opq said: yeah, but many, include me, think of IF/IW as some just slightly outside the box forward, who needs to be as close to it, as he can
anyway, we can't see G/A distribution between players from test results, and mb IFs just supports more then finishing moments themselves, so it benefits for overall team result Expand
They usually are second goal scorers (after strikers) and first in assists, and they have a good number of crosses per match. You can think of them as a mix between wingers and strikers.
opq said: finally and it's not even about result but for my stupidity to put the most intrigue variant such deep xD
p.s. but I'll laugh hard if good old variant with narrow + narrow works better Expand
It makes sense that wider players work better with focus play through the flanks. Many people think that focus play through the flanks increase chance for players to pass the ball to them, but it actually just makes central midfielders get closer to the flanks so the ball flows more around that area.
opq said: I usually play on full DoF or with shortlist from my scouts for A-grade recommends, from which I can suggest players for DoF to buy. Shortlist doesn't help if you're climbing from low-leagues tho, cuz it's always "out of date" if you climb fast enough. Expand
I'm not a fan of DoF for hiring, they never get the player I want, and when they do, they pay double the price.
Going to start my journey on FM, sharing step by step what I am doing, with the reasoning behind every decision. I couldn't do earlier because my wife had a surgery and needed help recovering, so I couldn't make the commitment to play regularly to share. Anyway, I accept suggestions on the initial setup of this journey.
- Transfers: Only control scouts through scout meetings, and only hire between players they recommend. Yes or no?
- Club: start from lower division of England and climb to win Champions League, or start with weakest side from a top division and try to win during first season?
- Tactic: Play with a generic tactic, or a specific style or formation?
For next test, I would like to suggest Prevent Short GK Distribution, and the 4 methods of distribution (roll, throw, short kicks and long kicks). The reason is because Play Out of Defense isn't doing so well, so maybe allowing opponent to play from defense can be good (in my tests, difference is minimal). On the other hand, roll it out is working well like previous years, but I don't see much difference to the other methods of distribution in win rate.
Muukzor said: Updated with some results, doesn't seem super promising but who knows :P Expand
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.
Please note, that we tested the version without "Get Stuck In" TI only for 1,920 matches so the RNG might be 3 points and if we tested it for 5,760 Matches as we did to the original tactic then the result might be worse up to 3 points.
Anyway, even if the version without "Get Stuck In" TI got 0.5 - 2.0 points less than the original tactic then I still would suggested playing a normal game without "Get Stuck In" TI because there are always at least 1-3 matches every season where some of your players gets a second yellow card that automatically turns into a red card and it might cost you 3 - 6 points every season but it can be prevented by removing 'Tackle Harder' PI off this player or even adding 'Ease Off Tackles' PI to him, of course, that would have an effect if there's no "Get Stuck In" TI, which overrides the PIs.
I don't urge everyone to imidialty get rid of "Get Stuck In" TI, especially, if your goal is getting the highest score in our tactic testing because "Get Stuck In" TI might also increase the "Pressing" by a tiny fraction (I'm not sure about it), which might improve the score by 0.5 point in our tactic testing but if you play a normal game then obviously, "Get Stuck In" TI is pure evil, it doesn't allow you making point adjustments to the aggression of the tackles, which might cost you 3 - 6 points every season.
Also, imagine you're playing in a final and some of your players got an early yellow card and you can do nothing to adjust the aggression level of his tackles. Expand
If look at the top tactics from our tactic testing then you'll see they all have 'Get Stuck In' TI and the positions have 'Tackle Harder' PI.
It seems mandatory to have these tactical instructions if you want to maximize the result.
But highly likely those tactical instructions do the same thing, they just set the aggression of the tackles at the highest possible level.
If you ask me then I find using "Tackle Harder" PI gives you much more flexibility than using "Get Stuck In" TI.
When you add "Get Stuck In" TI then you increase the aggression level of the tackles for every position in your tactic and when you remove "Get Stuck In" TI then you decrease the aggression level of the tackles for every position in your tactic, it doesn't allow you to make point adjustments but very often you need it.
How often do you see that during a match some of your players gets a second yellow card that automatically turns into a red card?
That can be easily prevented, it's just when during a match you see some of your players gets booked then remove 'Tackle Harder' PI off this player or even add 'Ease Off Tackles' PI to him.
BUT BE AWERE if "Get Stuck In" TI is present then the actions above won't have any effect because TIs overwrite PIs.
