Changes - Eliminated a lot of the general instructions, simplified the tactic a little. - Changed some PI to fit with some of my newer, more succesful tactics. - Permanently changed to SS and 2 AF - Advanced Segundo Volantes to CM-Attack
Expand
That is my original favorite formation from when I played before FM14. I might now need to do a version based on Dragons Breath for old times sake. So many memories. I so hope we can get this working for FM22.
The ratings are calculated off the attributes testing and the position weight table. See the previous post from last years game for more details.
You should save the standard FMGS ratings file before loading and changing to this file so you can reload the default if you are not happy with my ratings.
The standard place for Genie Scout ratings files is C:\FM Genie Scout 22g\Ratings. If you did a custom install it will be in a folder called Ratings under the FMGS install directory. Once you have copied the file to the correct location you should be able to select my ratings file by clicking on the GS symbol in the top left of the screen, and then clicking Ratings in the drop down menu, and then MDW22 from the sub menu.
I have adjusted the weightings this year to try and align all the positions, as previously Wingers had much higher ratings.
Nikko said: Dragons Breath 3.1 is devastating with PSG!
Expand
Wow. Thanks for testing. I am sure you know that I usually play in the lower leagues with sides that are expected to be relegated. The tactic is doing very well for me with these sides so it is good to see what it can do in a top flight team. And it does seem to be doing well defensively for me as well. Certainly looks like your experience is the same on that front.
cptdoggo said: With IW-A's added, I can send u the save if u wanna use it as well. I have all players without traits, 15 on every attribute (was too lazy to do it like fm-arena), age, weight, height all the same, etc. Just add ur tactics on managers, freeze all players using FMRTE and simulate until 21 Nov for results. download Expand
I would like to see the save. My preference is to use tactics I have authored and always try to get three tactics that are easy to move between. Currently I run 4-1-3W-0-2 with Dragons Breath and then 4-1-2W-0-3 for Dragons Breath 3.1, I just move the CM to F9. The third tactic is 4-1-3W-1-1 with Dragons Den where the F9 moves back to an AMC SS role. I find that having different formations will reduce your bad spell time. All sides seem to have this unless you have unbelievable players. I am always starting with very much lower league teams so do not have that luxury.
I ran Dragons Breath 3.1 on your league and it wasn't as good as your results so the IW might well be a better set up. I will try it.
I have added a new version of this tactic which is over the top attacking. Dragon Breath 3.1. Moved the F9 across to AF and brought the CM Attack up to F9. This has given a ridiculous amount of scoring. Even got Norwich to 4th at the end of the season in EPL.
ZaZ said: Another thing I would like to add is that some things don't require immediate credits, because they are overused. For example, I don't think people need to say in every tactic like "set pieces are from ZaZ". It's sufficient if they give credits when asked about set pieces, or to simply correct other people if they try to give them credits for those set pieces. Not sure what other people think about that, though. Expand
Set Pieces are interesting aren't they. Some people like to spend a lot of time on them and try and perfect them for their tactics and others prefer just to plug and play what they think are the best. I think if the set pieces are from the base of the tactic you have already acknowledged then there is no reason to acknowledge the set piece as well. but if you have taken a set piece routine from another tactic and not altered it I think there should be some acknowledgement.
I am pretty impressed that an old TFF tactic would still rate so well. Reckon with a bit of tweaking it could be very competitive. TFF was truly amazing. Always followed his tactics from FM14 on. I really miss that he no longer produces tactics. What a legend.
ZaZ said: One thing that could help would be to not test tactics that are too similar to another that was already tested, unless they are marked as a tweak. I believe there is a rule about that in how tactics are tested, saying you won't test things that are too close, to avoid the use of brute force. But then we would need to have a clear understanding of what is considered "too close", and that's up to debate. Expand
I was thinking the same. I reckon that would stop a bit of it, but with some allowance for newbies first time. Still no test but point them to the rules
@Zippo thanks for starting the discussion going on this topic. As you say, it has generated a bit of discussion of late.
