ZaZ said: There is a green arrow with "Win" that represents the % of points. Expand
Isn't that related to equal teams playing each other? The top tactic has a win rate of 56%, which is about 21 wins in a premier league season but the top teams will win much more than that
For example if I wanted to manage the team who is predicted to finish midtable, would I be able to use the Win% and Pts from the tactics testing table to choose a tactic that would have that team finish around mid table?
@Orion Ive started to use the FM Tweak match engine so have revisted this thread. Just looking at the ST position. Acceleration is not there, seems strange. Is there a particular reason?
TommyToxic said: A user tested all the default tactics (tiki taka, route one, gegenpress etc) with a few different formations in FM24. It's very interesting because gives an indication as to how effective the different playstyles are, and a lot on inexperienced users tend to use default tactics as a starting point. Maybe even more now than before because of the new tactics system.
I would do it myself but I simply don't have much time available atm. Expand
How does this compare against the previous top tactic (EF 424 IF HP V2 P101 AC) when you consider it's much harder to find natural players at the ML position compared to AML position. Is it better to use this with someone who is accomplished at ML or use EF 424 IF HP V2 P101 AC with a natural AML?
Sorry @Zippo I actually was replying to you but thought that was Orions post. Your answer cleared it up for me though because I had misunderstood. Are the main differences between the two tests that yours is important attributes across all positions whereas Orion has identified position specific attributes? I'm sure there are also differences in the methodology but these are the main outcome differences?
Edit - This comment by Orion also gives me more info
"In terms of rating - FM Arena test is based on team Points. harvestgreen22 test is using goal difference. And my model is using players rating as a target variable. Hence my model will look for attributes that increase rating, but not team performance per se. We know that in general average rating will be somehow connected with team results. And I know about a flaw of this model that since it looks for players for high rating it will usually prioritise offensive player but that's due to FM rating system."
I was talking about creating such testing environment to test AGAINST that would accurately represent the real game environment otherwise there's no point in testing because your findings won't work in the real game environment.
The game has an algorithm that distributes attributes for every position, it relates to both type of players such as existing players and generated players.
To understand how the attribute distribution algorithm works you can take a look on the attributes of the top 100 highest CA player for each position.
For example, if we take the top 100 highest CA Strikers in the game then we'll see that the average value for "Tackling" attribute is about "7" and the average value for "Finishing" attribute is about "15"
But if we take the top 100 highest CA Central Defenders in the game then we'll see that the average value for "Tackling" attribute is about "15" and the average value for "Finishing" attribute is about "7".
What does the above tell us?
It tells us if we in our testing league set "Tackling" attribute for the Strikers to be much higher than "7" or if we set "Finishing" attribute for the Central Defenders much higher that "7" then we are moving away form the real environment and creating such testing environment to test AGAINST that would be a far away from the real game environment. There's no point in testing AGAINST such environment because it's obvious that in the real game you won't encounter Central Defenders with "14" for Finishing attribute or Strikers with "14" for "Tackling" attribute.
Once more, I was talking about creating a test environment to test AGAINST. I didn't say that the top 100 highest CA players for every position are the best performances.
I hope it clears things.
Cheers. Expand
Hey @Zippo I replied to Orion, who I believe did say that he uses the top 100 players at each position to then determine the most important attributes for each position, if I understand it correctly
@Zippo Why is it important to base the testing on the CA rating of the top 100 players for each position? Don't we know that the highest top 100 CA rated players are not the top 100 performing players in the game?
@Orion Also, can you explain this from the opening post - MLR is Winger - AMLR is Fast Striker
Are you saying if i want to select the best AMLR I should look at the Fast ST column on GS?
DarthTrone said: Hello Long time lurker but made an account since I think I can answer this *somewhat* well albeit unable to give concrete proof of it
First of all, I am in an online save myself and have found myself overperforming regardless of team situation and there's a few core principles to go off of
Firstly, You should be running the set pieces from this website. At minimum the corner attack routines and have a tall striker (if this is first few seasons Lucca/Onoachu/Veerman/Uldricks from most expensive to least but any will suffice and guarantee 15~ corner goals and 30 goals per season. They will also act as the first line of defence for corners and be used as an effective first line of defence against set pieces.) If you're late into your save, just go for anyone with as high Jumping reach as possible a 20-30% of your goals will come from set pieces alone and I'd put BIG money on them running such routines.
