It's me, Dzek I have an idea for the FM Arena devs to implement on the website. Following my previous suggestion to add "PPG" to the tactics table, it could be done in a different way and that would help more the visibility of both the website and the creators! Since this site is mainly for testing the tactics we create I would like to suggest some ideas and discuss them! So here are they:
1. Create a tab on our profiles called Tactics -> FM22, FM23, FM24, etc. and in each tab there should be the tactics we posted for each edition - this is mainly for a reorganisation of tactics according to the game rather than having them all on pages.
2. As managers in real life have PPG (Points Per Game) as a unit of measurement it would be useful for each creator in his/her profile or even when he/she opens a new thread or writes a comment on others threads to show his/her PPG from all the tactics he/she has tested in the testing league combined.
An example: If I have posted two tactics for FM23 and one has got 1.34 PPG and the other 1.47 PPG then as a creator I have 1.41 points per game (PPG).
Thanks for your time!
PS I think you've got the whole idea but maybe if others join in we can build it even better. We will definitely need the participation of the devs of the website
@dzek, imagine, one person puts a lot of efforts, hundreds of hours of playing and testing things, in creating a tactic and when he finds something that works incredible he brings the tactic here for a testing and gets a very good score 60 Points or 1.58 PPG whatever number format you like.
Now, other person who doesn't have any clue about FM and who hasn't spent a single effort on testing anything just takes that tactic and makes one totally irrelevant tweak, I don't know like changing one irrelevant PI of GK that would make 0.000001% difference and than he puts this tweaked tactic for a testing and due to lucky RNG he gets 61 Points and 1.60 PPG.
So now that second person, who doesn't have any clue about FM and who hasn't spent a single effort on testing, has a "shiny badge" that tells everyone that this person is the best tactician and also, he's a better tactic than the first person who did all the job.
No... no... no... turning this place into a place where tacticians compete with each other is nonsense because you can't compete with someone if any moment he can take your works as his own and there're a lot of tactical settings that makes such small difference that even 4,000 matches RNG can be bigger than their impact.
I have full confidence that this place should be about testing tactics/game mechanics to understand how the game works and what playing approaches work the best and not about competing with others.
Lapidus said: @dzek, imagine, one person puts a lot of efforts, hundreds of hours of playing and testing things, in creating a tactic and when he finds something that works incredible he brings the tactic here for a testing and gets a very good score 60 Points or 1.58 PPG whatever number format you like.
Now, other person who doesn't have any clue about FM and who hasn't spent a single effort on testing anything just takes that tactic and makes one totally irrelevant tweak, I don't know like changing one irrelevant PI of GK that would make 0.000001% difference and than he puts this tweaked tactic for a testing and due to lucky RNG he gets 61 Points and 1.60 PPG.
So now that second person, who doesn't have any clue about FM and who hasn't spent a single effort on testing, has a "shiny badge" that tells everyone that this person is the best tactician and also, he's a better tactic than the first person who did all the job.
No... no... no... turning this place into a place where tacticians compete with each other is nonsense because you can't compete with someone if any moment he can take your works as his own and there're a lot of tactical settings that makes such small difference that even 4,000 matches RNG can be bigger than their impact.
I have full confidence that this place should be about testing tactics/game mechanics to understand how the game works and what playing approaches work the best and not about competing with others. Expand It was a problem I had thought about when I was writing this but I think there are ways to combat it.
For example, to have a proper distribution of these "badges"(as you said) there could be a weighting as to how many tactics A has posted compared to B and so that B who just made a small to minimal change to a tactic of A then B would not get more points than A. It could also be that in each new edition of the game these are reset.
I don't think of it as a competition but as a "reward" of the creator to the FM-Arena community and FM in general because surely many people enter the site as guests and follow the evolution of the tactics here.
It would be very pleasant to have others join this conversation, old and new, to hear different opinions.
I started playing FM 23 in November 2022, and this community has been a big help in helping me understand the game and how to create successful tactics. I agree with @Lapidus that FM-Arena is more about learning and understanding the game than ranking contributors or tactics. However, if we want to expand the forum's purpose (although I don't think it's necessary), I have a suggestion on how to do it.