I think the starting point should be why people use the site. I think there are a few different groups of people.
There are a core of people who love creating tactics and set pieces who are striving to try and crack a formation and structure that will be unbeatable, generally through analyzing what works. Some of this is obviously trial and error. An example of this is @ZaZ who can always be relied upon to come up with a very competitive tactic, with little or no reliance on tactics of other people. Most of these people who also love the collaboration and competition that comes into play as the tactics and formations evolve.
The other extreme are people who come to the site only to try and find a tactic that they can plug and play. They have no interest in playing around with tactics only in playing the game. Clearly there are plenty of people who sit between these two extremes.
I don't think it is a high proportion of people that are intentionally stealing other people's ideas and I also think that we have seem in years gone by that some minor changes can be the difference between a really good tactic and an also ran tactic, so I wouldn't like to see tactics not tested with small changes.
What we don't want to do is to slow down the evolving and testing of tactics that allow creators to analyze what works.
Some of the instances of non attribution recently have come from newbies to the site. I think pointing out to these people on what we as a community expect in terms of attributing the basis of the tactic is sufficient for an innocent first offence.
Maybe to assist people understand this is what we are looking for, an additional two questions for authors before they submit a tactic would help as follows:
Is your tactic based on an existing Tactic that has been tested? If so which Tactic or Tactics?
And do the same with Set Pieces. Are your Set Pieces based on or copied from an existing Set Piece routine that is from a Tactic that has been tested? If so which Tactic or Tactics?
This post is just trying to stimulate some more thought on this topic. I will have a bit more of a think and post again. I am definitely interested in the views of others.
ZaZ said: Added a version with Ease Off Tackles to compare and see how it goes. In my tests, I couldn't catch much difference. If results are alike, then the player instruction should become standard (at least for this setup, should test for others) since it reduces cards and energy cost. Expand
Isn't it interesting that it doesn't change the rating. You were right. This may mean we can stop a lot of the red cards people have been getting.
This is the best of my tactics using ZaZ Testing League. Man City on top and Norwich in 8th. I have based it on Dragons Breath and changed some of the PIs. Also adapted Fanecas set pieces. I have run this very successfully in a couple of lower league jobs. My current save is with St Albans in VNS and C.D. Coria in Spain. Both were expected to be relegated and I am leading the League in both comps albeit early in the season.
Thanks to @ZaZ for the Testing League and for the insight into Player Instructions and for just doing a great job of testing the boundaries and coming up with brilliant tactics. Thanks also to @NeOnHD92 for the set pieces which were the best I found for this formation.
ZaZ said: It's about time to start experimenting with set pieces. I'm creating this thread so people can share routines and results. If anyone wants to help, I would recommend to follow these guidelines:
1. You can use any editor data for that (or none at all). I would recommend setting consistency and important matches of all players in the league to 20, and injury proneness to 1. My editor data is attached to this post.
2. Create a new game with the teams you want to use for testing (remember to disable first season transfers). Save a backup file on the very first day. My save file is attached here (can't attach to the post because it's over 20 mb).
3. Run my set pieces first and save results to use as reference. I am attaching three tactics with the same set pieces and different formations to this post (343 defenders, 433 strikers or 442). The positions got a bit messed up in FM-Arena table (because of me testing different shapes), but I fixed it properly now. I use Orange 1.0 for reference, which is the new name of Orange SS.
4. For each experiment, set up the same tactic with the desired routines, then go in vacation until the end of season (330 days on English Premier League), marking the option to use current tactics. Use the same save for all tests. I usually run three to five times, but feel free to use any methodology of testing you want.
5. The most important data to share are total points in the league (or points per match) and goal difference. If you want, you can also provide data from league > stats > team detailed > goals/conceded from corners, direct free kicks and indirect free kicks. For throw ins, the relevant data is in data hub > team > report > scoring/conceding > assists (it usually won't show anything since it's common to get 0 assists from throw ins).
You can also help with suggestions of routines to be tested.
