TactocTestor said: I use your schedule but it seems that every player is complaining about high volumes of quickness training. Should I just leave them be and stick with the schedule? Expand
It's normal to have bad spells every now and then. If you win too much, your team can get complacent. If you lose, your team loses morale. Not only that, some players have low consistency or low important matches and just perform bad for five or ten games in a row. If that happens with both strikers at once, or a number of other positions, then you are bound to enter a losing streak.
In short, the tactics improve your chances of winning, but don't make you invincible. If you lose with a strong tactic, you would probably do even worse with a weaker tactic.
Poacher said: As far as I know you can choose the volante role for a DM position only if there are 2 or more DMs positions in your tactic and if there's only 1 DM position in your tactic then the volante role isn't available. Expand
It can be Volante as long as it's not in the center.
Asstem said: I was try it to test 2 times on mrl base test league. AM choose players. Don't know why, but when I pick fast players FMRTE settings break( Expand
Thank you for testing! It seems to be stronger than Blue for weak teams, so I'm satisfied.
TactocTestor said: Thanks. How about the defensive winger guys? Do i need to train them in defensive positioning attributes? Here's my regen. Would you advise developing his defensive positioning or going all in on quickness development. He already has 15 in both attributes. Expand
Defensive attributes don't matter much. For a defensive winger, you want pace, accelerations and agility (like anyone else), as well as dribbling and vision, since they do the most dribbles and assists in the team.
Your regen is pretty good, he will definitely become a beast in the future. I would still train him in quickness because nothing stops him from reaching 20 in those key attributes. =)
Red is clearly a better mid table tactic - even if we exclude the bad Chester performance, it got better results with every team apart from Accrington (but still there was only 4 point difference there). Blue got better results with underdog teams - mainly because how much better it performed with West Brom and Dover - Red got better results with 3/6 of the teams, so part of it could be just randomness. And it seems like Hungerford is just a really bad team, no matter what tactic you use with it.
Here are the save files if anyone wanted to get more data from them (they were too big to upload directly to fmarena):
TactocTestor said: So for youth team training do you let the youth team managers do it or do you also set them up for pace and acceleration training? Expand
Same for youth. If they don't get enough speed, they won't even have a spot in the upper team.
Machismo said: Does blue 3.0 replace Blue 2.0 or have you uploaded both to use as specific tactic? e.g. Tighter marking when up against the elite teams thus switching to 2.0? Expand
Blue 3.0 is the best. The others are there for history value, but they are outdated.
Thanks for the test and thorough explanation. I would like to see the result for Blue to see how they compare. Looking just as it is, it seems bad for West Browwich and Hungerford, but they might just be very weak teams recently promoted. Have to compare with Blue to know for sure.
JTC said: I have been using Phoenix/Blue in my online game with friends and have achieved great success. High scoring (spread across the front 5 players) and solid defence. Biggest problem is with DLP(Su). Even when I play Camavinga he still has very low rating. I understand that rating does not reflect all but it would seem odd for a great player to score so low.
I have changed to Red in the last two games and immediately I noticed a few things.
First, the DM(Su) position now has much better rating. I believe the problem with Blue in that regard is that DLP(Su) is positioned too close to CM(A) so there is "too little" for the DLP(Su) to do save to recover the ball and pass upwards (occasionally long killer pass but rare). Now with DM(Su) you can see that he is positioned half notch downwards so there is more space away from the CM(A). I have a strong feeling that in this game rating is at least partially influenced by how much "work" a player will do during a match. From what I see from the match highlights, the DM(Su) is contributing much more than DLP(Su). There is more interaction with the the back four (given his closer position) and he runs more before passing to other players: in Blue he mainly interacts with CM(A) who is closest to him.
Second, and by similar logic, the DW(Su) contributes more than W(Su) because of their lower position. This made them interact more with the rest of the whole team. In Blue, W(Su) keeps bombing down the sideline to cross from the byline, and to great success, but far too monotone. When the DW(Su) is positioned further down, they would interact with others more, and this instills greater variety in terms of approach play e.g. I now see much more chances created by DW(Su) passing not from the byline but actually down the centre cutting across the opponent team's CB and FB.