As you can see having "Get Stuck In" TI is pure evil it doesn't allow you making point adjustments to the aggression level of the tackles.
So I discourage you from using "Get Stuck In" TI, you'd better use "Tackle Harder" PI, it gives the same effect as "Get Stuck In" TI, but also allows you making point adjustments to the aggression level of the tackles.
I hope this helps.
Cheers. Expand
Test the top tactic with the TI and with PI and show results, please. =)
For reference, their cross completion ratio is around 30%-40%, while that from wing backs is lower than 20%. They also try almost double the number of crosses than wing backs. That's one of the reasons why they usually have way more assist than wing backs. (P.S.: I answered fast because I'm testing exactly that right now, setting wing backs to cross less often because I noticed their inaccuracy during game play.)
Nebuuuu said: One question about Water & the offensive winger. How i understand this type of position is like they are searching to go inside and even trying to shoot on goal, right? So, when i got a left-footed winger on the right side, it would be better or not? Because they can shoot it into the long-corner of the goal and coming from the right side of the pitch, so left footed are (like Robben in his prime) in advantage or not?
I mean its the Football Manager, so it somestimes doesn´t make sense but yeah..just asking if it would better to have left footed player as right winger and the other way on the left side.
Greetings. Expand
They work well with either foot. If you check the statistics, not only they participate in goals with shots, but they are also the best crossers.
Nebuuuu said: Bro...i´m so HYPED (again)! I have time, i can play FM, fresh tactic-upgrade (never played Water, always Fire)...right in time 2nd half of the season with Hertha..if i can hold international quali places it would be superb. Posting Screens, experience/feelings tomorrow. Thanks alot - if you ever visit Berlin/Germany, let me now..i invite you to a good Döner Kebab or Ramen or whatever you want.
Enjoy the evening@all.
PS: congratz to reach 58, awesome! Expand
Thanks! I'm glad you like the tactic, and I would rather eat something else because there is kebab in every single corner here in Sweden (ramen is good, though).
Delicious said: I am not assuming and you didn't even followed that if you say something like that,it's not like i've deleted any post. Because it's more or less all explained the process. Because i started with "old-meta no clue who or what created it" and new "meta". To make a comparasion. If you believe i did copy someone i will give credit him,i am not that self-fish,this thing about converge seem more my reasoning then yours. I am assuming that from the past, i might be wrong. But in order to achieve that it was required a tons of test, but somehow this hurted the community. Sorry if i am bit confused here,but really the thing that fished me was "it could be achieved by the author with a bit of test" more then anything else.
But assimilate all the template it's a bit optimistic to say, about the players instructions are basically none so i do accept that. But funny part you know what is it? That there are more hidden things around how those stuff works,guess will be your turn.
Will let it here so everyone can understand clearly. Expand
Again, I am just proposing an improvement to the queue system of FM-Arena. I do not understand why you are bringing another issue to the table, and I have no interest in getting into an argument about that.
Delicious said: So from this reasoning you get the results that,is better going w/o overlap? Because on mine say the contrary. I am more confused then before now. Expand
Different methodologies of testing achieve different results.
Delicious said: If you say so i might believe you know pretty well. But as i said for me is everything cool,even stay on my queque
Those are just a bunch, seem people need to understand, that it's not like i was random spamming because of something,but in order to achieve something-accurate you need a server-computing. Spoiler will wait you explain how mentality passive's works from your accurate work.
You trying to explain things with your "database" that is working in a completely different way to understand how things works under a "freeze" on this one?
Or do you have fm-arena file?
Do you really believe if i had something that was nearly accurate as this Tactic-Test i would even come here and "spamming"?
My mistake was trying to "hold" more "roles-slot" possible in order to prevent people to just copy.
About that kind of spam you're totaly right and since i've understand how things working i just went and deleted most of them that were on queque.
That's why even @ZaZ is using the work i did, because was very inefficient computing resource.
Hope you understand better now. And hope you will show me the results of your work so i can just use it for my liking.
And i said that is totaly cool. You helping me in that way i am not blind to see that.
Frankly,i totaly agree with you. But in order to make it "clean" we should need a tool in order to conduct a research. In another site was provided and i am frankly using it for not shooting-gunning test in this place. Because as Zippo said i am obsessed too much with micro-improvements and i like to juice out till the last drop from everything i can about something i like. That could be a cpu or a script or a database or something that require always more speed. Expand
I think you are a bit too full of yourself right now. When you started testing, you said the instructions you were using were meta, so you could copy from others without giving any credits. Now, you assume everyone is copying from you. You shouldn't hold that double standard.