Note: If you use my save file, I believe you don't need to download the editor data. Expand
I am going to run with testing 3 tactic formations, being ZaZ Orange 4-3-1-2, Dragons Breath 4-1-3-1 and Blitz 4-2-2W-2. These seem to be the basis for most of the tactics scoring 5.5 plus this season. I will take and adapt the set pieces from 10 tactics to test with each formation as follows: FM20 TFF Cerber, 424 RMD, Arrowhead 2.0, Blitz, Cruels Angel, Electro, Fanecas, Snow Halation V3, Zaz and ZaZ with adapted corners from FM Scout's suggested attacking corner winning tactic (ZaZ MDW). That is 30 tests. If I have time I will then run them 3 times to make 90 tests. They seem to run reasonably quickly in ZaZ test League so I will give results after the first 30 tests and then the next 30 tests and finally at the end. If a set piece routine looks too much like a previously tested one I will disregard it.
So that's the plan. Lets see how it goes. Hopefully I will get through the first run by this time tomorrow.
ZaZ said: It's about time to start experimenting with set pieces. I'm creating this thread so people can share routines and results. If anyone wants to help, I would recommend to follow these guidelines:
1. You can use any editor data for that (or none at all). I would recommend setting consistency and important matches of all players in the league to 20, and injury proneness to 1. My editor data is attached to this post.
2. Create a new game with the teams you want to use for testing (remember to disable first season transfers). Save a backup file on the very first day. My save file is attached here (can't attach to the post because it's over 20 mb).
3. Run my set pieces first and save results to use as reference. I am attaching three tactics with the same set pieces and different formations to this post (343 defenders, 433 strikers or 442). The positions got a bit messed up in FM-Arena table (because of me testing different shapes), but I fixed it properly now. I use Orange 1.0 for reference, which is the new name of Orange SS.
4. For each experiment, set up the same tactic with the desired routines, then go in vacation until the end of season (330 days on English Premier League), marking the option to use current tactics. Use the same save for all tests. I usually run three to five times, but feel free to use any methodology of testing you want.
5. The most important data to share are total points in the league (or points per match) and goal difference. If you want, you can also provide data from league > stats > team detailed > goals/conceded from corners, direct free kicks and indirect free kicks. For throw ins, the relevant data is in data hub > team > report > scoring/conceding > assists (it usually won't show anything since it's common to get 0 assists from throw ins).
You can also help with suggestions of routines to be tested.
Note: If you use my save file, I believe you don't need to download the editor data. Expand
Mate I will give it a go on Saturday when the grandkids are here and I cant play. Will try the tests overnight to see how long they run. Tomorrow is rain here and I want to keep my current save going. Really keen to get across set pieces again. Had a little play but not really enough time so far to get anything meaningful. There was one on FM Scout for corners that I was keen to try, and I think that long throws are much better this year, so far. The save helps immensely. Thanks
Changes
- Eliminated a lot of the general instructions, simplified the tactic a little.
- Changed some PI to fit with some of my newer, more succesful tactics.
- Permanently changed to SS and 2 AF
- Advanced Segundo Volantes to CM-Attack
That is my original favorite formation from when I played before FM14. I might now need to do a version based on Dragons Breath for old times sake. So many memories. I so hope we can get this working for FM22.
I think it deserves having its own thread
Thanks @Zippo. Do you arrange that or do you want me to start a new thread and copy this across?
https://www.dropbox.com/s/r55jwbdutrq19n6/MDW22.grf?dl=0
The ratings are calculated off the attributes testing and the position weight table. See the previous post from last years game for more details.
You should save the standard FMGS ratings file before loading and changing to this file so you can reload the default if you are not happy with my ratings.
The standard place for Genie Scout ratings files is C:\FM Genie Scout 22g\Ratings. If you did a custom install it will be in a folder called Ratings under the FMGS install directory. Once you have copied the file to the correct location you should be able to select my ratings file by clicking on the GS symbol in the top left of the screen, and then clicking Ratings in the drop down menu, and then MDW22 from the sub menu.
I have adjusted the weightings this year to try and align all the positions, as previously Wingers had much higher ratings.