Third, I think removing "take more risks" from most players save for CM(A) is a good move. It enhances the quality of the chances and definitely helps maintain possession.
Overall speaking, from what I observe so far, I think Red is a much better version than Blue even for strong/elite teams, provided of course you have the right players in each position. In fact I think Red whilst being a gegenpress does not necessarily need very pacey players. Running is important, but the player interaction and passing around the field mean chances are now created by slicing through the opponent's team rather than a particular player running past your opponent's players. Expand
Thanks for testing! Later I'll see if something from Red can be used in Blue, but it has been really hard to improve Blue as it's very close to optimal for strong teams. I know for a fact that Red is better than Blue for weak team, but most of those tweaks that improve for weaker team makes strong team play worse. In simple words, better players perform well with risky moves, while worse players perform better playing safer.
DoubleR said: Would you guys say Pace and acceleration are still the most OP stats? Like is it 'safe' to just have my whole team focus on those 2 for individual training? (together with the player role so other stats increase too of course) Expand
It is. I always set all line players additional focus to quickness (goalkeeper to reactions).
Thanks! It seems to be slightly worse for strong team than Blue 3.0, but my focus was making it stronger to the weak team, for those 160/140 CA tests. I hope someone will test it in that league so I know if it's really better. In my experiments, it's much better than Blue 3.0 for weaker team. Needs more testing from other people for confirmation.
crazyfmguy93 said: Why does my player worth so little versus AI players? Lets hear your advices for buy players with less cost, also sell players with more money. Expand
There is a hidden attribute called asking price, which is the minimum price a team is willing to receive in order to sell a player. In my experience, that value is around the middle ground of your offer and their counter-offer (for example, if you suggest 1 mi and they ask 7 mi, then the asking prince is around 4 mi).
For selling your players, it has a lot to do with how rich the buying team is and if they are are actively trying to buy or not. When you offer players to other clubs, the price is always smaller than when they bid for a player you are not willing to sell. There might be something behind it, but I don't know how it works exactly.
This is Red 3.0, a mix between Red and Blue 3.0. Player roles and instructions were adjusted based on the stats of a full season using Blue 3.0. For example, it was noticed that DLP wasn't producing enough chances to have "Take More Risks", as well as goalkeeper, so they changed to roles that don't force that instruction. In the end, it got pretty similar to this tactic, so I incorporated a couple of instructions that improved performance. It performs similar to Blue 3.0 for strong teams, but delivers better results with weaker teams. Below are the tactics and results from a holiday test with Manchester City and Fulham.
P.S.: Seems like an "unrealistic strikerless tactics" will be in the finals of UCL.
I just let them whine.
It's normal to have bad spells every now and then. If you win too much, your team can get complacent. If you lose, your team loses morale. Not only that, some players have low consistency or low important matches and just perform bad for five or ten games in a row. If that happens with both strikers at once, or a number of other positions, then you are bound to enter a losing streak.
In short, the tactics improve your chances of winning, but don't make you invincible. If you lose with a strong tactic, you would probably do even worse with a weaker tactic.
And an AMC & SS up front rather than two SS?
Difference isn't big, but it's not better in my tests.
It can be Volante as long as it's not in the center.
Thank you for testing! It seems to be stronger than Blue for weak teams, so I'm satisfied.
Here's my regen. Would you advise developing his defensive positioning or going all in on quickness development. He already has 15 in both attributes.
Defensive attributes don't matter much. For a defensive winger, you want pace, accelerations and agility (like anyone else), as well as dribbling and vision, since they do the most dribbles and assists in the team.
Your regen is pretty good, he will definitely become a beast in the future. I would still train him in quickness because nothing stops him from reaching 20 in those key attributes. =)
Red is clearly a better mid table tactic - even if we exclude the bad Chester performance, it got better results with every team apart from Accrington (but still there was only 4 point difference there).
