Woodball 4-2-3-1

Hi all, here's a tactic that I have made following on from previous ones uploaded in the last few days. However, I have moved away from strikerless systems now.



So the main difference is the inclusion of a striker. However, I also found that adding overlaps on the wing-backs allowed them to get much more involved in play and their numbers improved greatly. I tested this tactic with Manchester City (predicted 1st) and Bournemouth (predicted 20th)



Man City did very well, 98 points and a 98 GD. They also won the Champions League, thumping Real Madrid 5-0 in the final. Bournemouth didn't perform that well on paper, but more on them in a moment.



According to the xG table, Bournemouth were very unlucky throughout the season and really should have got Europe. However, striker Dominic Solanke performed very well for them, bagging 22 goals in the Premier League.

Woodball 4-2-3-1 SIMPLIFIED: https://fm-arena.com/find-comment/17530/

Hi all, I am writing in this thread because I have made a slight adjustment to this tactic. I have added a couple of team instructions, but I have removed all player instructions. This is Woodball 4-2-3-1 SIMPLIFIED



Below, you will see that Watford won the Championship with 102 points, while Birmingham missed out on automatic promotion on goal difference. This tactic was a lot better defensively than the others that I have uploaded.



On expected points, Watford got 95 which is the highest I've managed from them thus far. Birmingham got 83 so this does mean that they overperformed theirs by a fair margin.

So I think it's time to draw a close on this tactic since I can only take a 4-2-3-1 so far and there are lots of formations that perform better in testing. So, here is Woodball FINAL.



It is based on @Delicious tactics but still includes my idea of no player instructions to see how it would do. The only player roles that have been changed are the two volantes because I've seen it do well in tactics at the top of the table.



Watford got 97 points as well as Birmingham also getting 97 points. However, Birmingham lost in the playoff final. So why am I bigging up this tactic so much if it is doing worse than my previous attempts.



The simple answer is because it's not. With Watford it equals my personal best at expected points from the simplified version uploaded previously. With Birmingham it beats the tally from that tactic by two.

This will probably be the last edition of Woodball that I upload.

Steelwood said: So I think it's time to draw a close on this tactic since I can only take a 4-2-3-1 so far and there are lots of formations that perform better in testing. So, here is Woodball FINAL.



It is based on @Delicious tactics but still includes my idea of no player instructions to see how it would do. The only player roles that have been changed are the two volantes because I've seen it do well in tactics at the top of the table.



Watford got 97 points as well as Birmingham also getting 97 points. However, Birmingham lost in the playoff final. So why am I bigging up this tactic so much if it is doing worse than my previous attempts.



The simple answer is because it's not. With Watford it equals my personal best at expected points from the simplified version uploaded previously. With Birmingham it beats the tally from that tactic by two.

This will probably be the last edition of Woodball that I upload. Expand

You still have Get stuck in, so it will help even w/o tackle PIs

Steelwood said: So I think it's time to draw a close on this tactic since I can only take a 4-2-3-1 so far and there are lots of formations that perform better in testing. So, here is Woodball FINAL.



It is based on @Delicious tactics but still includes my idea of no player instructions to see how it would do. The only player roles that have been changed are the two volantes because I've seen it do well in tactics at the top of the table.



Watford got 97 points as well as Birmingham also getting 97 points. However, Birmingham lost in the playoff final. So why am I bigging up this tactic so much if it is doing worse than my previous attempts.



The simple answer is because it's not. With Watford it equals my personal best at expected points from the simplified version uploaded previously. With Birmingham it beats the tally from that tactic by two.

This will probably be the last edition of Woodball that I upload. Expand

https://fm-arena.com/tactic/3949-4231-prochazka-iii/

The truth lies in something else mate... A bit sad about that it's most likely the shape is "Locked" on benchmark,but gonna check it where or how later on.

Many people told me already that they prefer to remove stuck-in and tackle, let's see how it give so we can even move around

opq said: You still have Get stuck in, so it will help even w/o tackle PIs Expand

Yeah that's what I figured from some testing the other day

Delicious said: https://fm-arena.com/tactic/3949-4231-prochazka-iii/

The truth lies in something else mate... A bit sad about that it's most likely the shape is "Locked" on benchmark,but gonna check it where or how later on.

Many people told me already that they prefer to remove stuck-in and tackle, let's see how it give so we can even move around Expand

I'm actually just doing this test to see which system I want to use in my own save. My squad is set up for a 4-2-3-1 but I love my "simplified" tactic because it's good defensively and gives a lot of possession. However, if this is better I'll use this instead

Steelwood said: Yeah that's what I figured from some testing the other day



I'm actually just doing this test to see which system I want to use in my own save. My squad is set up for a 4-2-3-1 but I love my "simplified" tactic because it's good defensively and gives a lot of possession. However, if this is better I'll use this instead Expand

Nono don't missunderstand me! I guess we missing something on how the tactic-system impact on the M.E. ; that's why on balanced mentality can't even surpass 53 with that mentality.
I really want to know how works out on a real test without "tackle harder"
Because i just know from "my" test