Instead of giving one badge for high-scoring tactics, we could have different badges for different types of contributions. For example:
A "Tactician Badge" for people who come up with their own tactics. A "Tweaker Badge" for those who make small changes to tactics and get good results. A "Tester Badge" for people who thoroughly test and give feedback on tactics. An "Innovator Badge" for those who introduce new tactical ideas.
This way, we can recognize contributors with different levels of effort and expertise in a fair way.
sponsorkindest said: I started playing FM 23 in November 2022, and this community has been a big help in helping me understand the game and how to create successful tactics. I agree with @Lapidus that FM-Arena is more about learning and understanding the game than ranking contributors or tactics. However, if we want to expand the forum's purpose (although I don't think it's necessary), I have a suggestion on how to do it.
Instead of giving one badge for high-scoring tactics, we could have different badges for different types of contributions. For example:
A "Tactician Badge" for people who come up with their own tactics. A "Tweaker Badge" for those who make small changes to tactics and get good results. A "Tester Badge" for people who thoroughly test and give feedback on tactics. An "Innovator Badge" for those who introduce new tactical ideas.
This way, we can recognize contributors with different levels of effort and expertise in a fair way. Expand Good idea!
My idea is just something additional. I just want to make it clear that the main purpose of the website will not be changed in any way.
We should reward exploration, trying new ideas and taking risks, not posting 12 versions of a cookie cutter tactics so you can get a shiny badge for highest point average. There is enough competition as it is, there is even a HoF category.
Also I think what you guys suggest is too subjective and not really worth the effort and policing and would only cause bad blood. Most of us who regularly visit the site know who are the "innovators", "tweakers" etc. anyway or at least for me personally who is who.
Yarema said: We should reward exploration, trying new ideas and taking risks, not posting 12 versions of a cookie cutter tactics so you can get a shiny badge for highest point average. There is enough competition as it is, there is even a HoF category.
Also I think what you guys suggest is too subjective and not really worth the effort and policing and would only cause bad blood. Most of us who regularly visit the site know who are the "innovators", "tweakers" etc. anyway or at least for me personally who is who. Expand You have a point here but since we don't have the testing league file available then it makes sense to try different variations of a tactic.
What I suggested is not competition but reward.
As @sponsorkindest said above this could be done like this: sponsorkindest said: A "Tactician Badge" for people who come up with their own tactics. A "Tweaker Badge" for those who make small changes to tactics and get good results. A "Tester Badge" for people who thoroughly test and give feedback on tactics. An "Innovator Badge" for those who introduce new tactical ideas. Expand
dzek said: You have a point here but since we don't have the testing league file available then it makes sense to try different variations of a tactic.
What I suggested is not competition but reward.
As @sponsorkindest said above this could be done like this: Expand
Problem of those points are : How you gonna reconize who come up with their own tactics and who didn't. There are people that are honest and others that for some reason come up with your same TI/PI from nowhere..
Yes, FM-Arena should somehow give more "space" to content creators, at the very moment as you can notice, just the first tactic is getting "views", rest are there to make numbers even tho the last one was the "base" of everything..
I would like the reward system, but idk how hard it is to be implement etc.
Delicious said: Problem of those points are : How you gonna reconize who come up with their own tactics and who didn't. There are people that are honest and others that for some reason come up with your same TI/PI from nowhere..
Yes, FM-Arena should somehow give more "space" to content creators, at the very moment as you can notice, just the first tactic is getting "views", rest are there to make numbers even tho the last one was the "base" of everything..
I would like the reward system, but idk how hard it is to be implement etc. Expand The issue of recognizing original tactics versus those that are copied is difficult for sure. Also it can be difficult to distinguish between honest creators and those who claim someone else's work as their own. In any case, promoting fairness and proper attribution should be a key focus to encourage original content and support original creators.
Recently I read those topics and i think there are some interesting answers there. If more people contribute to this conversation then we will find a way i believe.
