tzahy said: hey zaz, does it matter who take the corners? btw my has score 13 goals from coreners in 20 leaegue game Expand
Just put best taker, unless it's one of the defenders. =p
Chewbacca said: @ZaZ, do you find the AI managers have become much tougher in FM23? Expand
To be fair, I don't see much of a difference. It was harder last year during this same time. It just happens that we didn't have time to find the tricks to make the best tactics yet.
Delicious said: It seriously feels when the stuff is about your "shit" you act in a way when it's not you ask for private "DM", If you were that kind why you didn't ask zippo to do that on private? I know that things like that would just create dramas,that's was my whole point.
Maybe you are not a member of the "staff" but you know there are doubts around you as well?
What we gonna do then? We need ispiration!
Sorry if i am dumping on you but that thing really made my day.
On the matter:
tactics are pretty the same 1 option and some rules of CWB are different. No doubts. And one player difference on Sp's.
@MakeSuRE My boy, where did you get the ispiration to create such tactic? Tell us the story behind it.
@ZaZ tell us the story and where and how you get ispiration for Water?
Yes, i am trolling you, maybe with some of this stupid "ispiration" medice you gonna understand any better Expand
To be short, I think you should calm down. It makes zero sense that you try to make this a conflict between you and me, when the issue has nothing to do with either of us. I accept your opinion that tactics are too similar and the issue should be investigated, and I just gave my opinion on how I think the case should be handled. Divergence in opinions is not a problem. The problem is when you try to make this personal and attack me for no apparent reason. Again, I think you should calm down.
The post you are linking is a suggestion, and it has no power because I'm not staff from this site. The procedure adopted by the mods was the one described here, which states that any suspect of plagiarism should be brought to this section. However, people started bashing the mod for asking to post in the proper place, and instead started saying very rude stuff like "this page should be shut down". Do you understand the problem?
The incident took huge proportions just because @Zippo asked the creator to post in the right section. After that, people started bashing me just because I asked them to solve the problem internally instead of creating a huge fuss. Most people don't appreciate watching free drama on internet, and that's what this case became. It could have been solved via DM between users and a mod after the issue was reported. Again, remember that I'm not staff and my opinion has no effect on the way FM-Arena solves issues like that.
Jeffdekker said: Copying Set pieces or actually copying entire tactic with the same TI for 1 slight change, is not the same.
I thought this was a proper channel to deal with it? I understand you saying not on the page, but I had no clue where to address it, when Zippo called it out I did, we need to address this, it's making people believe a tactic someone made can be succesful while being completely copied from someone else.
That means you're not just lying to yourself, but you're lying to a community, and that imo is not done Expand
I was answering to what the other member said, not talking about subject of this thread.
Metal said: It doesn't sound absurd, in fact I backed you up on that when people were doing that, but don't be a hypocrite and act like it's a sin to publicly call out plagiarism without giving credit when you complained about a similar issue which was even such as set piece routine in public.
I know someone who has stopped producing content for fm within the community due to several plagiarisers using their ideas and not giving credit. I'd rather make a few people feel uncomfortable than see another gifted creator stop producing content because they are sick and tired of seeing their hard work stolen Expand
Like I said before, I support addressing the issue, but I think it's taking a proportion bigger than it should. We don't even know if Knap copied him or if he copied Knap, so it's a bit harsh to bring this to public before any investigation. Talking to the guy via DM could have solved the problem without creating much chaos.
Delicious said: What do you mean by inspiration? If i see a tactic and i want to emulate the shape? or what?
Let's take my experience for example i am going trough a process to achieve what i did on fm22 on a tactic, but i got ispiration from Tuchel AI and after from Mr green that made a version for full elite teams, so i did the process to revamp every role, studying the meta roles/rules around the forums,set pieces are from his tactic (i didn't yet go trough that part of the game yet).
We share looking shape and sp's
Now from your point of view, it's considered a tweak?
At least we can undestand a point of view on the matter
Keep sometimes before to reply,because how you saw people pay attention when this kind of topic being discussed on public threads.
P.S.
I am mentioning him about set pieces already. Expand
Metal said: You're just a member like everyone else right, so you all people shouldn't be preaching about how to go through the correct channels, guidelines and regulations on how to go about reporting cases of plagiarism talking about doing things privately, especially when you yourself have publicly called out other tacticians for simply using your set pieces and not giving you credit. Expand
When someone does a tweak to their tactics, like version 2.0, and the only difference is that they copied the set pieces from mine, then I believe credits should be given, like "Changed to the tactics used by ZaZ". I don't know why that sounds so absurd to you.
