Eric said: here's what I got using this tactic with Chelsea
Expand
I know you are doing a good work without getting anything in return, but, if possible, I would suggest you keep a small table with the points, goals scored and conceded of each tactic that you are testing, to post together with the results. That would help people have a better idea of how good or bad are the results (which doesn't necessarily mean the tactic is good or bad).
Yeah, I noticed this tactic doesn't seem to be working as well as last patch. Probably it has to do with the performance of IF-At, but it requires more investigation.
Eric said: LOL... forgot about my suggesting to remove the hard tackles, I've tried it and it helped greatly with fouls and card but the same time it greatly worsen the result...
So I really don't know what to do...
Expand
I didn't have time to test yet, so thanks for testing! I am first testing the new out of possession instructions.
Just keep in mind that a single result can variate a lot between two runs, even using the same tactic. In one year you can achieve 90 points, and in another you can reach barely 60.
If you're going to use the same names for your tactics as for FM22 then I'd suggest adding "FM23" tag to the tactic names otherwise it'll be very confusing for people.
For example, ( FM23 ) - ZaZ - Blue 0.1 ... or something like that. Expand
Ok, I'll consider adding a tag to it. Thank you for the suggestion.
P.S.: I renamed Blue to Fire (because it's very offensive), and Green to Frost (because it's solid in the back). I hope that helps avoid confusion.
Here are the initial versions of Blue 4.0 and Green 5.0, converted to FM23. I'm currently testing the new instructions from out of possession to see how they perform.
P.S.: I have decided to rename of Blue and Green to Fire and Frost, respectively. The change is to avoid confusion on FM22 players. Let me know how they perform for you!
Thanks, @alexej and @Joe! Gonna use this thread to do a diary of information while I test everything. I am checking the new instructions for out of possession before I post Blue and Green, which will be the base benchmark for my testing.
Welcome to ZaZ FC! It's great to have you here. As your guide, I'm responsible for your induction program, explaining the culture of our club, and how you can achieve maximum performance here.
Below is the type of manager I expect you to be. - Determination: Get what you want from board. - People Management: Increase morale with praise / warn. - Level Discipline: Less unhappy players. - Motivating: Team talks and shouts. - Training: Any 5 star and Working With Youngsters.
For training, I prefer if you avoid GK training and Fitness, because coaches for those positions can also train youth and reserve teams. Having you as a coach for Attacking, Defending and Mental can potentially give us one extra coach for youth and reserve teams.
Zippo said: Here're results for Age = 18 and Age = 21
It looks to develop 18 years old players also must participate in competitive matches and without the participation the development rate will be much smaller.
"Group_1" players gain +8.4 "CA" at the end the season.
"Group_2" players gain +1.2 "CA" at the end the season. ------------------------------------------------------------------- [ Age = 18 / Professionalism = 15 / Ambition = 15 / Potential Ability = 170 ]
"Group_1" players gain +7.1 "CA" at the end the season.
"Group_2" players gain +2.1 "CA" at the end the season. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Expand
That is without any match on group 2, which shows 18 yo gain more from training than 21 yo, and 21 yo gains more from matches. I would like to see the results for Group_3 and Group_4, with youth matches and friendlies, respectively, which is a common setup for players in development.
dzek said: @Zippo, I think there is another attribute which determine player growth instead all the above and this is Determination. If you can make more tests including Determination and then another tests to see which of the three attributes(Professionalism, Ambition and Determination) have more impact to each other.
Another idea with this crucial tests is to find the peak age of each position for player growth so we can know when a player cant grow more and it starts to downgrade his attributes due to age. I know maybe this will not be so accurate to find the peak age of each position for different players but we maybe find a general peak age +/-1.
Well done 👏 Expand
It was already tested. Determination has negligible effect, and professionalism is the most important for growth, and also for keeping attributes at peak for longer.
For age, there is a direct correlation between age and effect of training. The younger they are, the more training impact in attribute gains, and the older they are, the more match experience has impact. Around the age of 18, it's around 50-50, and around the age of 23, match experience counts way more than training. If I remember well, the growth "stops" around the age of 27 or 28.
OpticFawn said: @ZaZ whenever I sign youngsters, they barely improve with your training session, one of my players increased who was aged 18 at the time, +1 in a few attributes like 4 years, what am I doing wrong?
P.s. I setup the rest and everything. Expand
Just setting up the training schedule and rest is not enough, you also need to have good facilities, good coaches, and assign coaches to the best training (people often forget to assign coaches on youth teams).
Also, as a complement to what Mark and Lapidus said, training is just one of the components of development, but the more a player ages, the more it needs match time in higher leagues to keep their pace of growth. Below is a video from Max talking about it:
Khalvito said: Hello ZaZ, im curious about the use of Physical instead of Resistence blocks as Evidences points out its kinda better because its not as demanding but equally good in growth, wanted to know what are your thoughts about it. Cheers Expand
He is probably right about Resistance over Physical. However, the difference is marginal, and Physical is clearer than Resistance, because the description of Resistance doesn't match the results (most likely an unintended bug). If I used Resistance, there would be lots of people asking why I don't use anything to train quickness.
pixar said: Dear ZaZ, I think the old training system is better. I played with the new system for about 3 seasons and observed that my players were injured much more often. I think players need recovery training.
I still use it as attached. Expand
The new training is focused on attribute growth, so it indeed causes more injuries than the old one. However, paired with automatic resting, it shouldn't be too problematic during a season.
holav said: Sorry if this has been answered already but when it comes to the training schedule, should I leave the 'match preview' that gets put in automatically before each game or should I replace it with 'defending'? Thanks Expand
You can leave it. I mean, it's more effective if you replace, but it's also very annoying to do that every season, and when new matches are added to the calendar.
