I adapted the TFF Cerber with lessons learned from the FM22 Beta to produce this tactic. Seems to test pretty well winning 2 of the 3 leagues I tested with side ranked to finish in the relegation zone. Testing would indicate it is good with underdog and lower league teams.
It tested well but not great with me. I holiday test with 3 very lowly ranked sides in Vanarama National, North and South. Electro is still well clear. All the numbers are averages between the 3 comps.
ZaZ said: I have two versions of Red 0.4 (also known as "All Mid" ), one with and another without mark tighter. I'm not sure which one is better (I believe 0.4b), so I appreciate if anyone can test and give me some second opinion. Player stats are from best XI, since team was picked by assistant manager.
P.S.: I got the idea to use IWB-At from @momentaryblink. Red 0.3 also used two Vol-At, but performance was lower because of IWB-Su. When I saw his Arrowhead, I just changed my IWB to At and results got better.
Red 0.4, without using tighter marking:
Red 0.4b, using tighter marking: Expand
You have moved away from using Target Forwards. I will give your tactics a try in the next few days. I do like a couple of formations in the new game and one is yours. the 4-2-2-2 wide I think works well. The other is combinations of Electro, a 4-2-3-1 or some derivatives of it like 4-1-3-1-1 or 4-1-2-1-1. I think the defensive back 4 are pretty set, Inverted WB or WB Support or Attack with 2 DCs BPD Defend. So I think there has been plenty of progress through the Beta period so far. Time will tell if these hold but I suspect they will. There really hasn't been a major flaw unearthed that would make them change the match engine yet like a corner or throw in routine that happened the last few years.
I have had a bit of a look at @Eric results to try and see if there are any patterns. I have excluded the tactics where he hasn't tested for a full season. I have also started testing them in my lower league tests. Here are the results from @Eric Tests.
I have focused on the teams that have either made 2 points per game or had a goal difference of over one goal per game.
Hey @Droid I am hearing you on this. My top metric is Points Per Match. And on that metric the 3 tactics I have uploaded are in the top 6 on Eric's tests. I know the testing isnt perfect but my analysis will appear in @ZaZ Log in the next day or 2. For now, Enjoy that tactic man, it is damn good
Is there any way you could test this one with Tottenham for me @Eric as it was marginally better for me than TFF Cerber and Dragons Breathe which both went pretty well in your testing. Thanks
I have adapted this tactic from my FM21 version and it looks to go ok. As with the TFF one I previously uploaded I tested this with 3 lower league sides that were all listed as having Board expectations of fight hard against relegation. The results were a little better than the TFF one with all sides finishing in the top 4. Very similar results to Dragons Breathe but a totally different formation.
I have adapted this tactic from my FM21 version and it looks to go ok. As with the TFF one I previously uploaded I tested this with 3 lower league sides that were all listed as having Board expectations of fight hard against relegation. The results were a little better than the TFF one with all sides finishing in the top 4.
Dragons Breath 3.1
I have tweaked this tactic to be very aggressive in attack to try and match what the match engine favors. The CM has moved forward to an F9 position and the old F9 has moved across to AF on the right. The old WBs are now FB Attack. I have removed all the tackle harder PIs and reworked all the set pieces.
As you can see the results in @ZaZ test league were pretty impressive with Norwich finishing 4th. Easily the best result for anything I have tested.
Man City with 144 goals and Norwich with over 100 goals in the season. Corner routine worked pretty well with City getting 23 and Norwich 17 from corners.
Defence is leaky but attack is mind blowing.
Dragons Breath 1.3
Changes from the original are CM offset and changed from CM Attack to MEZ, and DM changed from RPM to DLP Support.
Also changes to the Set Pieces.
Worked well in testing with Belgium unlucky to have 12 red cards which impacted on the results somewhat.
Dragons Breath 4.1
This is the best tactic I have used so far. Reworked the tactic to the structure that seems to be working best this year, 4-1-2W-1-2.
Change log:
From Dragons Breath the CM Attack moves forward to a AM Support. Changed the full backs to IWB Attack. Changed the set pieces again.
Results. I used the League of Nations testing game save. It is the best result I have had with any tactic on it. It is also doing very well in my normal game save.