Secondly, A basic 4-3-3 will not suffice while I usually am inspired by FMarena tactics its pretty consensus that as long as you run anything "meta" it'll be good, follow the general principles if you don't want to copy a tactic, the regular stuff such as tackle harder+get stuck in,Narrow formations,gegenpressing to the max,Inviting crosses as long as your CBs have high Jumping Reach etc.
The key is mostly following the meta than adapting to your needs and team. ^ In terms of the 4231 I've found the 3-4-3 to be a very effective tactic at quarreling it but the 4-2-4 being quite good against it, again purely circumstantial evidence from around 10~ seasons of online play so cannot give any definitive proof.
Finally, more importantly is your players there have been recent posts about the "most" important stats per position try to follow them per player but primarily fast wingers/fullbacks and tall sts/cbs and you'll be able to compete with any team
Would love to answer more questions or hopefully someone more experienced in the community to provide more feedback. Expand
@DarthTrone Do I need to manually select the positions for each player on set pieces or can I delegate this? I'm using the set piece tactics from this site but delegate the player selection to staff? I'm assuming the player with highest jumping reach should be in the A1 position, next highest JR in A2, etc?
Itsyaboy420 said: with 18 jumping reach striker (target foward) it could score 38 goals in the 3rd Bundesliga, while with 17 jumping reach it could score 32 goals in the 2nd Bundesliga from corners Expand
Do I manually have to put my player with highest jumping reach in a certain position or doesn't it matter? At the moment I let the set piece coach set this
Bafici said: I made a genie scout file. Biggest difference from fmarena ratings is this is bit more realistic. Great players in real life takes higher ratings.
I understand this puts the better players in real life withy higher ratings but is this then not inferior to the ratings file based off the meta attributes?
bigloser said: Depends on the save and how much you need/want to optimize PA into physicals. The bottleneck is first team minutes to reach PA so realistically you’ll need to loan guys out to consistently hit it. Even if you have reserves there is limited minutes there too.
In my experience managing in Germany, players who seem to have a decent amount of PA/professionalism hit at least 15+ acc/pac just doing V7 by 18-20 and usually get to at least 17s before maxing out. The 30 ca gain is not realistic in a real save unless you have a ton of first team minutes to give and someone with really high professionalism but the acc/pac usually gets priority.
I would only bother with no training if I was trying to do something that actually required like 90 PA players with 20/20 pac/acc. Which is intake only saves, winning ACL with like an Indian team, club WC with a MLS team (salary capped), etc Basically in any European save, you eventually get rich enough to buy/keep high PA regens because of UCL money. Expand
Do you think this no training strategy is optimal for a non league side? How long does the development usually take? I'll probably refresh my squad completely every 2 seasons so maybe its not worth it
Telespiza said: I start the game without checking the “Do not Add Key Staff” box, so I start with a scout. If you want to play with a maximum of 2 trials, I think you should at least start with a scout. I respect your realistic gameplay, but it makes it impossible to find players. Expand
How would I use the scout? Do I scout individual players or is there a way to get more players scouted?
Isn't that related to equal teams playing each other? The top tactic has a win rate of 56%, which is about 21 wins in a premier league season but the top teams will win much more than that
I would do it myself but I simply don't have much time available atm.
Do you have a link to this?
Edit - This comment by Orion also gives me more info
"In terms of rating - FM Arena test is based on team Points. harvestgreen22 test is using goal difference. And my model is using players rating as a target variable. Hence my model will look for attributes that increase rating, but not team performance per se. We know that in general average rating will be somehow connected with team results. And I know about a flaw of this model that since it looks for players for high rating it will usually prioritise offensive player but that's due to FM rating system."
I was talking about creating such testing environment to test AGAINST that would accurately represent the real game environment otherwise there's no point in testing because your findings won't work in the real game environment.
The game has an algorithm that distributes attributes for every position, it relates to both type of players such as existing players and generated players.
To understand how the attribute distribution algorithm works you can take a look on the attributes of the top 100 highest CA player for each position.
For example, if we take the top 100 highest CA Strikers in the game then we'll see that the average value for "Tackling" attribute is about "7" and the average value for "Finishing" attribute is about "15"
But if we take the top 100 highest CA Central Defenders in the game then we'll see that the average value for "Tackling" attribute is about "15" and the average value for "Finishing" attribute is about "7".
What does the above tell us?