Enjoy
Wow. Thanks for testing. I am sure you know that I usually play in the lower leagues with sides that are expected to be relegated. The tactic is doing very well for me with these sides so it is good to see what it can do in a top flight team. And it does seem to be doing well defensively for me as well. Certainly looks like your experience is the same on that front.
Enjoy.
I would like to see the save. My preference is to use tactics I have authored and always try to get three tactics that are easy to move between. Currently I run 4-1-3W-0-2 with Dragons Breath and then 4-1-2W-0-3 for Dragons Breath 3.1, I just move the CM to F9. The third tactic is 4-1-3W-1-1 with Dragons Den where the F9 moves back to an AMC SS role. I find that having different formations will reduce your bad spell time. All sides seem to have this unless you have unbelievable players. I am always starting with very much lower league teams so do not have that luxury.
I ran Dragons Breath 3.1 on your league and it wasn't as good as your results so the IW might well be a better set up. I will try it.
Thanks for your input I very much appreciate it.
Good results! 5.5+ tactics get ~130ish points
Good to hear. Maybe a chance to get above my 2 5.6 scores. Did you test as is or with the IWs?
No this was my first go at it. Happy for you to try the changes you have suggested and post it
Set Pieces are interesting aren't they. Some people like to spend a lot of time on them and try and perfect them for their tactics and others prefer just to plug and play what they think are the best. I think if the set pieces are from the base of the tactic you have already acknowledged then there is no reason to acknowledge the set piece as well. but if you have taken a set piece routine from another tactic and not altered it I think there should be some acknowledgement.
I was thinking the same. I reckon that would stop a bit of it, but with some allowance for newbies first time. Still no test but point them to the rules
I think the starting point should be why people use the site. I think there are a few different groups of people.
There are a core of people who love creating tactics and set pieces who are striving to try and crack a formation and structure that will be unbeatable, generally through analyzing what works. Some of this is obviously trial and error. An example of this is @ZaZ who can always be relied upon to come up with a very competitive tactic, with little or no reliance on tactics of other people. Most of these people who also love the collaboration and competition that comes into play as the tactics and formations evolve.
The other extreme are people who come to the site only to try and find a tactic that they can plug and play. They have no interest in playing around with tactics only in playing the game. Clearly there are plenty of people who sit between these two extremes.
I don't think it is a high proportion of people that are intentionally stealing other people's ideas and I also think that we have seem in years gone by that some minor changes can be the difference between a really good tactic and an also ran tactic, so I wouldn't like to see tactics not tested with small changes.
What we don't want to do is to slow down the evolving and testing of tactics that allow creators to analyze what works.
Some of the instances of non attribution recently have come from newbies to the site. I think pointing out to these people on what we as a community expect in terms of attributing the basis of the tactic is sufficient for an innocent first offence.
Maybe to assist people understand this is what we are looking for, an additional two questions for authors before they submit a tactic would help as follows:
Is your tactic based on an existing Tactic that has been tested? If so which Tactic or Tactics?
And do the same with Set Pieces. Are your Set Pieces based on or copied from an existing Set Piece routine that is from a Tactic that has been tested? If so which Tactic or Tactics?
This post is just trying to stimulate some more thought on this topic. I will have a bit more of a think and post again. I am definitely interested in the views of others.
Isn't it interesting that it doesn't change the rating. You were right. This may mean we can stop a lot of the red cards people have been getting.
Thanks to @ZaZ for the Testing League and for the insight into Player Instructions and for just doing a great job of testing the boundaries and coming up with brilliant tactics. Thanks also to @NeOnHD92 for the set pieces which were the best I found for this formation.
I was waiting for a few more attributes to be tested, but might start putting it together
1. You can use any editor data for that (or none at all). I would recommend setting consistency and important matches of all players in the league to 20, and injury proneness to 1. My editor data is attached to this post.
2. Create a new game with the teams you want to use for testing (remember to disable first season transfers). Save a backup file on the very first day. My save file is attached here (can't attach to the post because it's over 20 mb).