Anyway, I play FM for fun, not to get stressed, and I believe you are all blowing this out of proportion and making the environment uncomfortable to everyone. Users are also responsible for keeping the page enjoyable. There are proper channels to deal with issues, and if you don't use those channels, then you are becoming another issue that people have to deal. Remember that no one is saying the problem shouldn't be addressed, we are just telling to solve the problem without creating chaos in the page.
Muukzor said: @ZaZ Have you considered trying 4-1-2-0-3? Worked insanely well in FM22 with StephenHK Shaolin 433 V2. Also way easier with substitutions, especially in 5 sub leagues since you don't have to worry about wingers.
Edit: Not sure if that's what you meant by Wind 4123? Shock iirc was 4-2-0-3-1 which is very different, so thrown for a bit of a loop here. Expand
Fixed. It is based on Frost (which is based on Green), I just wrote it wrong.
first match no knowledge of tactics and this happens! Expand
Thank you for testing!
Kaczy said: Zaz You gonna put all of Your tactics in opening post and update them or when we have to search for them? As always great job. Regards. Expand
I will keep four threads, one for each tactic, and put all the variations in those threads. After new patches, I might drop some option that seems clearly weaker.
Look, the discussion of plagiarism is nice and all, but it's not the type of matter that should be solved by fighting and making the issue public. My suggestion to handle those situations is to first contact the person with DM to make sure they know there is a similar tactic, and only if the issue is not solved people should bring it to the admins through the proper thread that was created. There is absolutely no need to bring issues to the admins if they can be solved with a simple DM to the user, which anyone can do.
I don't think the guys from FM-Arena have time to investigate all tactics and similarities, and they rely on reports to check those things. That's why they are asking for suggestions on how to deal with the issue. I believe they don't plan to become a tribunal to judge who is copying who, or if the similarities are just coincidences. It's just unrealistic to think they would have the time for that. Bashing the website is pointless and rude.
I think it's enough to just mention the inspiration in the opening post. Putting the name of the inspiration in the title or name of the tactic is up to the author, but not a must.
I also think tweaks don't need to set up the name of the author as the inspiration. For example, in this thread here, @MiZuki added me as author, while I think she should take credit for her creation. She was the one with the idea to mix the tactics, which could have led to some improvement, and it wouldn't be fair to credit it only to me.
Muukzor said: @ZaZ Have you considered trying 4-1-2-0-3? Worked insanely well in FM22 with StephenHK Shaolin 433 V2. Also way easier with substitutions, especially in 5 sub leagues since you don't have to worry about wingers. Expand
Unfortunately, I don't have time to test all shapes, and he will probably test that shape already this year. I might try some different shapes later for fun, including some without wingers.
You can find in the first post of Fire. There is a link in the top.
Just put best taker, unless it's one of the defenders. =p
Chewbacca said: @ZaZ, do you find the AI managers have become much tougher in FM23?
To be fair, I don't see much of a difference. It was harder last year during this same time. It just happens that we didn't have time to find the tricks to make the best tactics yet.
For now. We never know what will happen in future patches.
Maybe you are not a member of the "staff" but you know there are doubts around you as well?
What we gonna do then? We need ispiration!
Sorry if i am dumping on you but that thing really made my day.
On the matter:
tactics are pretty the same 1 option and some rules of CWB are different. No doubts. And one player difference on Sp's.
@MakeSuRE My boy, where did you get the ispiration to create such tactic?
Tell us the story behind it.
@ZaZ tell us the story and where and how you get ispiration for Water?
Yes, i am trolling you, maybe with some of this stupid "ispiration" medice you gonna understand any better
To be short, I think you should calm down. It makes zero sense that you try to make this a conflict between you and me, when the issue has nothing to do with either of us. I accept your opinion that tactics are too similar and the issue should be investigated, and I just gave my opinion on how I think the case should be handled. Divergence in opinions is not a problem. The problem is when you try to make this personal and attack me for no apparent reason. Again, I think you should calm down.
The tactic scores most goals from inside the box with the advanced forward, and assists are evenly distributed by the flanks and middle.