Blue got better results with underdog teams - mainly because how much better it performed with West Brom and Dover - Red got better results with 3/6 of the teams, so part of it could be just randomness.
And it seems like Hungerford is just a really bad team, no matter what tactic you use with it.
Here are the save files if anyone wanted to get more data from them (they were too big to upload directly to fmarena):
Blue - https://www.mediafire.com/file/fflxk98xz5kr6j5/ZaZ_Blue_-_Results.fm/file
Red - https://www.mediafire.com/file/gzmjar1xsfesetb/ZaZ_Red_-_Results.fm/file
Thanks, I'll check on it.
Same for youth. If they don't get enough speed, they won't even have a spot in the upper team.
Blue 3.0 is the best. The others are there for history value, but they are outdated.
I have changed to Red in the last two games and immediately I noticed a few things.
First, the DM(Su) position now has much better rating. I believe the problem with Blue in that regard is that DLP(Su) is positioned too close to CM(A) so there is "too little" for the DLP(Su) to do save to recover the ball and pass upwards (occasionally long killer pass but rare). Now with DM(Su) you can see that he is positioned half notch downwards so there is more space away from the CM(A). I have a strong feeling that in this game rating is at least partially influenced by how much "work" a player will do during a match. From what I see from the match highlights, the DM(Su) is contributing much more than DLP(Su). There is more interaction with the the back four (given his closer position) and he runs more before passing to other players: in Blue he mainly interacts with CM(A) who is closest to him.
Second, and by similar logic, the DW(Su) contributes more than W(Su) because of their lower position. This made them interact more with the rest of the whole team. In Blue, W(Su) keeps bombing down the sideline to cross from the byline, and to great success, but far too monotone. When the DW(Su) is positioned further down, they would interact with others more, and this instills greater variety in terms of approach play e.g. I now see much more chances created by DW(Su) passing not from the byline but actually down the centre cutting across the opponent team's CB and FB.
Third, I think removing "take more risks" from most players save for CM(A) is a good move. It enhances the quality of the chances and definitely helps maintain possession.
Overall speaking, from what I observe so far, I think Red is a much better version than Blue even for strong/elite teams, provided of course you have the right players in each position. In fact I think Red whilst being a gegenpress does not necessarily need very pacey players. Running is important, but the player interaction and passing around the field mean chances are now created by slicing through the opponent's team rather than a particular player running past your opponent's players.
Thanks for testing! Later I'll see if something from Red can be used in Blue, but it has been really hard to improve Blue as it's very close to optimal for strong teams. I know for a fact that Red is better than Blue for weak team, but most of those tweaks that improve for weaker team makes strong team play worse. In simple words, better players perform well with risky moves, while worse players perform better playing safer.
It is. I always set all line players additional focus to quickness (goalkeeper to reactions).
General FM21. Acceleration and Pace are just too strong in this match engine.
I understand nothing of turkish, but thanks!
Thanks! It seems to be slightly worse for strong team than Blue 3.0, but my focus was making it stronger to the weak team, for those 160/140 CA tests. I hope someone will test it in that league so I know if it's really better. In my experiments, it's much better than Blue 3.0 for weaker team. Needs more testing from other people for confirmation.
There is a hidden attribute called asking price, which is the minimum price a team is willing to receive in order to sell a player. In my experience, that value is around the middle ground of your offer and their counter-offer (for example, if you suggest 1 mi and they ask 7 mi, then the asking prince is around 4 mi).
For selling your players, it has a lot to do with how rich the buying team is and if they are are actively trying to buy or not. When you offer players to other clubs, the price is always smaller than when they bid for a player you are not willing to sell. There might be something behind it, but I don't know how it works exactly.
More information, like set pieces, best player attributes or training schedules can be found on the link below.
https://fm-arena.com/thread/884-zaz-blue-3-0/page-1/
Leave a comment if you liked the tactic and make sure to share your results. Enjoy!