3. Run my set pieces first and save results to use as reference. I am attaching three tactics with the same set pieces and different formations to this post (343 defenders, 433 strikers or 442). The positions got a bit messed up in FM-Arena table (because of me testing different shapes), but I fixed it properly now. I use Orange 1.0 for reference, which is the new name of Orange SS.
4. For each experiment, set up the same tactic with the desired routines, then go in vacation until the end of season (330 days on English Premier League), marking the option to use current tactics. Use the same save for all tests. I usually run three to five times, but feel free to use any methodology of testing you want.
5. The most important data to share are total points in the league (or points per match) and goal difference. If you want, you can also provide data from league > stats > team detailed > goals/conceded from corners, direct free kicks and indirect free kicks. For throw ins, the relevant data is in data hub > team > report > scoring/conceding > assists (it usually won't show anything since it's common to get 0 assists from throw ins).
You can also help with suggestions of routines to be tested.
@Mark
Note: If you use my save file, I believe you don't need to download the editor data.
I am going to run with testing 3 tactic formations, being ZaZ Orange 4-3-1-2, Dragons Breath 4-1-3-1 and Blitz 4-2-2W-2. These seem to be the basis for most of the tactics scoring 5.5 plus this season. I will take and adapt the set pieces from 10 tactics to test with each formation as follows: FM20 TFF Cerber, 424 RMD, Arrowhead 2.0, Blitz, Cruels Angel, Electro, Fanecas, Snow Halation V3, Zaz and ZaZ with adapted corners from FM Scout's suggested attacking corner winning tactic (ZaZ MDW). That is 30 tests. If I have time I will then run them 3 times to make 90 tests. They seem to run reasonably quickly in ZaZ test League so I will give results after the first 30 tests and then the next 30 tests and finally at the end. If a set piece routine looks too much like a previously tested one I will disregard it.
So that's the plan. Lets see how it goes. Hopefully I will get through the first run by this time tomorrow.
1. You can use any editor data for that (or none at all). I would recommend setting consistency and important matches of all players in the league to 20, and injury proneness to 1. My editor data is attached to this post.
2. Create a new game with the teams you want to use for testing (remember to disable first season transfers). Save a backup file on the very first day. My save file is attached here (can't attach to the post because it's over 20 mb).
3. Run my set pieces first and save results to use as reference. I am attaching three tactics with the same set pieces and different formations to this post (343 defenders, 433 strikers or 442). The positions got a bit messed up in FM-Arena table (because of me testing different shapes), but I fixed it properly now. I use Orange 1.0 for reference, which is the new name of Orange SS.
4. For each experiment, set up the same tactic with the desired routines, then go in vacation until the end of season (330 days on English Premier League), marking the option to use current tactics. Use the same save for all tests. I usually run three to five times, but feel free to use any methodology of testing you want.
5. The most important data to share are total points in the league (or points per match) and goal difference. If you want, you can also provide data from league > stats > team detailed > goals/conceded from corners, direct free kicks and indirect free kicks. For throw ins, the relevant data is in data hub > team > report > scoring/conceding > assists (it usually won't show anything since it's common to get 0 assists from throw ins).
You can also help with suggestions of routines to be tested.
@Mark
Note: If you use my save file, I believe you don't need to download the editor data.
Mate I will give it a go on Saturday when the grandkids are here and I cant play. Will try the tests overnight to see how long they run. Tomorrow is rain here and I want to keep my current save going. Really keen to get across set pieces again. Had a little play but not really enough time so far to get anything meaningful. There was one on FM Scout for corners that I was keen to try, and I think that long throws are much better this year, so far. The save helps immensely. Thanks
The latest patch is 22.1.1 which was released about 1 day ago - https://community.sigames.com/forums/topic/559568-football-manager-2022-minor-update-2211-out-now/
The latest M.E. number is v22.2.0.0. and it hasn't been changing since the release.
I hope that helps.
Cheers.
Thanks mate. Just seemed like I was winning more easily after the patch