I have been here for a while and every time someone is on top, it's natural that people will try to understand what made that tactic work and assimilate to their own tactics. If the difference is too small, then I agree it's just a tweak and it should be given credits, but after a while the tactics always start to converge somewhere.
anyway, we can't see G/A distribution between players from test results, and mb IFs just supports more then finishing moments themselves, so it benefits for overall team result
They usually are second goal scorers (after strikers) and first in assists, and they have a good number of crosses per match. You can think of them as a mix between wingers and strikers.
and it's not even about result but for my stupidity to put the most intrigue variant such deep xD
p.s. but I'll laugh hard if good old variant with narrow + narrow works better
It makes sense that wider players work better with focus play through the flanks. Many people think that focus play through the flanks increase chance for players to pass the ball to them, but it actually just makes central midfielders get closer to the flanks so the ball flows more around that area.
Shortlist doesn't help if you're climbing from low-leagues tho, cuz it's always "out of date" if you climb fast enough.
I'm not a fan of DoF for hiring, they never get the player I want, and when they do, they pay double the price.
Anyway, I accept suggestions on the initial setup of this journey.
- Transfers: Only control scouts through scout meetings, and only hire between players they recommend. Yes or no?
- Club: start from lower division of England and climb to win Champions League, or start with weakest side from a top division and try to win during first season?
- Tactic: Play with a generic tactic, or a specific style or formation?
So, any suggestions?
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.
"424 Alhamdulillah II" tactic without "Get Stuck In" TI = 60.18645833333 points
"424 Alhamdulillah II" tactic = 59.75763888889 points
Please note, that we tested the version without "Get Stuck In" TI only for 1,920 matches so the RNG might be 3 points and if we tested it for 5,760 Matches as we did to the original tactic then the result might be worse up to 3 points.
Anyway, even if the version without "Get Stuck In" TI got 0.5 - 2.0 points less than the original tactic then I still would suggested playing a normal game without "Get Stuck In" TI because there are always at least 1-3 matches every season where some of your players gets a second yellow card that automatically turns into a red card and it might cost you 3 - 6 points every season but it can be prevented by removing 'Tackle Harder' PI off this player or even adding 'Ease Off Tackles' PI to him, of course, that would have an effect if there's no "Get Stuck In" TI, which overrides the PIs.
I don't urge everyone to imidialty get rid of "Get Stuck In" TI, especially, if your goal is getting the highest score in our tactic testing because "Get Stuck In" TI might also increase the "Pressing" by a tiny fraction (I'm not sure about it), which might improve the score by 0.5 point in our tactic testing but if you play a normal game then obviously, "Get Stuck In" TI is pure evil, it doesn't allow you making point adjustments to the aggression of the tackles, which might cost you 3 - 6 points every season.
Also, imagine you're playing in a final and some of your players got an early yellow card and you can do nothing to adjust the aggression level of his tackles.
Yeah, I agree with your reasoning.
If look at the top tactics from our tactic testing then you'll see they all have 'Get Stuck In' TI and the positions have 'Tackle Harder' PI.
It seems mandatory to have these tactical instructions if you want to maximize the result.
But highly likely those tactical instructions do the same thing, they just set the aggression of the tackles at the highest possible level.
If you ask me then I find using "Tackle Harder" PI gives you much more flexibility than using "Get Stuck In" TI.
When you add "Get Stuck In" TI then you increase the aggression level of the tackles for every position in your tactic and when you remove "Get Stuck In" TI then you decrease the aggression level of the tackles for every position in your tactic, it doesn't allow you to make point adjustments but very often you need it.
How often do you see that during a match some of your players gets a second yellow card that automatically turns into a red card?
That can be easily prevented, it's just when during a match you see some of your players gets booked then remove 'Tackle Harder' PI off this player or even add 'Ease Off Tackles' PI to him.
BUT BE AWERE if "Get Stuck In" TI is present then the actions above won't have any effect because TIs overwrite PIs.
As you can see having "Get Stuck In" TI is pure evil
So I discourage you from using "Get Stuck In" TI, you'd better use "Tackle Harder" PI, it gives the same effect as "Get Stuck In" TI, but also allows you making point adjustments to the aggression level of the tackles.
