CBP87 said: They've done quite a bit of research and believe they've found a better way to test which will give the community more accurate results Expand
Thanks CBP87! So it's what I thought. They believe they have found a better way to test, but it hasn"t been proven yet? For example, we don't know for sure that the tactic that is currently top with a 5.8 rating will yield better results than the one that was top of the 'old' table with a 6.0 rating? Am I right?
Alexis said: Thanks CBP87! So it's what I thought. They believe they have found a better way to test, but it hasn"t been proven yet? For example, we don't know for sure that the tactic that is currently top with a 5.8 rating will yield better results than the one that was top of the 'old' table with a 6.0 rating? Am I right? Expand
To be honest, I don't there is any point in comparing the new results with the old ones, Zippo and the team have refined the test so its a different environment for both tests, plus the old ones were tested twice whilst the new table is testing 3 times. It's a difficult one and I don't really fully understand it myself yet
The thing I’m getting out of it mostly so far is that the ai doesn’t know how to counter volante and IWB mostly 😂 I guess you can see this as a test at CL level , where usually the better coaches are all present , where as in your league there are quite some non successful ones as well.
CBP87 said: To be honest, I don't there is any point in comparing the new results with the old ones, Zippo and the team have refined the test so its a different environment for both tests, plus the old ones were tested twice whilst the new table is testing 3 times. It's a difficult one and I don't really fully understand it myself yet Expand
Honestly, everything is really simple.
Let's say, you're trying to create a good tactic and you're testing your ideas in English Premier League.
If we take the 1st season ( the default database ) in English Premier League then we see that the league is heavily dominated by 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3 formations, also, the AI managers in EPL have some specific sets of tactical settings ( Mentality, D-Line, Roles and so on ):
Let's assume that you found a tactic that works very well in EPL ( the 1st season ) so you might think that the job is done but the next season a lot of different AI managers come to the EPL or you move to a different league and now you've got a league that is heavily dominated by 4-4-2, 5-2-1-2 or 5-3-2 formations and also, the tactical settings of the AI managers have changes significantly:
And your tactic that worked very well in EPL ( the 1st season ) might stopped working at all due to a very different environment. Just look at the results under the new database, obviously, the environment(AI formations/tactical settings) makes a huge difference.
Our new database has a better set of AI formations/tactical settings than the old database has, also, we left only the most successful AI tactical settings so we don't waste time on testing against weak AI tactical settings.
Please note, it might be that some of the top tactics from our testing work slight better against 4-2-3-1/4-3-3 formations and some work slight better against 4-4-2/5-3-2/5-2-1-2 formations but you can be sure that all the tactics from the top are well-rounded tactics and you can rely on them in any environment.
Zippo said: Honestly, everything is really simple.
Let's say, you're trying to create a good tactic and you're testing your ideas in English Premier League.
If we take the 1st season ( the default database ) in English Premier League then we see that the league is heavily dominated by 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3 formations, also, the AI managers in EPL have some specific sets of tactical settings ( Mentality, D-Line, Roles and so on ):
Let's assume that you found a tactic that works very well in EPL ( the 1st season ) so you might think that the job is done but the next season a lot of different AI managers come to the EPL or you move to a different league and now you've got a league that is heavily dominated by 4-4-2, 5-2-1-2 or 5-3-2 formations and also, the tactical settings of the AI managers have changes significantly:
And your tactic that worked very well in EPL ( the 1st season ) might stopped working at all due to a very different environment. Just look at the results under the new database, obviously, the environment(AI formations/tactical settings) makes a huge difference.
Our new database has a better set of AI formations/tactical settings than the old database has, also, we left only the most successful AI tactical settings so we don't waste time on testing against weak AI tactical settings.
Please note, it might be that some of the top tactics from our testing work slight better against 4-2-3-1/4-3-3 formations and some work slight better against 4-4-2/5-3-2/5-2-1-2 formations but you can be sure that all the tactics from the top are well-rounded tactics and you can rely on them in any environment.