Middleweight165 said: @ZaZ after this discussion with you and zippo about retraining, it's an absolute no brainer to retrain Ws and FBs to the opposite side because theres no negatives Expand
There are two negatives. First, you will have slightly less tactic familiarity (in only one of the fields), but in my tests that difference was not significant. The other negative is that FM22 keeps removing individual training for position when players get injured or after some unknown events, so you need to reassign it once or twice per season.
Anyway, even if there was a real negative in performance, it wouldn't be bigger than the benefit of having better players in the flanks. For example, if you have 2 DL and 2 DR trained in a single side, you are forced to use one of each position. However, if you have 4 players trained in both positions, then you can always use the best two, even if they are natural from the same side. That means your flanks will usually get stronger by training in both sides.
I know you are doing a good work without getting anything in return, but, if possible, I would suggest you keep a small table with the points, goals scored and conceded of each tactic that you are testing, to post together with the results. That would help people have a better idea of how good or bad are the results (which doesn't necessarily mean the tactic is good or bad).
So I really don't know what to do...
I didn't have time to test yet, so thanks for testing! I am first testing the new out of possession instructions.
If you're going to use the same names for your tactics as for FM22 then I'd suggest adding "FM23" tag to the tactic names otherwise it'll be very confusing for people.
For example, ( FM23 ) - ZaZ - Blue 0.1 ... or something like that.
Ok, I'll consider adding a tag to it. Thank you for the suggestion.
P.S.: I renamed Blue to Fire (because it's very offensive), and Green to Frost (because it's solid in the back). I hope that helps avoid confusion.
P.S.: I have decided to rename of Blue and Green to Fire and Frost, respectively. The change is to avoid confusion on FM22 players. Let me know how they perform for you!
I'm currently testing the new instructions for out of possession, so I can use those tactics as a benchmark.
Below is the type of manager I expect you to be.
- Determination: Get what you want from board.
- People Management: Increase morale with praise / warn.
- Level Discipline: Less unhappy players.
- Motivating: Team talks and shouts.
- Training: Any 5 star and Working With Youngsters.
For training, I prefer if you avoid GK training and Fitness, because coaches for those positions can also train youth and reserve teams. Having you as a coach for Attacking, Defending and Mental can potentially give us one extra coach for youth and reserve teams.
It looks to develop 18 years old players also must participate in competitive matches and without the participation the development rate will be much smaller.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[ Age = 21 / Professionalism = 15 / Ambition = 15 / Potential Ability = 170 ]
"Group_1" players gain +8.4 "CA" at the end the season.
"Group_2" players gain +1.2 "CA" at the end the season.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[ Age = 18 / Professionalism = 15 / Ambition = 15 / Potential Ability = 170 ]
"Group_1" players gain +7.1 "CA" at the end the season.
"Group_2" players gain +2.1 "CA" at the end the season.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
That is without any match on group 2, which shows 18 yo gain more from training than 21 yo, and 21 yo gains more from matches. I would like to see the results for Group_3 and Group_4, with youth matches and friendlies, respectively, which is a common setup for players in development.
Another idea with this crucial tests is to find the peak age of each position for player growth so we can know when a player cant grow more and it starts to downgrade his attributes due to age. I know maybe this will not be so accurate to find the peak age of each position for different players but we maybe find a general peak age +/-1.
Well done 👏
It was already tested. Determination has negligible effect, and professionalism is the most important for growth, and also for keeping attributes at peak for longer.
For age, there is a direct correlation between age and effect of training. The younger they are, the more training impact in attribute gains, and the older they are, the more match experience has impact. Around the age of 18, it's around 50-50, and around the age of 23, match experience counts way more than training. If I remember well, the growth "stops" around the age of 27 or 28.
P.s. I setup the rest and everything.
Just setting up the training schedule and rest is not enough, you also need to have good facilities, good coaches, and assign coaches to the best training (people often forget to assign coaches on youth teams).
Also, as a complement to what Mark and Lapidus said, training is just one of the components of development, but the more a player ages, the more it needs match time in higher leagues to keep their pace of growth. Below is a video from Max talking about it:
He is probably right about Resistance over Physical. However, the difference is marginal, and Physical is clearer than Resistance, because the description of Resistance doesn't match the results (most likely an unintended bug). If I used Resistance, there would be lots of people asking why I don't use anything to train quickness.
I think the old training system is better. I played with the new system for about 3 seasons and observed that my players were injured much more often. I think players need recovery training.
I still use it as attached.
The new training is focused on attribute growth, so it indeed causes more injuries than the old one. However, paired with automatic resting, it shouldn't be too problematic during a season.
You can leave it. I mean, it's more effective if you replace, but it's also very annoying to do that every season, and when new matches are added to the calendar.
There are two negatives. First, you will have slightly less tactic familiarity (in only one of the fields), but in my tests that difference was not significant. The other negative is that FM22 keeps removing individual training for position when players get injured or after some unknown events, so you need to reassign it once or twice per season.
Anyway, even if there was a real negative in performance, it wouldn't be bigger than the benefit of having better players in the flanks. For example, if you have 2 DL and 2 DR trained in a single side, you are forced to use one of each position. However, if you have 4 players trained in both positions, then you can always use the best two, even if they are natural from the same side. That means your flanks will usually get stronger by training in both sides.