Kyle said: Are you sure about cross less often being the strongest option? Heading just seems so nuts, the amount of goals I get from my RB crossing it to a tall AM/L is ridiculous.
Cross less often basically tells players to avoid crossing when probabilities are low, but they still do when probabilities are good. For example, below are the goals of a season using Red 0.4. As you can see, even with IWs and that option, they still got 40 assists from crossing. That's over 140 goals using cross less often and low crosses. I'll still test again removing those options, and even adding the opposite (cross more often and floating/whipped crosses).
Alexis said: I'm really surprised to see Cerber's tactic doing better than Zaz's, because at the beginning of my game I was using Cerber's tactic and my results were really mixed, and quite bad away from home, and when I switched to Zaz's tactic, my results improved dramatically, I won the French cup and reached the final of the Europa League (with Marseille in Ligue 1). I lost in the final 3-0 against Lazio. I only finished 4th in the league though, but Lyon and Monaco are very strong teams. And Paris of course, they didn't lose a single match all season, and I think only drew 3... Expand
It's just Beta, it doesn't matter much which tactic is the best. I just hope we have many different tactics with good score early, so people have options for different tastes.
ArsenalHighbury said: does anyone know the best player traits for every position/role? Expand
Any that enforce the player instructions and team instructions from your tactic. For example, if a role has "run into space", then you get moves into channels. If your tactics have dribble more or run at defense, then you get runs with the ball often.
The reason to get traits that fit the tactics is simple: If the tactic is good, any player not following it will make the team perform worse. If the tactic is not good, then you should be improving the tactic, not learning random traits. If your tactic has a position that should get further forward and the player has "stays back all time", then you should train it to forget that trait.
Mark said: I have had a bit of a look at @Eric results to try and see if there are any patterns. I have excluded the tactics where he hasn't tested for a full season. I have also started testing them in my lower league tests. Here are the results from @Eric Tests.
I have focused on the teams that have either made 2 points per game or had a goal difference of over one goal per game.
I hope this helps someone Expand
Thanks! I will try to check it after this batch of experiments. Red 0.4 is getting a bit more solid at the back, but I couldn't get that 0.5 goals conceded per match yet with top team.
Bogeyman said: I don't remember when the last time a 3 defenders tactic worked well in FM. They always have been very leaky and it looks like this year isn't an exception Expand
Eric, can you share the save you use for tottenham? I mean, since you already tested lots of tactics, I think it would be a nice complimentary test during beta. Also, the same steps you use to run (like set tactic, go on vacations and mark use same tactic). I understand if it's not possible.
Sane said: @ZaZ Should we expect your new tactics with changes in the coming days? Did you hide your findings in the first post because they probably don't work anymore? Expand
Yeah, I am trying to get a new tactic in the coming days.
About spoilers in first post, I did it because results suddenly got way different from before. I'm not sure if match engine changed or if variance was too big, but I hope I can get something solid soon. Meanwhile, some good tactics are already around, like Electro from @Cyborg.
arsenal737 said: @ZaZ which would be a better tactic between the test, red 0.1 & red 0.2?? Expand
Answered in the other topic.
Kyle said: Holidays test just seem unreliable in general, very dependent on how well other teams are doing, injuries to both player and AI and obviously sometimes you just get really lucky and is much easier to fluke 38 games than 456 or whatever the tests are. Expand
Unfortunatelly, it's the only way to test before editor is out.
Eric said: Here's my test with Tottenham, predicted 6th
Expand
Thank you for testing!
I'm not with much time this week to keep testing, so I just rolled back and added the pictures from Red 0.2. Match engine will change in one week after game releases, so I'll wait to test more when that happens. I also want the editor to create a league and make testing more reliable.
I can give your new Red tactic a go with Tottenham if you don't mind Expand
It's fine by me, thanks. I was just pointing out that they usually schedulle some match engine changes during beta. Since the match engine seems pretty broken right now, I would be surprised if those changes were subtle.
Also, it's very likely that they will try three versions of match engine during beta, then four after release, so it's hard to compare tactics from one week to the other.
I'm having some inconsistencies with the results, so I'll have to run some things again. Either I screwed up somewhere, or they changed the match engine last patch.
Jimmy said: @ZaZ What do you think about this one ? I just don't know if I should tell my SSs to stay outside and to take the flanks when they/we have the ball on their player instructions. Expand
It's better for the SS to play by the middle instead of going to the flanks.
P.S.: Current match engine has way more variance than previous. I am gonna create a custom test league to improve my tests accuracy.