22.2 is up (Match Engine 21.3.0.0: - Near post corners made less effective - Various fixes in different areas to defending teams keeping possession too well and inflating possession stats to unrealistic levels - Fixed goalkeepers not being marked during attacking set pieces - Tweaks to throw-ins - Number of other improvements to overall engine balance) grab your pens boys, we drawing tacts again
ptacts said: 22.2 is up (Match Engine 21.3.0.0: - Near post corners made less effective - Various fixes in different areas to defending teams keeping possession too well and inflating possession stats to unrealistic levels - Fixed goalkeepers not being marked during attacking set pieces - Tweaks to throw-ins - Number of other improvements to overall engine balance) grab your pens boys, we drawing tacts again Expand Let's see if very attacking tactic work anymore
ta2199 said: Let's see if very attacking tactic work anymore Expand
Just a quick note, I've managed to pick up 3 red cards in a couple of games when previously it was 3 red cards over the course of 15 games, using Tackle Harder on every position. (Revelation 1.0)
CBP87 said: @Zippo with these ME updates especially to the very attacking TIs, will you be looking to retest the tactics you've already done? Expand
To be honest, with the new ME, most data they got to make the database might have become invalid, since they tried to get the most effective to previous patch. Let's just hope it stays the same so they don't need to update their test league again.
ZaZ said: To be honest, with the new ME, most data they got to make the database might have become invalid, since they tried to get the most effective to previous patch. Let's just hope it stays the same so they don't need to update their test league again. Expand
But those tactics that use very attacking mentality will essentially be null and void because the instructions used will no longer be there
Metal said: So far using very attacking on the new M.E is russian rullette suicide. Scored 6 and conceded 6 in the same game Expand
I reckon its been nerfed!(is that the saying? if not then patched) I've tested about 6 of my tactics with PSG since the patch that use very attacking mentality and they have gone to crap (probably just my tactics haha)
CBP87 said: I reckon its been nerfed!(is that the saying? if not then patched) I've tested about 6 of my tactics with PSG since the patch that use very attacking mentality and they have gone to crap (probably just my tactics haha) Expand
not shure about exact attacking mentality but after patch ME is changed drasticaly... one thing is shure that near post corners gonne for good played about 10 games - 0 corners scored
Wigo said: not shure about exact attacking mentality but after patch ME is changed drasticaly... one thing is shure that near post corners gonne for good played about 10 games - 0 corners scored Expand
I agree, in each of these tests, my CBs have scored considerably less than what they were scoring pre patch. In pretty much all my elite testing pre patch my CBs were double figures, no way near now
Zippo said: Could you elaborate a little bit on that? I don't get it. Expand
Yeah no worries mate, so if I may use Mongoose as an example, it uses very attacking mentality with standard passing and standard width but with the ME update, these options are no longer available for very attacking mentality and have defaulted to slightly shorter passing and fairly narrow width meaning its a different tactic so to speak
CBP87 said: Yeah no worries mate, so if I may use Mongoose as an example, it uses very attacking mentality with standard passing and standard width but with the ME update, these options are no longer available for very attacking mentality and have defaulted to slightly shorter passing and fairly narrow width meaning its a different tactic so to speak Expand
Ok, I see...
Hmmm... it might be that it was a visual bug and under the hood it always worked as "slightly shorter passing" and "fairly narrow".
Anyway, based on our experience I can say that 1 notch difference in the passing and width settings make so small difference that it hardly can be seen after 6 tests ( 912 matches ).
Hmmm... it might be that it was a visual bug and under the hood it always worked as "slightly shorter passing" and "fairly narrow".
Anyway, based on our experience I can say that 1 notch difference in the passing and width settings make so small difference that it hardly can be seen after 6 tests ( 912 matches ). Expand
They are commenting on the SI forum that with the new ME, it might be possible to make a good tactic of high possession and real position game. Did you notice that?
They are commenting on the SI forum that with the new ME, it might be possible to make a good tactic of high possession and real position game. Did you notice that? Expand
Cyan is schedulled in my test queue, I will see if it holds or not.
Alexis said: Oh, because you think I haven't already? thanks for deliberately not trying to help me!
Yeah I agree, first post is quite vague and doesn't really say that much
Alexis said: Oh, because you think I haven't already? thanks for deliberately not trying to help me!
They've done quite a bit of research and believe they've found a better way to test which will give the community more accurate results
CBP87 said: They've done quite a bit of research and believe they've found a better way to test which will give the community more accurate results
Thanks CBP87! So it's what I thought. They believe they have found a better way to test, but it hasn"t been proven yet? For example, we don't know for sure that the tactic that is currently top with a 5.8 rating will yield better results than the one that was top of the 'old' table with a 6.0 rating? Am I right?
Alexis said: Thanks CBP87! So it's what I thought. They believe they have found a better way to test, but it hasn"t been proven yet? For example, we don't know for sure that the tactic that is currently top with a 5.8 rating will yield better results than the one that was top of the 'old' table with a 6.0 rating? Am I right?
