Uploaded Date
|
Downloads
|
|
---|---|---|
Jan 1, 2023
|
3,518
|
latest patchPatch 23.5.0 ( N )
not tested yet
Patch 23.2.0
Patch 23.2.0 tests
Create an account or log in to leave a comment
343 Suplex to the wind
Spoiler So, i was working to the shape and after the result of StoneFree_5-2-3 by @MemorizableUsername,i've took a look and found that set pieces are different from the mass(or maybe i never seen them before), i kept the defend one and changed the rest.
Licious-meta template applied.
343 Poetry in Motion
Changelog:
Spoiler Simple tweak to find out if for real 343 is better with libero
343 Extreme Suplex to the wind
Changelog:
Spoiler WB change from (a) to (su)
Vol change from (su) to (a)
OMG nice work!
Tornado time!
Uh-oh
Who needs winger ? WHO ?
GJ
Great tactic! Would you mind sharing the player instructions for those not on PC?
Wowzers said: Great tactic! Would you mind sharing the player instructions for those not on PC?
tackle hard for all positions, dribble more for bpd, stay wide for sides BPDs, take fewer risks for GK
opq said: tackle hard for all positions, dribble more for bpd, stay wide for sides BPDs, take fewer risks for GK
Wow, is that really it? Thanks.
47PTS 343 Extreme Suplex to the wind
49PTS 343 Extreme Suplex to the wind
That's literally Poirer vs the Tornado!
is this good tactic for underdog?
AG said: is this good tactic for underdog?
To answer your question at first you need to define what would be "good" result for you with underdog.
Any tactic with "46+" score in the testing allows overachieving with any type of team.
Why does this tactic appear in 2nd place when it has the same score as the first tactic but has a better average? @Zippo
pixar said: Why does this tactic appear in 2nd place when it has the same score as the first tactic but has a better average? @Zippo
Probably because of roundings
pixar said: Why does this tactic appear in 2nd place when it has the same score as the first tactic but has a better average? @Zippo
"343 Extreme Suplex to the wind" tactic got 59.691666666667 points.
"424 Alhamdulillah II" tactic got 59.757638888889 points.
Bear in mind, even the tactics have been tested for 6К matches there still might be "1" point RNG.
np boys next we go 4 forwards
Did a bunch of runs for you guys!
City :
Spoiler
Pool :
Spoiler
Forest :
Spoiler
Psg :
Spoiler
Udinese :
Spoiler
Delicious said: Did a bunch of runs for you guys!
If you build your team around this tactic then I'm sure you'll get an incredible result.
But by default not many teams fit this tactic so 424 Alhamdulillah II tactic has an additional advantage over this tactic because it's much easier to fit any team into 424 Alhamdulillah II tactic.
Bogeyman said: If you build your team around this tactic then I'm sure you'll get an incredible result.
But by default not many teams fit this tactic so 424 Alhamdulillah II tactic has an additional advantage over this tactic because it's much easier to fit any team into 424 Alhamdulillah II tactic.
The passion for 343 will never lose to any 424
Hi guys, looks like a great tactic. Any chance someone could post team and player instructions for an Xbox player? Thanks in advance.
this is a great tactic, even better than the balanced 4-2-4 because balanced 3-4-3 stand a chance against giant teams like man utd. hell i rather take draws all day rather than losing. as you could see the possession is horrid, but as long as you get shots then it is still good. the only unbelievable thing in this match is that one of my players actually got a disputed red card in the 13th minute can you believe it. it's like when sir Alex Ferguson is still in Manchester United and referee's would always favor Manchester United. i thought i already lost this match but man a draw is amazing.
you think this should be retested? @Delicious. seeing some TIs and PIs part of the top tactics in .3 tests
Dohny said: you think this should be retested? @Delicious. seeing some TIs and PIs part of the top tactics in .3 tests
I will focus on 3atb a bit later, i am more concern to to findout other stuff at the moment! I don't think testing it again will make any difference at the moment