I also think the throw ins lend themselves to FM19 throw in exploit but will test that later. Indeed some of the FM19 tactics might be the best for this release,
I wrote somewhere on this forum a few weeks ago that FM22 would definitely move away from FM21 Strikerless tactics the way FM did after the last FM Strikerless tactics were a success. I suggested we start with successful tactics from FM20. So my starting test was the best tactic from that year, the attached Apache tactic based on the TFF Cerber tactic. To test I started with 3 lower Division teams who were 33/1 with the bookies in Vanarama National, South and North. The sides were FC Halifax, Southport and Hungerford. All had media predictions of 16 to 20. I think this is a good starting point as all did well above expectations. Including a win in the Trophy to FC Halifax, and a League win to Southport.
All the sides finished top 6. I think this is a worthwhile kick off to FM22.
I am still very happy to have 3 tactics on the first page. This remains my favourite tactic. I started my last save for FM21 a month ago, called The Last Save - Hungerford. I was trying to put everything I learned into one last game and picked the lowest rated side in playable English football. We finished champions after 40 games with a record of 30 wins 5 draws and 5 losses, 21 points clear of second placed Havant. Our for and against was 97 to 35. We were predicted to finish 21st or last in the League. You can read about it on FM Scout. I have just signed a heap of replacement players and will see how far I get into the new season in Vanaarama National League before a start on the Beta of FM22.
Dezhy said: So, you said we needed to consider positional rating as the main criteria to compare players on GS. Should I completely ignore Role ratings on GS? Expand
The short answer is yes, ignore role ratings. I have tried using role ratings but there was no noticeable difference. It does mean you miss some very good players for the position. Players seem to be able to play the role regardless if they are reasonable at the position and it gives you flexibility if you want to move between tactics.
P.S.: I got the idea to use IWB-At from @momentaryblink. Red 0.3 also used two Vol-At, but performance was lower because of IWB-Su. When I saw his Arrowhead, I just changed my IWB to At and results got better.
Red 0.4, without using tighter marking:
Red 0.4b, using tighter marking:
You have moved away from using Target Forwards. I will give your tactics a try in the next few days. I do like a couple of formations in the new game and one is yours. the 4-2-2-2 wide I think works well. The other is combinations of Electro, a 4-2-3-1 or some derivatives of it like 4-1-3-1-1 or 4-1-2-1-1. I think the defensive back 4 are pretty set, Inverted WB or WB Support or Attack with 2 DCs BPD Defend. So I think there has been plenty of progress through the Beta period so far. Time will tell if these hold but I suspect they will. There really hasn't been a major flaw unearthed that would make them change the match engine yet like a corner or throw in routine that happened the last few years.
I have focused on the teams that have either made 2 points per game or had a goal difference of over one goal per game.
I hope this helps someone
VNL
VNN
VNS
I have adapted this tactic from my FM21 version and it looks to go ok. As with the TFF one I previously uploaded I tested this with 3 lower league sides that were all listed as having Board expectations of fight hard against relegation. The results were a little better than the TFF one with all sides finishing in the top 4.
Dragons Breath 3.1
I have tweaked this tactic to be very aggressive in attack to try and match what the match engine favors. The CM has moved forward to an F9 position and the old F9 has moved across to AF on the right. The old WBs are now FB Attack. I have removed all the tackle harder PIs and reworked all the set pieces.
As you can see the results in @ZaZ test league were pretty impressive with Norwich finishing 4th. Easily the best result for anything I have tested.
Man City with 144 goals and Norwich with over 100 goals in the season. Corner routine worked pretty well with City getting 23 and Norwich 17 from corners.
Defence is leaky but attack is mind blowing.
Dragons Breath 1.3
Changes from the original are CM offset and changed from CM Attack to MEZ, and DM changed from RPM to DLP Support.
Also changes to the Set Pieces.
Worked well in testing with Belgium unlucky to have 12 red cards which impacted on the results somewhat.
Dragons Breath 4.1
This is the best tactic I have used so far. Reworked the tactic to the structure that seems to be working best this year, 4-1-2W-1-2.
Change log:
From Dragons Breath the CM Attack moves forward to a AM Support. Changed the full backs to IWB Attack. Changed the set pieces again.
Results. I used the League of Nations testing game save. It is the best result I have had with any tactic on it. It is also doing very well in my normal game save.
So is this the best of what you have tested so far?
All the sides finished top 6. I think this is a worthwhile kick off to FM22.
The short answer is yes, ignore role ratings. I have tried using role ratings but there was no noticeable difference. It does mean you miss some very good players for the position. Players seem to be able to play the role regardless if they are reasonable at the position and it gives you flexibility if you want to move between tactics.