Delicious
4132 Two Different Philosophies MLD III


RPM on DM zone
4132 Two Different Philosophies MLD II

DM(D) instead of BWM
4132 Two Different Philosophies MLD


On much lower defensive line.
4123W Two Different Philosophies MLD

Trying another asset
4123 Two Different Philosophies MHD


MHD= much higher defensive line
RPM
433W The Big Maneuver

Double RMD and RPM
3421W Italian KO  IV


Conte's Style
4123 Two Different Philosophies


On left IWB & DW on right WB & IW
3421 Italian KO  IV

Tweak of 343 Italian KO III*

Double SS instead of AFs
Classic MLD 4-2-4 VI

Underlaps over Overlaps
Classic MLD 4-2-4 V

BWM instead of DM
WB on support
Classic MLD 4-2-4 IV
Rince said: LOL... I guess @kjordafen already did that - https://fm-arena.com/thread/5238-4-3-3-striker-focus/

Ops I didn't see that :blush:
@Zippo is fine if i do take the vacation with this tactic so it can be tested?

I don't know if the guy understand the "rules" but we are all curious about :D
Zeyad said: @Delicious so then if you are suggesting that being an underdog does make a difference to how a tactic performs then @WestDoorBlowJ point about underdog testing in fm-gamers is valid even though there the number of games tested is no way near enough to minimize the RNG effect.

Maybe one day fm-arena will incorporate underdog testing too


I guess you are missundersting the whole point here. He said that ANCHOR role is giving more stability and consistency to a tactic when you do play as underdog.

But since you are trying to point out something, but you putting me in the situation that i can be missunderstood.

So, you basically saying that attacking mentality is solid for underdog as well? And we are all fools

Because from FM-Gamers you can see clearly that :



You can check by your self. I won't really go any futher.

If FM-Arena didn't bother to make a test-league like previous edition, "Team A" ; "Team B" on the same league i guess they had their reason behind that.

From the test (go check how a test is conduct) you can understand why i do prefer to start the games as underdog(Negative side) on Cautious instead of Balanced and tweak in according of the game flow.

You can't really compare 3800 games vs 228. In order to minimize the RNG effect we should run tactics like 8k+ times, but at it would be just a waste of resource on both sides.

Cautious in a game where you don't freeze etc, has it's benifits even to manage your team status and rotation.

From one of my vacation lens got super season : https://fm-arena.com/find-comment/22577/
I could just post that around the web and claim tactic is super, but as you can see it did pretty normal to the other leagues.


My test league is CA 140 +o- vs Elite teams and it has totaly different results from here as well.



I am doing even back-end test as well :

And attacking mentality isn't even near about being good for underdogs or sub/top.



Next time, check at least before to come at me with "points" are valid and etc. check what the discussion is about. Because we were talking about a role(anchor) giving out magic to underdogs.

And i didn't say that the tactic is bad etc, because i am working on that shape as well and if you check i did tested on Arena alot anchor's build after this tactic went out. So i am only thanksfull for the tweak and the test.

And saying this kind of shape it suit more "underdog" because of anchor to me is a bit optmistic.
Because means it would suit 80%(Random number, to say alot) of the tactics posted here.
Classic MLD 4-2-4 II
Zeyad said: @Delicious I thought @Zippo tested the cautious mentality on away games theory recently and balanced mentality still won out?

https://fm-arena.com/thread/5171-cautious-mentality-for-away-matches/


Ye, in a scenario where teams are equal, and to me those results are pretty the same ( we don't know how RNG hitted them).
If i am the underdog in a away game i would always start on cautious and check the game's flow.
I do even start on cautious even if my team is "equal", but that's me, maybe i do like my placebo's dose.
Tweak the mentality in order to get the result you want is more how you dare in order to win a game.

The days you could just plug a tactic and go afk are done for. Or at least i just play the game in a different way.

And i would even check how Cautious drain off your players compared to Balanced one. But that's just me.
WestDoorBlowJ said: Of course it won't, that's why I uploaded the tactic here for testing. I also uploaded the tactic to FM-gamers for testing to see how it works in different scenario, though that test is not comparable to FM-Arena's.

And if you read my original post, I have posted a lot of different team results there, which shows that I clearly understand '38 matches test' is meaningless. Furthermore, those are just a few of the interesting results. I have run a lot of saves with the tactic before posting it here.

Also, I especially mentioned 'holiday test' to let others know that I didn't play the season by myself. This increased a lot of randomness in the so-called 'tests'. It's just that this tactic tends to give more consistent results no matter what happened during the season or how strong the team is.

FM-player doesn't play with the test leagues. I am just suggesting that even with 'injuries, bans, transfers, rotation and many other RNG factors', this tactic has higher chance of giving you success, even if different teams are used.


Point is one and simple :

Are you trying to understand how consistent is a "tactic" or how lucky you are?
A "FM-Player", would try to build the team to do rotation and things like that at least is that what i do hope. But basically what you trying to do is to force a tactic into a team regard if the tactic fit for the players.

MR/ML roles as even zippo said are rare as pink unicorn, i did found like 2-3 really good for the roles.
What you are trying to say that is Anchor, for some reason is giving you better consistency to "underdog",but my question is did you even tested the role by watching it?

Because after this tactic's result i did tried on live-games and i didn't like it not even a bit, but that doesn't mean the role is "bad", maybe it didn't fit the player i had on that save.

What we know from test that : BWM(D)/DM(S)/DM(D)/RPM are giving out for some unknow reason the similar kind of perfomance on test league.

About FM-Gamers's test,if that wasn't afflicted by RNG you wouldn't see Man City once with 90+ points and the other time with 66. I am sure their test league is really good and interesting, but doing 228 games in order to value a tactic it seem to my point of view very optmistic.

I am not trying to attack you or anyone, for me the anchor was really good hint and very happy you did it.
Vacation isn't a test is most likely a showdown,full of rng. Sometimes it's good and sometimes is .... as Gattuso's cit.

Imagine that out of there are people doing 16 games "Vacation-Test" and they are convinced that those results should be meta.
Classic MLD 4-2-4

Took as base (Lazy to redo set pieces, but i am most likely curious about reliable set pieces on corner defence, even tho i am sure they do no different in test)

https://fm-arena.com/thread/5121-4-2-4-structured-attack-v2/


MLD= Much lower Defensive Line
Pip said: This looks interesting. Can you mirror the tactic? Have an MR, AML and the SS on the right? and Still  work?
Thanks


If you have better players on the other side, yes it will work. I do pretty often "mirror" when i do play.