Hi again!
I have an idea for the FM Arena devs to implement on the website.
It's me, Dzek
Following my previous suggestion to add "PPG" to the tactics table, it could be done in a different way and that would help more the visibility of both the website and the creators! Since this site is mainly for testing the tactics we create I would like to suggest some ideas and discuss them! So here are they:
1. Create a tab on our profiles called Tactics -> FM22, FM23, FM24, etc. and in each tab there should be the tactics we posted for each edition - this is mainly for a reorganisation of tactics according to the game rather than having them all on pages.
2. As managers in real life have PPG (Points Per Game) as a unit of measurement it would be useful for each creator in his/her profile or even when he/she opens a new thread or writes a comment on others threads to show his/her PPG from all the tactics he/she has tested in the testing league combined.
An example:
If I have posted two tactics for FM23 and one has got 1.34 PPG and the other 1.47 PPG then as a creator I have 1.41 points per game (PPG).
Thanks for your time!
PS I think you've got the whole idea but maybe if others join in we can build it even better. We will definitely need the participation of the devs of the website
@dzek, imagine, one person puts a lot of efforts, hundreds of hours of playing and testing things, in creating a tactic and when he finds something that works incredible he brings the tactic here for a testing and gets a very good score 60 Points or 1.58 PPG whatever number format you like.
Now, other person who doesn't have any clue about FM and who hasn't spent a single effort on testing anything just takes that tactic and makes one totally irrelevant tweak, I don't know like changing one irrelevant PI of GK that would make 0.000001% difference and than he puts this tweaked tactic for a testing and due to lucky RNG he gets 61 Points and 1.60 PPG.
So now that second person, who doesn't have any clue about FM and who hasn't spent a single effort on testing, has a "shiny badge" that tells everyone that this person is the best tactician and also, he's a better tactic than the first person who did all the job.
No... no... no... turning this place into a place where tacticians compete with each other is nonsense because you can't compete with someone if any moment he can take your works as his own and there're a lot of tactical settings that makes such small difference that even 4,000 matches RNG can be bigger than their impact.
I have full confidence that this place should be about testing tactics/game mechanics to understand how the game works and what playing approaches work the best and not about competing with others.
Lapidus said: @dzek, imagine, one person puts a lot of efforts, hundreds of hours of playing and testing things, in creating a tactic and when he finds something that works incredible he brings the tactic here for a testing and gets a very good score 60 Points or 1.58 PPG whatever number format you like.
Now, other person who doesn't have any clue about FM and who hasn't spent a single effort on testing anything just takes that tactic and makes one totally irrelevant tweak, I don't know like changing one irrelevant PI of GK that would make 0.000001% difference and than he puts this tweaked tactic for a testing and due to lucky RNG he gets 61 Points and 1.60 PPG.
So now that second person, who doesn't have any clue about FM and who hasn't spent a single effort on testing, has a "shiny badge" that tells everyone that this person is the best tactician and also, he's a better tactic than the first person who did all the job.
No... no... no... turning this place into a place where tacticians compete with each other is nonsense because you can't compete with someone if any moment he can take your works as his own and there're a lot of tactical settings that makes such small difference that even 4,000 matches RNG can be bigger than their impact.
I have full confidence that this place should be about testing tactics/game mechanics to understand how the game works and what playing approaches work the best and not about competing with others.
It was a problem I had thought about when I was writing this but I think there are ways to combat it.
For example, to have a proper distribution of these "badges"(as you said) there could be a weighting as to how many tactics A has posted compared to B and so that B who just made a small to minimal change to a tactic of A then B would not get more points than A. It could also be that in each new edition of the game these are reset.
I don't think of it as a competition but as a "reward" of the creator to the FM-Arena community and FM in general because surely many people enter the site as guests and follow the evolution of the tactics here.
It would be very pleasant to have others join this conversation, old and new, to hear different opinions.
I started playing FM 23 in November 2022, and this community has been a big help in helping me understand the game and how to create successful tactics. I agree with @Lapidus that FM-Arena is more about learning and understanding the game than ranking contributors or tactics. However, if we want to expand the forum's purpose (although I don't think it's necessary), I have a suggestion on how to do it.
