Filer974 said: Thank you so much for trying this tactic that doesn't work... 53 Expand
You are racting too badly for a 53 score. It's not a bad score at all, it's enough to overachieve with most teams. We understand you expected it to score 999 pts, but unfortunately it didn't. The fact that your tests got a different result than here just shows that your methodology and the one from this website are different, nothing else. Showing a bunch of tests and complaining of the results won't change the score.
Mark said: I will test it against using Quickness for all at some point. Expand
It's not needed. It's only in the lower leagues that you use players without reaching full potential, but in most top leagues they reach it after a couple of seasons.
Zippo said: We've tested a left footed player as the right winger and a right footed player as the left winger in this tactic and there wasn't any significant difference so I guess you can safely play Salah on the right and Mane on the left. Expand
Guidito said: @ZaZ mate how would you organize the 4 attacking players in this tactic having the following: Mbappe, Dybala, Salah, Mane, Firmino and Jota.
My main struggle is whether Salah or Mbappe should go to the wings and whom should be AF. Expand
There are probably better people than me to answer this question, but I would use Salah on the left wing, Mbappe on the center and Mané on the right, with Dybala playing behind. Firmino is good but too slow, and Jota is fast but not that good.
Poacher said: I think the idea behind Mark individual training is for example, if 1 point of Acceleration costs 5CA and give 5% performance boot and 1 point of Anticipation costs 2CA and give 3% performance boost and 1 point of Stamina costs 2CA and 3% performance boost so it comes out that it's more effective to train Anticipation and Stamina instead of Acceleration because for 4CA you get 6% performance boost. Expand
Yeah, I understand that. But that only makes a difference if we reach the top of PA, else it's not very important. Gaining 1 in pace and 1 in acceleration is better for performance than gaining 1 in stamina and 1 in anticipation. The difference is that you will reach PA faster, meaning you stop to grow, while gaining stamina and anticipation will still leave space for growth.
Mark said: I have followed the advice provided in their final few paragraphs on training
"For guidance on training, the attributes take up CA, so in order to train the players with the highest tactical true CA, we can train the attributes with the highest cost effectiveness The cost effectiveness of each attribute for each position can be measured by the attribute Tactical True CA Weight / Attribute CA Weight, the higher the value, the higher the attribute will make the player's attribute Tactical True CA higher if it increases the same CA."
If you look at the attribute values by position and attributes covered by each Individual Focus training item you come up with my table above. Expand
Just to be clear, that methodology only holds for players that hit the ceiling of PA. If you don't expect a player to reach all his potential, be it because your training facilities are poor or because your club sells players for good offers, then attribute weight is pointless. However, good players are usually expected to reach peak at your club.
Nikko said: Shadow Striker isn't a pure striker, he plays at AMC position and contributes a lot to the defense so I guess having good work rate and decent defensive attributes will be beneficent. Expand
I agree. A tactic with two advanced forwards usually concedes more than the same tactic with an advanced forward and a shadow striker. Anyone can just check the table to confirm that.
Mark said: Well we have the results in for the Training Schedule performance tests. I had to change from the original plan as the League of Nations testing environment doesn't allow for training. I went back to the ZaZ EPL environment and once again healed all players at the start of each run. I ran 7 tests with each schedule cycling through each of the 7 teams. As each only has one run with each schedule it is open to impact by injury or send offs so there is a fair margin of error in this test.
The winner this time, but in a photo finish, was ZaZ. Just finishing on top from Passion 4 FM and the other 2 top ones from the development testing. Given the previous testing was a bit more thorough I think I would be weighting preferences towards the previous winners, however as ZaZ has pointed out, his training is targeted towards winning games not player development.
For me, overall I think I will run with Passion 4 FM as it appears to be very close to the top on both counts, and as I said before I will try and improve on it. More to come.
Expand
My schedule was designed to bring the best performance for the current season, so if it was losing to other training schedules focused on player development there would be no point using it at all. It makes me kinda happy to know it's at least serving its purpose, because I used it without having ever tested to see if it actually makes any difference.
Anyway, Passion 4 FM schedule seems pretty close in points and development, so it's probably superior and I should check later if anything from there can be used to improve my schedule.