I hope this helps.
Cheers.
Test the top tactic with the TI and with PI and show results, please. =)
For reference, their cross completion ratio is around 30%-40%, while that from wing backs is lower than 20%. They also try almost double the number of crosses than wing backs. That's one of the reasons why they usually have way more assist than wing backs. (P.S.: I answered fast because I'm testing exactly that right now, setting wing backs to cross less often because I noticed their inaccuracy during game play.)
How i understand this type of position is like they are searching to go inside and even trying to shoot on goal, right?
So, when i got a left-footed winger on the right side, it would be better or not?
Because they can shoot it into the long-corner of the goal and coming from the right side of the pitch, so left footed are (like Robben in his prime) in advantage or not?
I mean its the Football Manager, so it somestimes doesn´t make sense but yeah..just asking if it would better to have left footed player as right winger and the other way on the left side.
Greetings.
They work well with either foot. If you check the statistics, not only they participate in goals with shots, but they are also the best crossers.
Will test run it for shits and giggles
Now, move IF to the other side to have three wingers there, centralize the SS, and make the tactic focus only on left side.
I have time, i can play FM, fresh tactic-upgrade (never played Water, always Fire)...right in time 2nd half of the season with Hertha..if i can hold international quali places it would be superb.
Posting Screens, experience/feelings tomorrow.
Thanks alot - if you ever visit Berlin/Germany, let me now..i invite you to a good Döner Kebab or Ramen or whatever you want.
Enjoy the evening@all.
PS: congratz to reach 58, awesome!
Thanks! I'm glad you like the tactic, and I would rather eat something else because there is kebab in every single corner here in Sweden (ramen is good, though).
If you believe i did copy someone i will give credit him,i am not that self-fish,this thing about converge seem more my reasoning then yours. I am assuming that from the past, i might be wrong.
But in order to achieve that it was required a tons of test, but somehow this hurted the community.
Sorry if i am bit confused here,but really the thing that fished me was "it could be achieved by the author with a bit of test" more then anything else.
But assimilate all the template it's a bit optimistic to say, about the players instructions are basically none so i do accept that. But funny part you know what is it? That there are more hidden things around how those stuff works,guess will be your turn.
EDIT:
https://fm-arena.com/find-comment/16473/
Will let it here so everyone can understand clearly.
Again, I am just proposing an improvement to the queue system of FM-Arena. I do not understand why you are bringing another issue to the table, and I have no interest in getting into an argument about that.
I am more confused then before now.
Different methodologies of testing achieve different results.
After Earth 3.0. I'm testing less currently since I'm playing on my free time, so I only test during work hours.
the KING is baaaaaack!
Yeah, I would trust the results from the attribute test table.
Those are just a bunch, seem people need to understand, that it's not like i was random spamming because of something,but in order to achieve something-accurate you need a server-computing.
Spoiler
will wait you explain how mentality passive's works from your accurate work.
You trying to explain things with your "database" that is working in a completely different way to understand how things works under a "freeze" on this one?
Or do you have fm-arena file?
Do you really believe if i had something that was nearly accurate as this Tactic-Test i would even come here and "spamming"?
My mistake was trying to "hold" more "roles-slot" possible in order to prevent people to just copy.
About that kind of spam you're totaly right and since i've understand how things working i just went and deleted most of them that were on queque.
That's why even @ZaZ is using the work i did, because was very inefficient computing resource.
Hope you understand better now. And hope you will show me the results of your work so i can just use it for my liking.
And i said that is totaly cool. You helping me in that way i am not blind to see that.
Frankly,i totaly agree with you. But in order to make it "clean" we should need a tool in order to conduct a research. In another site was provided and i am frankly using it for not shooting-gunning test in this place. Because as Zippo said i am obsessed too much with micro-improvements and i like to juice out till the last drop from everything i can about something i like.
That could be a cpu or a script or a database or something that require always more speed.
I think you are a bit too full of yourself right now. When you started testing, you said the instructions you were using were meta, so you could copy from others without giving any credits. Now, you assume everyone is copying from you. You shouldn't hold that double standard.
I have been here for a while and every time someone is on top, it's natural that people will try to understand what made that tactic work and assimilate to their own tactics. If the difference is too small, then I agree it's just a tweak and it should be given credits, but after a while the tactics always start to converge somewhere.