Instead of giving one badge for high-scoring tactics, we could have different badges for different types of contributions. For example:
A "Tactician Badge" for people who come up with their own tactics.
A "Tweaker Badge" for those who make small changes to tactics and get good results.
A "Tester Badge" for people who thoroughly test and give feedback on tactics.
An "Innovator Badge" for those who introduce new tactical ideas.
This way, we can recognize contributors with different levels of effort and expertise in a fair way.
sponsorkindest said: I started playing FM 23 in November 2022, and this community has been a big help in helping me understand the game and how to create successful tactics. I agree with @Lapidus that FM-Arena is more about learning and understanding the game than ranking contributors or tactics. However, if we want to expand the forum's purpose (although I don't think it's necessary), I have a suggestion on how to do it.
Instead of giving one badge for high-scoring tactics, we could have different badges for different types of contributions. For example:
A "Tactician Badge" for people who come up with their own tactics.
A "Tweaker Badge" for those who make small changes to tactics and get good results.
A "Tester Badge" for people who thoroughly test and give feedback on tactics.
An "Innovator Badge" for those who introduce new tactical ideas.
This way, we can recognize contributors with different levels of effort and expertise in a fair way.
Good idea!
My idea is just something additional. I just want to make it clear that the main purpose of the website will not be changed in any way.
We should reward exploration, trying new ideas and taking risks, not posting 12 versions of a cookie cutter tactics so you can get a shiny badge for highest point average. There is enough competition as it is, there is even a HoF category.
Also I think what you guys suggest is too subjective and not really worth the effort and policing and would only cause bad blood. Most of us who regularly visit the site know who are the "innovators", "tweakers" etc. anyway or at least for me personally who is who.
Yarema said: We should reward exploration, trying new ideas and taking risks, not posting 12 versions of a cookie cutter tactics so you can get a shiny badge for highest point average. There is enough competition as it is, there is even a HoF category.
Also I think what you guys suggest is too subjective and not really worth the effort and policing and would only cause bad blood. Most of us who regularly visit the site know who are the "innovators", "tweakers" etc. anyway or at least for me personally who is who.
You have a point here but since we don't have the testing league file available then it makes sense to try different variations of a tactic.
What I suggested is not competition but reward.
As @sponsorkindest said above this could be done like this:
sponsorkindest said: A "Tactician Badge" for people who come up with their own tactics.
A "Tweaker Badge" for those who make small changes to tactics and get good results.
A "Tester Badge" for people who thoroughly test and give feedback on tactics.
An "Innovator Badge" for those who introduce new tactical ideas.
dzek said: You have a point here but since we don't have the testing league file available then it makes sense to try different variations of a tactic.
What I suggested is not competition but reward.
As @sponsorkindest said above this could be done like this:
Problem of those points are : How you gonna reconize who come up with their own tactics and who didn't.
There are people that are honest and others that for some reason come up with your same TI/PI from nowhere..
Yes, FM-Arena should somehow give more "space" to content creators, at the very moment as you can notice, just the first tactic is getting "views", rest are there to make numbers even tho the last one was the "base" of everything..
I would like the reward system, but idk how hard it is to be implement etc.
Delicious said: Problem of those points are : How you gonna reconize who come up with their own tactics and who didn't.
There are people that are honest and others that for some reason come up with your same TI/PI from nowhere..
Yes, FM-Arena should somehow give more "space" to content creators, at the very moment as you can notice, just the first tactic is getting "views", rest are there to make numbers even tho the last one was the "base" of everything..
I would like the reward system, but idk how hard it is to be implement etc.
The issue of recognizing original tactics versus those that are copied is difficult for sure. Also it can be difficult to distinguish between honest creators and those who claim someone else's work as their own. In any case, promoting fairness and proper attribution should be a key focus to encourage original content and support original creators.
Recently I read those topics and i think there are some interesting answers there. If more people contribute to this conversation then we will find a way i believe.