Going a bit off topic, I'm currently testing set pieces and found some good improvement so far. I still have a lot to do specially on defending IFK.
Tejash said: @Snoop@ZaZ Just wanted some advise from you guys for the SS and AF position how would you fit Haaland and Mbappe as Ive got both in my squad. Many thanks! Expand
If you have those two, you can even use one in the goal and still win everything. Jokes aside, I would use Mbappé as AF and Haaland as SS, because I think Mbappé is faster and more selfish, while Haaland usually does better at passing and pressing. However, going the other way around will also work very well, since Haaland is taller and stronger. You seriously can't go wrong with those two, but if it was me, I would actually use Mbappé in the right wing instead.
Penaldo said: With the genie scout ratings once we have loaded them and it's calculated the ratings do we just search by the positions that the tactic uses or do we search using the current ratings Expand
FM Genie Scout gives score for current rating and potential rating. It's up to you to decide how you use that info to hire players, since each person has a different policy for hiring.
fm arena user said: Im searching for those atributes for each position as per Zaz guide and have great succes acros all my saves, nice and simple. Expand
Just to be clear, I just reposted that guide. Someone else from China did all the work.
I consider the tweaked versions superior to the original, even though they might be technically tied in the margin of error of tests. I just think wingers are easier to handle than defensive wingers, since you can set them to ease off tackles if they get a yellow card or if you wanna rest. The tweaks also seem to have a better goal difference due to superior defense, which is always a plus.
I remember we did some tests trying to figure out what factors(except the attributes) make players to develop faster and we found the following factors had the most influence:
- The intensity of the training. The higher intensity, the higher development rate. - The quality of the training facility. - The quality of the coaches. - The amount of competitive matches a player participates during a season. - The quality of competitive matches. - The ratings a player gets in matches.
Different training schedules didn't have any significant influences on the development rate, they just were responsible for the distribution of points between the attributes. Expand
You guys could make that info easily available somewhere! So many cool things you tested, but since there is no pinned post in the forums, we just don't see it!
I'm trying to identify what is causing the improvement in quality, if it's the CD instead of BPD, the removal of Play Out of Defense, the tweaked set pieces or the different roles/positions. Once I get some hint, I'll see if it can be improved further, but I like that it's getting even more solid defensively. Good job to everyone!
Mark said: A recap, I am doing this to determine which schedule provides the most improvement in the players. All players are under 21, not in the current Main Squad and are listed as having the most improvement ie difference between CA and PA.
I ended up excluding Man City players as their results were the only ones jumping around a bit.
So 154 players, 5 tests for each of the 7 schedules plus the default AM selected one all over 5 tests. The equivalent of around 6000 player seasons. I put the individual training on the 7 schedules to playing position and role. On the default/base schedule I left it to the AM who went with their preferred position.
I looked at the results in 2 ways, firstly against overall CA improvement and the second against the improvement in the position played and trained against. I decided the latter was more reflective of what I would be looking for. If there is a lot of interest I will share the other version, but to be honest there isn't a lot between them.
Observations
The 2 things impacting the most appear to be the number of games and the higher the level the games the better. For example, where players had no or very limited game time their improvement averaged going from 56.1% CA to 57.8% CA or 1.7% CA in a season.
Those in the U18 team playing a full season improved slightly better, the increase being 3% for the season.
The big gains were for those who played the full season in the Main Team averaging a 5.2% gain in CA over the season. And those that were active in both squads and playing upward of 50 games, did even better averaging 6.1% increase in CA.
So there is a lot to be said for playing your potential stars in the main side for as long as possible during the season.
In terms of the schedules tested, the results seemed to run pretty consistently across the tests. The best 2 schedules were pretty much the best across all categories, with a gap back to 3rd and then a bigger gap to the rest.
Passion4FM appears to be our winner, from RDF and then MDW. All the 7 I was interested in beat leaving the training to your AM, so I think there is benefit in picking one of these schedules and using it or even mixing it up a bit.
I am going to relook at the best 3 and try and improve on these results. I will share any improved training schedule when I am confident I can beat the current front runner. I am also going to look at the impact of different Individual Focus training on these top 3 schedules.