After some testing, I noticed Red 0.2 was actually worse than Red 0.1. It's just that the first couple of results were too good, possibly outliers due to RNG. I have removed it from the main post to avoid confusion, but it will be here if anyone still want to try it.
pixar said: How likely are IWBs doing better on the opposite foot? I'm almost certain they have a higher tactical aptitude. Expand
Foot of IWB doesn't matter, since they don't shoot or cross. You can safely ignore the opinion of your assistant manager on that, it has no affect on performance.
Jimmy said: @ZaZ When you talked about 1 TF supported by 2 SS performing well… what kind of formation were you talking about ? What about a 3(CBs)-3(WBs+DM)-1(CM)-2(SSs)-1(TF) ? Basically your formation with SS instead of IW and one more CB instead of 1 TF, that allows WB to be a bit higher. Expand
Using Electro with Isak AM/L scoring this type of goal on average once or twice a match
https://streamable.com/1daryh
https://streamable.com/0wvjc1
https://streamable.com/c1djlw
Cross less often basically tells players to avoid crossing when probabilities are low, but they still do when probabilities are good. For example, below are the goals of a season using Red 0.4. As you can see, even with IWs and that option, they still got 40 assists from crossing. That's over 140 goals using cross less often and low crosses. I'll still test again removing those options, and even adding the opposite (cross more often and floating/whipped crosses).
It's just Beta, it doesn't matter much which tactic is the best. I just hope we have many different tactics with good score early, so people have options for different tastes.
Any that enforce the player instructions and team instructions from your tactic. For example, if a role has "run into space", then you get moves into channels. If your tactics have dribble more or run at defense, then you get runs with the ball often.
The reason to get traits that fit the tactics is simple: If the tactic is good, any player not following it will make the team perform worse. If the tactic is not good, then you should be improving the tactic, not learning random traits. If your tactic has a position that should get further forward and the player has "stays back all time", then you should train it to forget that trait.
I have focused on the teams that have either made 2 points per game or had a goal difference of over one goal per game.
I hope this helps someone
Thanks! I will try to check it after this batch of experiments. Red 0.4 is getting a bit more solid at the back, but I couldn't get that 0.5 goals conceded per match yet with top team.
New role sucks.
Sure, go ahead.
Eric, can you share the save you use for tottenham? I mean, since you already tested lots of tactics, I think it would be a nice complimentary test during beta. Also, the same steps you use to run (like set tactic, go on vacations and mark use same tactic). I understand if it's not possible.
Yeah, I am trying to get a new tactic in the coming days.
About spoilers in first post, I did it because results suddenly got way different from before. I'm not sure if match engine changed or if variance was too big, but I hope I can get something solid soon. Meanwhile, some good tactics are already around, like Electro from @Cyborg.
You can put here for people to try.
It's very close, don't be alarmed.
Answered in the other topic.
Kyle said: Holidays test just seem unreliable in general, very dependent on how well other teams are doing, injuries to both player and AI and obviously sometimes you just get really lucky and is much easier to fluke 38 games than 456 or whatever the tests are.
Unfortunatelly, it's the only way to test before editor is out.
Lapidus said: Here's how a proper testing should be done - https://fm-arena.com/thread/652-fm-arena-tactic-testing-league/
I agree, but can't be done without the editor.
Hard to know, they are pretty close. 0.1 worked better for stronger team while 0.2 for weaker, but I'm not sure at all.
Thank you for testing!
I'm not with much time this week to keep testing, so I just rolled back and added the pictures from Red 0.2. Match engine will change in one week after game releases, so I'll wait to test more when that happens. I also want the editor to create a league and make testing more reliable.
I can give your new Red tactic a go with Tottenham if you don't mind
It's fine by me, thanks. I was just pointing out that they usually schedulle some match engine changes during beta. Since the match engine seems pretty broken right now, I would be surprised if those changes were subtle.
I just don't know if I should tell my SSs to stay outside and to take the flanks when they/we have the ball on their player instructions.
It's better for the SS to play by the middle instead of going to the flanks.
P.S.: Current match engine has way more variance than previous. I am gonna create a custom test league to improve my tests accuracy.
Yeah. It went very well in the first two runs, then bad in the later three. I then run a couple more just to be sure, and it was worse.
Chewbacca said: Any results with the tactics?
Running right now. (Don't have a save of the end of season to get the screenshots.)
Foot of IWB doesn't matter, since they don't shoot or cross. You can safely ignore the opinion of your assistant manager on that, it has no affect on performance.
Jimmy said: @ZaZ When you talked about 1 TF supported by 2 SS performing well… what kind of formation were you talking about ?
What about a 3(CBs)-3(WBs+DM)-1(CM)-2(SSs)-1(TF) ? Basically your formation with SS instead of IW and one more CB instead of 1 TF, that allows WB to be a bit higher.
Not sure, I didn't test it.