It tells us if we in our testing league set "Tackling" attribute for the Strikers to be much higher than "7" or if we set "Finishing" attribute for the Central Defenders much higher that "7" then we are moving away form the real environment and creating such testing environment to test AGAINST that would be a far away from the real game environment. There's no point in testing AGAINST such environment because it's obvious that in the real game you won't encounter Central Defenders with "14" for Finishing attribute or Strikers with "14" for "Tackling" attribute.
Once more, I was talking about creating a test environment to test AGAINST. I didn't say that the top 100 highest CA players for every position are the best performances.
I hope it clears things.
Cheers.
Hey @Zippo I replied to Orion, who I believe did say that he uses the top 100 players at each position to then determine the most important attributes for each position, if I understand it correctly
@Orion
Also, can you explain this from the opening post
- MLR is Winger
- AMLR is Fast Striker
Are you saying if i want to select the best AMLR I should look at the Fast ST column on GS?
First of all, I am in an online save myself and have found myself overperforming regardless of team situation and there's a few core principles to go off of
Firstly, You should be running the set pieces from this website. At minimum the corner attack routines and have a tall striker (if this is first few seasons Lucca/Onoachu/Veerman/Uldricks from most expensive to least but any will suffice and guarantee 15~ corner goals and 30 goals per season. They will also act as the first line of defence for corners and be used as an effective first line of defence against set pieces.) If you're late into your save, just go for anyone with as high Jumping reach as possible a 20-30% of your goals will come from set pieces alone and I'd put BIG money on them running such routines.
Secondly, A basic 4-3-3 will not suffice while I usually am inspired by FMarena tactics its pretty consensus that as long as you run anything "meta" it'll be good, follow the general principles if you don't want to copy a tactic, the regular stuff such as tackle harder+get stuck in,Narrow formations,gegenpressing to the max,Inviting crosses as long as your CBs have high Jumping Reach etc.
The key is mostly following the meta than adapting to your needs and team. ^ In terms of the 4231 I've found the 3-4-3 to be a very effective tactic at quarreling it but the 4-2-4 being quite good against it, again purely circumstantial evidence from around 10~ seasons of online play so cannot give any definitive proof.
Finally, more importantly is your players there have been recent posts about the "most" important stats per position try to follow them per player but primarily fast wingers/fullbacks and tall sts/cbs and you'll be able to compete with any team
Would love to answer more questions or hopefully someone more experienced in the community to provide more feedback.
@DarthTrone Do I need to manually select the positions for each player on set pieces or can I delegate this? I'm using the set piece tactics from this site but delegate the player selection to staff? I'm assuming the player with highest jumping reach should be in the A1 position, next highest JR in A2, etc?
Do I manually have to put my player with highest jumping reach in a certain position or doesn't it matter? At the moment I let the set piece coach set this
Sort by the Position rating then change to the other rating and re-sort
If player is near the top on both then sign them
and why use both? why not choose one?
I use either of the ones below...
@Bafici
https://fm-arena.com/thread/14077-guide-on-how-to-use-genie-scout-to-find-meta-players/
@Orion
https://fm-arena.com/thread/14201-fm24-experiment-update-new-match-engines-most-important-attributes-for-each-respecitve-positions-with-their-coefficients/
@Pip i read you're not using GS anymore but how did you choose between the two GS ratings above? They seem to be very different
Ratings
@Bafici How does this ratings file differ from the fmarena one from this thread: https://fm-arena.com/thread/14077-guide-on-how-to-use-genie-scout-to-find-meta-players/
I understand this puts the better players in real life withy higher ratings but is this then not inferior to the ratings file based off the meta attributes?
In my experience managing in Germany, players who seem to have a decent amount of PA/professionalism hit at least 15+ acc/pac just doing V7 by 18-20 and usually get to at least 17s before maxing out. The 30 ca gain is not realistic in a real save unless you have a ton of first team minutes to give and someone with really high professionalism but the acc/pac usually gets priority.
I would only bother with no training if I was trying to do something that actually required like 90 PA players with 20/20 pac/acc. Which is intake only saves, winning ACL with like an Indian team, club WC with a MLS team (salary capped), etc Basically in any European save, you eventually get rich enough to buy/keep high PA regens because of UCL money.
Do you think this no training strategy is optimal for a non league side? How long does the development usually take? I'll probably refresh my squad completely every 2 seasons so maybe its not worth it
Why do you say Recovery is not necessary? I may have missed it but what is the rationale for including 7 x recovery sessions in the original?
How would I use the scout? Do I scout individual players or is there a way to get more players scouted?
Its not realistic though. Is that my only option? What happens at the next stage? Say i employ a scout surely i dont need to scout players indvidually