To be honest, I don't there is any point in comparing the new results with the old ones, Zippo and the team have refined the test so its a different environment for both tests, plus the old ones were tested twice whilst the new table is testing 3 times. It's a difficult one and I don't really fully understand it myself yet
I bet they themselves didn't expect such big difference. =)
The thing I’m getting out of it mostly so far is that the ai doesn’t know how to counter volante and IWB mostly 😂
I guess you can see this as a test at CL level , where usually the better coaches are all present , where as in your league there are quite some non successful ones as well.
CBP87 said: To be honest, I don't there is any point in comparing the new results with the old ones, Zippo and the team have refined the test so its a different environment for both tests, plus the old ones were tested twice whilst the new table is testing 3 times. It's a difficult one and I don't really fully understand it myself yet
Honestly, everything is really simple.
Let's say, you're trying to create a good tactic and you're testing your ideas in English Premier League.
If we take the 1st season ( the default database ) in English Premier League then we see that the league is heavily dominated by 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3 formations, also, the AI managers in EPL have some specific sets of tactical settings ( Mentality, D-Line, Roles and so on ):
Let's assume that you found a tactic that works very well in EPL ( the 1st season ) so you might think that the job is done but the next season a lot of different AI managers come to the EPL or you move to a different league and now you've got a league that is heavily dominated by 4-4-2, 5-2-1-2 or 5-3-2 formations and also, the tactical settings of the AI managers have changes significantly:
And your tactic that worked very well in EPL ( the 1st season ) might stopped working at all due to a very different environment. Just look at the results under the new database, obviously, the environment(AI formations/tactical settings) makes a huge difference.
Our new database has a better set of AI formations/tactical settings than the old database has, also, we left only the most successful AI tactical settings so we don't waste time on testing against weak AI tactical settings.
Please note, it might be that some of the top tactics from our testing work slight better against 4-2-3-1/4-3-3 formations and some work slight better against 4-4-2/5-3-2/5-2-1-2 formations but you can be sure that all the tactics from the top are well-rounded tactics and you can rely on them in any environment.
I hope that helps.
Cheers.
So guys basically rely on the second set of table with * for a more accurate testing results!
Zippo said: Honestly, everything is really simple.
Let's say, you're trying to create a good tactic and you're testing your ideas in English Premier League.
If we take the 1st season ( the default database ) in English Premier League then we see that the league is heavily dominated by 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3 formations, also, the AI managers in EPL have some specific sets of tactical settings ( Mentality, D-Line, Roles and so on ):
Let's assume that you found a tactic that works very well in EPL ( the 1st season ) so you might think that the job is done but the next season a lot of different AI managers come to the EPL or you move to a different league and now you've got a league that is heavily dominated by 4-4-2, 5-2-1-2 or 5-3-2 formations and also, the tactical settings of the AI managers have changes significantly:
And your tactic that worked very well in EPL ( the 1st season ) might stopped working at all due to a very different environment. Just look at the results under the new database, obviously, the environment(AI formations/tactical settings) makes a huge difference.
Our new database has a better set of AI formations/tactical settings than the old database has, also, we left only the most successful AI tactical settings so we don't waste time on testing against weak AI tactical settings.
Please note, it might be that some of the top tactics from our testing work slight better against 4-2-3-1/4-3-3 formations and some work slight better against 4-4-2/5-3-2/5-2-1-2 formations but you can be sure that all the tactics from the top are well-rounded tactics and you can rely on them in any environment.
I hope that helps.
Cheers.
Lovely stuff, thanks for the explanation
22.2 is up
(Match Engine 21.3.0.0:
- Near post corners made less effective
- Various fixes in different areas to defending teams keeping possession too well and inflating possession stats to unrealistic levels
- Fixed goalkeepers not being marked during attacking set pieces
- Tweaks to throw-ins
- Number of other improvements to overall engine balance)
grab your pens boys, we drawing tacts again
I mean is it unrealistic for defending teams to keep the ball
ptacts said: 22.2 is up
(Match Engine 21.3.0.0:
- Near post corners made less effective
- Various fixes in different areas to defending teams keeping possession too well and inflating possession stats to unrealistic levels
- Fixed goalkeepers not being marked during attacking set pieces
- Tweaks to throw-ins
- Number of other improvements to overall engine balance)
grab your pens boys, we drawing tacts again
Let's see if very attacking tactic work anymore
ta2199 said: Let's see if very attacking tactic work anymore
Just a quick note, I've managed to pick up 3 red cards in a couple of games when previously it was 3 red cards over the course of 15 games, using Tackle Harder on every position. (Revelation 1.0)
ta2199 said: Let's see if very attacking tactic work anymore
Looks like they've removed the option for standard passing and width on very attacking
@Zippo with these ME updates especially to the very attacking TIs, will you be looking to retest the tactics you've already done?