Changelog Wind 1.0
Wind 2.0
Leave a comment below if you liked the tactic and make sure to share your results. Enjoy!
Illuminate me please.
The post you are linking is a suggestion, and it has no power because I'm not staff from this site. The procedure adopted by the mods was the one described here, which states that any suspect of plagiarism should be brought to this section. However, people started bashing the mod for asking to post in the proper place, and instead started saying very rude stuff like "this page should be shut down". Do you understand the problem?
The incident took huge proportions just because @Zippo asked the creator to post in the right section. After that, people started bashing me just because I asked them to solve the problem internally instead of creating a huge fuss. Most people don't appreciate watching free drama on internet, and that's what this case became. It could have been solved via DM between users and a mod after the issue was reported. Again, remember that I'm not staff and my opinion has no effect on the way FM-Arena solves issues like that.
I thought this was a proper channel to deal with it? I understand you saying not on the page, but I had no clue where to address it, when Zippo called it out I did, we need to address this, it's making people believe a tactic someone made can be succesful while being completely copied from someone else.
That means you're not just lying to yourself, but you're lying to a community, and that imo is not done
I was answering to what the other member said, not talking about subject of this thread.
Metal said: It doesn't sound absurd, in fact I backed you up on that when people were doing that, but don't be a hypocrite and act like it's a sin to publicly call out plagiarism without giving credit when you complained about a similar issue which was even such as set piece routine in public.
I know someone who has stopped producing content for fm within the community due to several plagiarisers using their ideas and not giving credit. I'd rather make a few people feel uncomfortable than see another gifted creator stop producing content because they are sick and tired of seeing their hard work stolen
Like I said before, I support addressing the issue, but I think it's taking a proportion bigger than it should. We don't even know if Knap copied him or if he copied Knap, so it's a bit harsh to bring this to public before any investigation. Talking to the guy via DM could have solved the problem without creating much chaos.
Let's take my experience for example i am going trough a process to achieve what i did on fm22 on a tactic, but i got ispiration from Tuchel AI and after from Mr green that made a version for full elite teams, so i did the process to revamp every role, studying the meta roles/rules around the forums,set pieces are from his tactic (i didn't yet go trough that part of the game yet).
We share looking shape and sp's
Now from your point of view, it's considered a tweak?
At least we can undestand a point of view on the matter
Keep sometimes before to reply,because how you saw people pay attention when this kind of topic being discussed on public threads.
P.S.
I am mentioning him about set pieces already.
You can see my definition of inspiration (or too close) in the link: https://fm-arena.com/find-comment/14963/
Sorry. It's in the first post of the thread, under "Important Attributes".
When someone does a tweak to their tactics, like version 2.0, and the only difference is that they copied the set pieces from mine, then I believe credits should be given, like "Changed to the tactics used by ZaZ". I don't know why that sounds so absurd to you.
Anyway, I play FM for fun, not to get stressed, and I believe you are all blowing this out of proportion and making the environment uncomfortable to everyone. Users are also responsible for keeping the page enjoyable. There are proper channels to deal with issues, and if you don't use those channels, then you are becoming another issue that people have to deal. Remember that no one is saying the problem shouldn't be addressed, we are just telling to solve the problem without creating chaos in the page.
Not yet, sorry. But Haaland will be there.
Edit: Not sure if that's what you meant by Wind 4123? Shock iirc was 4-2-0-3-1 which is very different, so thrown for a bit of a loop here.
Fixed. It is based on Frost (which is based on Green), I just wrote it wrong.
Ralle said: Tactic - Water 442 Solid.
first match no knowledge of tactics and this happens!
Thank you for testing!
Kaczy said: Zaz You gonna put all of Your tactics in opening post and update them or when we have to search for them? As always great job.
Regards.
I will keep four threads, one for each tactic, and put all the variations in those threads. After new patches, I might drop some option that seems clearly weaker.
I also think tweaks don't need to set up the name of the author as the inspiration. For example, in this thread here, @MiZuki added me as author, while I think she should take credit for her creation. She was the one with the idea to mix the tactics, which could have led to some improvement, and it wouldn't be fair to credit it only to me.
You absolute legend!!!
Good job there! Nice to see it working!
Unfortunately, I don't have time to test all shapes, and he will probably test that shape already this year. I might try some different shapes later for fun, including some without wingers.
Thanks! Someone will break it soon, I am not worried about that.