My next testing will be to go back to the League of Nations test League and look at the performance side of using the schedules. Once again using the ZaZ Blue DM tactic on sides that are all basically 160 CA across the board. This time I can tackle the 7 tactics in a single test and compare. I will run 5 tests again after setting the baseline. Let me know your thoughts Expand
I'm actually surprised my training schedule was better than base considering it's not focused in gaining attributes, but in improving your team performance for the current season. If it's not too much to ask, can you dismember the training schedules in categories, saying how many of each sessions it has per week? That way we could try to see some pattern for what training session seems to be more efficient in improving attributes.
Also, if it's not much to ask, can you compare the gains in pace and acceleration of the tactics? My training schedule has heavy focus on those two attributes, so if it gains as much as other tactics in quickness, that would still be good enough to me.
DoubleR said: Maybe I am dumb but what do all the "top" tactics score a 5.4 specifically ? Why not one with a 5.5. and other with 5.6 etc. What causes that 5.4 number? What is it based on? What does a tactic need to do to score higher than that 5.4? Expand
A tactic that achieves 100% of possible points is considered 10 score. If it achieves 54% of the points possible, it scores 5.4. It's that simple.
You are racting too badly for a 53 score. It's not a bad score at all, it's enough to overachieve with most teams. We understand you expected it to score 999 pts, but unfortunately it didn't. The fact that your tests got a different result than here just shows that your methodology and the one from this website are different, nothing else. Showing a bunch of tests and complaining of the results won't change the score.
It's not needed. It's only in the lower leagues that you use players without reaching full potential, but in most top leagues they reach it after a couple of seasons.
Good info!
Mbappe, Dybala, Salah, Mane, Firmino and Jota.
My main struggle is whether Salah or Mbappe should go to the wings and whom should be AF.
There are probably better people than me to answer this question, but I would use Salah on the left wing, Mbappe on the center and Mané on the right, with Dybala playing behind. Firmino is good but too slow, and Jota is fast but not that good.
Yeah, I understand that. But that only makes a difference if we reach the top of PA, else it's not very important. Gaining 1 in pace and 1 in acceleration is better for performance than gaining 1 in stamina and 1 in anticipation. The difference is that you will reach PA faster, meaning you stop to grow, while gaining stamina and anticipation will still leave space for growth.
"For guidance on training, the attributes take up CA, so in order to train the players with the highest tactical true CA, we can train the attributes with the highest cost effectiveness
The cost effectiveness of each attribute for each position can be measured by the attribute Tactical True CA Weight / Attribute CA Weight, the higher the value, the higher the attribute will make the player's attribute Tactical True CA higher if it increases the same CA."
If you look at the attribute values by position and attributes covered by each Individual Focus training item you come up with my table above.
Just to be clear, that methodology only holds for players that hit the ceiling of PA. If you don't expect a player to reach all his potential, be it because your training facilities are poor or because your club sells players for good offers, then attribute weight is pointless. However, good players are usually expected to reach peak at your club.
I agree. A tactic with two advanced forwards usually concedes more than the same tactic with an advanced forward and a shadow striker. Anyone can just check the table to confirm that.
The winner this time, but in a photo finish, was ZaZ. Just finishing on top from Passion 4 FM and the other 2 top ones from the development testing. Given the previous testing was a bit more thorough I think I would be weighting preferences towards the previous winners, however as ZaZ has pointed out, his training is targeted towards winning games not player development.
For me, overall I think I will run with Passion 4 FM as it appears to be very close to the top on both counts, and as I said before I will try and improve on it. More to come.
My schedule was designed to bring the best performance for the current season, so if it was losing to other training schedules focused on player development there would be no point using it at all. It makes me kinda happy to know it's at least serving its purpose, because I used it without having ever tested to see if it actually makes any difference.
Anyway, Passion 4 FM schedule seems pretty close in points and development, so it's probably superior and I should check later if anything from there can be used to improve my schedule.
Going a bit off topic, I'm currently testing set pieces and found some good improvement so far. I still have a lot to do specially on defending IFK.
