Higher version number should indicate a more recent tactic.
If you think that some of the previous versions(e.g. Blue 2.1) is the best for the 21.4 patch then there's nothing wrong in uploading it once more but with a different name(e.g. Blue 3.0).
ZaZ said: Sorry, I thought it wasn't useful anymore since you can't roll back to previous patch. I will get it back immediately. I deleted because I thought it would confuse people to have a version 2.2 that is outdated while version 2.1 is considered the one to be used in this patch, so I thought it would confuse people to leave them there. Expand
No worries, thank you for your comprehension.
The previous versions are far from being useless because it's always very useful to know what worked well for the previous patches and how you've been changing your tactics from patch to patch. Also, there are some people that keep their Steam clients in 'Offline mode' to avoid updates so they are still on the previous patches.
Also, having different tactics with the same name is extremely confusion. Imagine, people were discussing and positing results for a tactic that was called Blue 2.0 but you've deleted it and uploaded a different tactic with the same name. Now people are discussing and uploading results for a tactic that's is also called Blue 2.0 but it's a different tactic. Could you imagine how confusing it will be for people that only recently stumbled across your thread?
ZaZ said: I've removed Blue 2.2 from the first post since it now performs worse than 2.1. If anyone still wants to use it, it's the same as 2.1, but with "Use Tighter Marking" option enabled.
I'll keep Blue 2.1 for this patch since my attempt of 3.0 was also performing worse than 2.1. Unfortunately, Phoenix became too similar to Blue, so I'll probably set it aside for a while to work in different formations. @Zippo can test Blue 2.1 anytime. Expand
ZaZ said: Updated for this patch. Since I Blue 2.1 performed better in my experiments, this one is a variation of that tactic instead of 2.2 or 3.0 (which failed). Expand
Hi, pal.
Please, restore the 2.2 version which was tested.
Deleting your tactics, especially those which were tested, creates great confusion for everyone and nullifies our work. Please, never do that.
Tell me when you sort out your threads and I'll add your new tactics in the queue.
ZaZ said: That's funny, because I can swear the way matches unfold changed a lot. I mean, there are way more crosses now and less through passes. Maybe it's just a cognitive bias. Expand
Egraam said: Thank you very much for the test I'll try not to post anything to similiar to other tactics anymore, this one was an exception because I've been trying to use everything I know works in this meta. Thanks once again Expand
Pal, feel free to post whatever you want. Even a small tweak could be very useful for someone.
Of course, it should not be expected that we'll test every tactic posted and every small tweak posted but you know people still can use tactics that haven't been tested.
I find that testing Set Pieces is a highly complicated thing to do. You can't just take one tactic set pieces and put them into some other tactic and expect to see it works the same in both tactics. I can tell you it doesn't work this way and if you try to do that then you'll end up with a complete mess because Set Pieces are tied to the formation/roles/duties so you have to tune them for every tactic and you must be good at doing that and understand what are you doing so it requires a lot of efforts and knowledge.
Unfortunately, I don't speak Chinese so please, if you are really interested in seeing the tactic gets tested then spend some time and sum up the difference between the versions.
Purity said: Hey just wondering if you could test this tactic please? It got great results with loads of goals! This tactic is from Victorhugo4222 all credits goes to him. I just want it to be tested. Expand
Please, upload screenshots of the tactic.
Thanks.
Pal, it's still very confusing.
Higher version number should indicate a more recent tactic.
If you think that some of the previous versions(e.g. Blue 2.1) is the best for the 21.4 patch then there's nothing wrong in uploading it once more but with a different name(e.g. Blue 3.0).
Please, let me know when you sort it out.
Thanks.
No worries, thank you for your comprehension.
The previous versions are far from being useless because it's always very useful to know what worked well for the previous patches and how you've been changing your tactics from patch to patch. Also, there are some people that keep their Steam clients in 'Offline mode' to avoid updates so they are still on the previous patches.
Also, having different tactics with the same name is extremely confusion. Imagine, people were discussing and positing results for a tactic that was called Blue 2.0 but you've deleted it and uploaded a different tactic with the same name. Now people are discussing and uploading results for a tactic that's is also called Blue 2.0 but it's a different tactic. Could you imagine how confusing it will be for people that only recently stumbled across your thread?
Please, check this - https://fm-arena.com/find-comment/3977/
Thanks.
I'll keep Blue 2.1 for this patch since my attempt of 3.0 was also performing worse than 2.1. Unfortunately, Phoenix became too similar to Blue, so I'll probably set it aside for a while to work in different formations. @Zippo can test Blue 2.1 anytime.
Hi, pal.
Please, check this - https://fm-arena.com/find-comment/3967/.
Thanks.
Hi, pal.
Please, restore the 2.2 version which was tested.
Deleting your tactics, especially those which were tested, creates great confusion for everyone and nullifies our work. Please, never do that.
Tell me when you sort out your threads and I'll add your new tactics in the queue.
Thanks.
Is this your tactic?
The Placebo Effect
Please, give the tactic a more appropriate name.
Also, please add screenshots of the tactic and some results with it.
Thank you.
Pal, feel free to post whatever you want. Even a small tweak could be very useful for someone.
Of course, it should not be expected that we'll test every tactic posted and every small tweak posted but you know people still can use tactics that haven't been tested.
Hi,
Everything in the tactic has been tested very well already so there's a very low chance it gets tested.
Please, add screenshots of the tactic.
Thanks.
Please, add screenshots of the tactic.
Thanks.
I find that testing Set Pieces is a highly complicated thing to do. You can't just take one tactic set pieces and put them into some other tactic and expect to see it works the same in both tactics. I can tell you it doesn't work this way and if you try to do that then you'll end up with a complete mess because Set Pieces are tied to the formation/roles/duties so you have to tune them for every tactic and you must be good at doing that and understand what are you doing so it requires a lot of efforts and knowledge.
I just asked you to edit the 1st post of this thread and upload screenshots of the tactic.
I see you've done that.
Please, update the opening post and add screenshots of the tactic.
Thank you.
Please, update the opening post and add screenshots of the tactic and a link to the source of the tactic.
Thank you.
Please, could you update the opening post with proper screenshots.
Cobo10 said: @Zippo the difference between this 2 tactics can be found here: https://www.playgm.cn/thread-933610-1-1.html
Unfortunately, I don't speak Chinese so please, if you are really interested in seeing the tactic gets tested then spend some time and sum up the difference between the versions.
Thank you.
If you fix the screenshots and sum up the difference between v3.5 and v2.0 that has been tested then I'll take a look.
https://fm-arena.com/tactic/670-fm21-12-kung-fu-442-v2/
Thanks.
Seems very good!
https://www.fmscout.com/c-fm21-tactics.html?id=7441
Hi,
Please, update the opening post and add screenshots of the tactic and some results with it.
Thank you.
This tactic is from Victorhugo4222 all credits goes to him. I just want it to be tested.
Hi,
Please, add a link to the source of the tactic.
Thank you.