Cool ! Thanks FMArena team !

StoneFree_v2_5-2-3
Hi FMArena team, appreciate your help to test new tactic 'StoneFree_v2_5-2-3'.
It is a tweak based on 'StoneFree_5-2-3' with @Delicious updated set-pieces for this formation. Some other misc. changes :
1) Changed CWB (Att) > WB (Sup)
2) Changed PF (Sup) > AF (Att)
3) Changed SV (Sup) > SV (Att)
4) Cleaned up some PIs on players

Thank you in advance !

awww poopy... well at least now I know LOL
Thank you team !

ImSorry_v5_4-3-3

Hi FM-Arena team,
Appreciate your help to test 'ImSorry_v5_4-3-3'.

Thank you as per usual !

ZaZ said: More attacking roles doesn't necessarily mean more offensive, because you could be playing more direct and losing possession easier, which results in less attacking opportunities. Expand

Agree, I tried a 5 on top IF-AF-AF-AF-IF before and it was horrific...

Cherknam said: Yeah I do too, but on this tactic it is a higher defensive line, so I assumed you tested with other defensive lines too but maybe I'm wrong? Expand

I just remembered I did sort of test the standardD line using the existing meta, performed all the same
https://fm-arena.com/find-comment/18201/

Cherknam said: Just one last question regarding the tactic, did you test all the different defensive lines and with two BPDs on defend duty? Just wondering as many of the other top tactics don't have a covering BPD and play with either 'standard' or 'lower' defensive lines. Expand

Not officially tested here, but in-game i tended to gravitate to a standard D-Line... could be a placebo but my defense seems to perform better ?

Cherknam said: I must say, out of all the tactics I've used, none have been as good and consistent as this one, robbed of a 5,760 match test in my opinion. Thanks a lot for making it Expand

Thanks man ! Very much appreciated
Nahhh, don't think of it that way... I'm just happy someone finds it useful

Holy sheeeet ! Congrats

ImSorry_v4_4-3-3

Happy New Year !
Appreciate your help to test 'ImSorry_v4_4-3-3'.

This is a minor tweak from 'ImSorry_v2_4-3-3' where I want to see if DM(Def) would do better then A.

Thank you once again !

ImSorry_v3_4-3-3

Hi FM-Arena team,
Appreciate your help to test 'ImSorry_v3_4-3-3'.

Tactic is a tweak from the my  where I complained about how SS are kinda useless... follow up from testing done in 'ImSorry_v2_4-3-3' seems to indicate using 3 AFs is really effective !
Summary of changes from 'Useless_4-4-2' :

1) Change of SS > AF
2) Change of IWB > WB : Easier to find players
3) Updated PI/TIs inline with previous testings

Special shout out to @LI4M for making me realize to test it

Thank you once again !

Delicious said: ?? Ok,so i can go back to dm(d) ._. i am testing 433 but with that kind of midfield since 2 days but idk, was hopping for mezzalas to do something Expand

Yeah... have been very unimpressed with CMs so far... or at least no one found a winning combination with them yet

Delicious said: did you tried with DM(D) as well? is better anchor? Because ON EVERY damn test i did was always better the dm(D), even if i wanted the anchor O_O Expand

Nope lol, I just woke up... It's on the list for potential testing

Delicious said: that's anochor? ?_? Expand

Yes sir

Mentoring is kind of a difficult to setup IMO, for the reason that the mentor must exceed the mentee in 2 categories :

1) Social Hierarchy
2) Player Personality

...and even then its up to the RNG gods on what gets passed down
I seen online folks say mentoring groups must not exceed 3-4 players also, no clue on how to verify that to be honest - which if true makes setting up effective groups even more difficult

ImSorry_v2_4-3-3

Hi FM-Arena team,
Appreciate your help to test 'ImSorry_v2_4-3-3'.
Idea behind it is that DMs are overpowered compared to CMs... and the only role from DM that can attack naturally is SV.

Some eagle eyed folks would notice this is the 14th iteration from personal tests for a 4-3-3, below are some Player Roles / TIs / PIs that didn't work well :
1) GK Distribution : Unspecified > Choose any option (except Long Kick and you're fine)
2) Defensive Line : Anything higher then 'Standard'
3) Early Crosses : ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
4) SV (Support) : We just didn't get enough 'attacking' oomph
5) More PIs : Adding more PIs seem to have a negative effect on player performance - Only kept 'Tackle Harder' on all players mostly out of habit

Thank you once again !

Heck yea ! who needs wingers ? Just buy defenders and strikers

Not game breaking... but surprisingly consistent I can say

Delicious said: I did tried CM no clue,can't make it work good as mezzala Expand

I give up, I have gone crazy... am resolving to this now LOL
Will test run it for shits and giggles

Soft&Wet_v2_4-2-4
Hi FMArena team, appreciate your help to test new tactic 'Soft&Wet_v2_4-2-4'.
It is a tweak based on 'Soft&Wet_4-2-4' using personal & play tester @Vitinha feedback :
1) Change CWB > WB
2) TI Change : Low Cross > Whipped Cross
3) TI Change : Cross More Often
4) Cleaned up PI on AF

Thank you in advance !