If you have those two, you can even use one in the goal and still win everything. Jokes aside, I would use Mbappé as AF and Haaland as SS, because I think Mbappé is faster and more selfish, while Haaland usually does better at passing and pressing. However, going the other way around will also work very well, since Haaland is taller and stronger. You seriously can't go wrong with those two, but if it was me, I would actually use Mbappé in the right wing instead.
FM Genie Scout gives score for current rating and potential rating. It's up to you to decide how you use that info to hire players, since each person has a different policy for hiring.
https://fm-arena.com/find-comment/11368/
Also that other about preferred foot, since people ask about that every other day.
Just to be clear, I just reposted that guide. Someone else from China did all the work.
I remember we did some tests trying to figure out what factors(except the attributes) make players to develop faster and we found the following factors had the most influence:
- The intensity of the training. The higher intensity, the higher development rate.
- The quality of the training facility.
- The quality of the coaches.
- The amount of competitive matches a player participates during a season.
- The quality of competitive matches.
- The ratings a player gets in matches.
Different training schedules didn't have any significant influences on the development rate, they just were responsible for the distribution of points between the attributes.
You guys could make that info easily available somewhere! So many cool things you tested, but since there is no pinned post in the forums, we just don't see it!
I'm trying to identify what is causing the improvement in quality, if it's the CD instead of BPD, the removal of Play Out of Defense, the tweaked set pieces or the different roles/positions. Once I get some hint, I'll see if it can be improved further, but I like that it's getting even more solid defensively. Good job to everyone!
I ended up excluding Man City players as their results were the only ones jumping around a bit.
So 154 players, 5 tests for each of the 7 schedules plus the default AM selected one all over 5 tests. The equivalent of around 6000 player seasons. I put the individual training on the 7 schedules to playing position and role. On the default/base schedule I left it to the AM who went with their preferred position.
I looked at the results in 2 ways, firstly against overall CA improvement and the second against the improvement in the position played and trained against. I decided the latter was more reflective of what I would be looking for. If there is a lot of interest I will share the other version, but to be honest there isn't a lot between them.
Observations
The 2 things impacting the most appear to be the number of games and the higher the level the games the better. For example, where players had no or very limited game time their improvement averaged going from 56.1% CA to 57.8% CA or 1.7% CA in a season.
Those in the U18 team playing a full season improved slightly better, the increase being 3% for the season.
The big gains were for those who played the full season in the Main Team averaging a 5.2% gain in CA over the season. And those that were active in both squads and playing upward of 50 games, did even better averaging 6.1% increase in CA.
So there is a lot to be said for playing your potential stars in the main side for as long as possible during the season.
In terms of the schedules tested, the results seemed to run pretty consistently across the tests. The best 2 schedules were pretty much the best across all categories, with a gap back to 3rd and then a bigger gap to the rest.
Passion4FM appears to be our winner, from RDF and then MDW. All the 7 I was interested in beat leaving the training to your AM, so I think there is benefit in picking one of these schedules and using it or even mixing it up a bit.
I am going to relook at the best 3 and try and improve on these results. I will share any improved training schedule when I am confident I can beat the current front runner. I am also going to look at the impact of different Individual Focus training on these top 3 schedules.
My next testing will be to go back to the League of Nations test League and look at the performance side of using the schedules. Once again using the ZaZ Blue DM tactic on sides that are all basically 160 CA across the board. This time I can tackle the 7 tactics in a single test and compare. I will run 5 tests again after setting the baseline. Let me know your thoughts
I'm actually surprised my training schedule was better than base considering it's not focused in gaining attributes, but in improving your team performance for the current season. If it's not too much to ask, can you dismember the training schedules in categories, saying how many of each sessions it has per week? That way we could try to see some pattern for what training session seems to be more efficient in improving attributes.
Also, if it's not much to ask, can you compare the gains in pace and acceleration of the tactics? My training schedule has heavy focus on those two attributes, so if it gains as much as other tactics in quickness, that would still be good enough to me.
It gets complicated when the top tactic is a tweak of a tweak of a tweak of another tactic.
A tactic that achieves 100% of possible points is considered 10 score. If it achieves 54% of the points possible, it scores 5.4. It's that simple.