Author
Uploaded Date
Downloads
Dec 31, 2022
160
latest patchPatch 23.5.0 ( N )
not tested yet
Patch 23.2.0
good
PTS
G.D.
GF
AG
PLD
54.5
+5
62
57
1,920
Matches
Patch 23.2.0 tests
click to hide
Test #1
Date: 01.01.2023
Test #2
Date: 01.01.2023
Test #3
Date: 01.01.2023
Test #4
Date: 01.01.2023
Test #5
Date: 01.01.2023
Test #6
Date: 01.01.2023

Hi all, here is another 4-2-3-1 (a shape that I am determined to get right) but it has changed quite a lot, hence the name change.



It's back again including the theory behind @Delicious shape to see if it is a universal meta or just something that works well with a specific shape.



It did well with Watford and Birmingham, but not as well as it sometimes does.



Slightly underwhelmed by the expected points. My gut feeling is that this tactic won't do well and that these specific instructions work best with two strikers up front, but we'll wait and see.

Boris 4-2-3-1 v2: https://fm-arena.com/find-comment/18200/

Boris 4-2-3-1 v3: https://fm-arena.com/find-comment/18271/

Boris 4-2-3-1 v4: https://fm-arena.com/find-comment/18284/

2

Any reason why you chose to test with Watford & Birmingham ?

0

MemorizableUsername said: Any reason why you chose to test with Watford & Birmingham ?

Watford predicted 1st in the Championship and Birmingham are predicted 24th. Man City and Bournemouth tests are more useful but I am a Watford fan so I have a bias for using them more often

1

Despite me saying that I will not be tweaking any other kind of 4-2-3-1, here I am with exactly that. This is Boris 4-2-3-1 v2.



Despite using the Licious metarules from this year, it incorporates a lot of the meta from last year in terms of player instructions.



Did very well with Man City, amassing 100 points. Bournemouth performed averagely.



However, Bournemouth were very unlucky not to perform better in the league.

1

This did a lot better than I thought it would to be honest. Although the main takeaway from this is that adding player instructions like "take more risks" is probably detrimental

0

Afternoon, I've tweaked Boris v2 slightly as a result of the new top tactic on FM Arena this morning with the FB on attack. This is Boris 4-2-3-1 v3.



+ FB(A)
+ IF(S)

The player instructions remain the same. Take more risks, tackle harder, shoot less often, dribble more are all added to applicable positions. Stay wider is added to the BPDs and FBs. Cross from byline is added to the FBs. Sit narrower is added to the IFs. Get further forward is added to the DMs.



This is the first test I've ever done that Watford and Birmingham both manage to get promoted, although this was probably because of a weird (albeit realistic) underperformance from Norwich. Watford also would have had a lot more points had they not played like they were drunk once the title was secured.



It isn't the best performance from xG that I've ever had, but it's certainly up there. As I said, this was mainly made in response to the new top tactic on FM Arena involving the changes down the flanks so I wouldn't be too surprised if this isn't better than Boris v2.

0

I've changed quite a lot about this tactic this time but the main talking points are the volantes, attacking mentality, and work ball into the box. This is Boris 4-2-3-1 v4



It did well in the Premier League for Man City, and achieved my best league performance so far. City also won the FA Cup, Community Shield, Carabao Cup and were runners-up in the Champions League.



As you can see, Bournemouth were hit hugely by RNG because they should have got roughly 56 points. However, it was also my personal best xG performance from Man City.

0

You losing it :woot:

0

Delicious said: You losing it :woot:

The 4-2-3-1 formation will send me to an early grave I'm afraid

1

i fell you mate! If i can butt in i don't quite understand what you trying to do now,if you need clarification or sort of just ask em

0

Delicious said: i fell you mate! If i can butt in i don't quite understand what you trying to do now,if you need clarification or sort of just ask em

Boris v4 was just a result from an idea that I had earlier that performed very well in a test. I feel I might be onto something with it but I made it too attacking this time

0
Create an account or log in to leave a comment