CBP87 said: @Zippo with these ME updates especially to the very attacking TIs, will you be looking to retest the tactics you've already done?
To be honest, with the new ME, most data they got to make the database might have become invalid, since they tried to get the most effective to previous patch. Let's just hope it stays the same so they don't need to update their test league again.
ZaZ said: To be honest, with the new ME, most data they got to make the database might have become invalid, since they tried to get the most effective to previous patch. Let's just hope it stays the same so they don't need to update their test league again.
But those tactics that use very attacking mentality will essentially be null and void because the instructions used will no longer be there
So far using very attacking on the new M.E is Russian roulette suicide. Scored 6 and conceded 6 in the same game
Metal said: So far using very attacking on the new M.E is russian rullette suicide. Scored 6 and conceded 6 in the same game
I reckon its been nerfed!(is that the saying? if not then patched) I've tested about 6 of my tactics with PSG since the patch that use very attacking mentality and they have gone to crap (probably just my tactics haha)
CBP87 said: I reckon its been nerfed!(is that the saying? if not then patched) I've tested about 6 of my tactics with PSG since the patch that use very attacking mentality and they have gone to crap (probably just my tactics haha)
played about 10 games - 0 corners scored 
not shure about exact attacking mentality but after patch ME is changed drasticaly... one thing is shure that near post corners gonne for good
Wigo said: not shure about exact attacking mentality but after patch ME is changed drasticaly... one thing is shure that near post corners gonne for good
played about 10 games - 0 corners scored 
I agree, in each of these tests, my CBs have scored considerably less than what they were scoring pre patch. In pretty much all my elite testing pre patch my CBs were double figures, no way near now
CBP87 said: @Zippo with these ME updates especially to the very attacking TIs, will you be looking to retest the tactics you've already done?
At first we'll retest the top rated tactics from the previous patch as we always do
Zippo said: At first we'll retest the top rated tactics from the previous patch as we always do
How will you get around the difference the update has made to the TIs for very attacking mentalities?
CBP87 said: How will you get around the difference the update has made to the TIs for very attacking mentalities?
Could you elaborate a little bit on that? I don't get it.
Zippo said: Could you elaborate a little bit on that? I don't get it.
he said in previous post: Looks like they've removed the option for standard passing and width on very attacking
so he means all tactics with these options should not be tested again...
Zippo said: Could you elaborate a little bit on that? I don't get it.
Yeah no worries mate, so if I may use Mongoose as an example, it uses very attacking mentality with standard passing and standard width but with the ME update, these options are no longer available for very attacking mentality and have defaulted to slightly shorter passing and fairly narrow width meaning its a different tactic so to speak
CBP87 said: Yeah no worries mate, so if I may use Mongoose as an example, it uses very attacking mentality with standard passing and standard width but with the ME update, these options are no longer available for very attacking mentality and have defaulted to slightly shorter passing and fairly narrow width meaning its a different tactic so to speak
Ok, I see...
Hmmm... it might be that it was a visual bug and under the hood it always worked as "slightly shorter passing" and "fairly narrow".
Anyway, based on our experience I can say that 1 notch difference in the passing and width settings make so small difference that it hardly can be seen after 6 tests ( 912 matches ).
Zippo said: Ok, I see...
Hmmm... it might be that it was a visual bug and under the hood it always worked as "slightly shorter passing" and "fairly narrow".
Anyway, based on our experience I can say that 1 notch difference in the passing and width settings make so small difference that it hardly can be seen after 6 tests ( 912 matches ).
Thanks for explaining pal
Hi guys,
They are commenting on the SI forum that with the new ME, it might be possible to make a good tactic of high possession and real position game. Did you notice that?
MisterCMS said: Hi guys,
They are commenting on the SI forum that with the new ME, it might be possible to make a good tactic of high possession and real position game. Did you notice that?
Cyan is schedulled in my test queue, I will see if it holds or not.