/thread/1661-how-fm-arena-picks-tactics-for-the-testing/
Just to be accurate:
The left winger had Left Foot Rating 10 ( Reasonable ) and Right Foot Rating 20 ( Very Strong )
The right winger had Left Foot Rating 20 ( Very Strong ) and Right Foot Rating 10 ( Reasonable )
We've tested a left footed player as the right winger and a right footed player as the left winger in this tactic and there wasn't any significant difference so I guess you can safely play Salah on the right and Mane on the left.
At some point when I have a bit more more free time I'll make a detailed post about the players development and training.
I remember we did some tests trying to figure out what factors(except the attributes) make players to develop faster and we found the following factors had the most influence:
- The intensity of the training. The higher intensity, the higher development rate.
- The quality of the training facility.
- The quality of the coaches.
- The amount of competitive matches a player participates during a season.
- The quality of competitive matches (the competition reputation).
- The ratings a player gets in matches.
Different training schedules didn't have any significant influences on the development rate, they just were responsible for the distribution of points between the attributes.
Just a heads-up, if your tactic is based on someone else's tactic or you take some elements from other tactic then you should state that the description and give proper credit otherwise it won't get tested.
Thank you.
Please, add a screenshot of the tactic.
Thank you.
Hey,
I've already told you what is needed to be done - it requires posting your own result with the tactic.
Thank you.
If you play in a underdog team, change to the mentality to positive or cautious
Dino said: Maybe I should go back and look at the save files for my strikerless might explain why test scores are what they are.
Hi,
Please, read this - https://fm-arena.com/find-comment/11216/
Thank you.