Football Manager or Find-the-Meta Manager

[batsy23]

Simple question: How is this tactic successful? 

I'm not trying to tarnish anyone. But i cannot understand. When i make a tactic with deep lying forward, inside forward, inverted wing, one fullback & one wingback, one mezzala with attacking duty & trying to play positive mentality, all i see is totally garbage. I'm trying to play a realistic game that suits my team. So, please look, this is my tactic: 

Is it so bad? Is it so ridiculous? Is it so stupid? I'm watching football, i'm playing football every friday, i think i know "football" and for me, this tactic suits my team well. But in the game, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE. Basel or Galatasaray, City or Blackburn, Santa Clara or AIK Stockholm, doesn't matter, this double mezzala full attacking & running tactic wins everyting. How? Why? 

I'm in the top spot because for test, last two match i use gyr's c'mon everybody run tactic. And of course it's "perfect". 

Question is simple: This is football manager or find-the-meta manager? I don't wanna go full attacking with everybody & score nonsense goals. I wanna play a tactical game. 

 

 

 

[whatsupdoc]

The top tactics are all, without exception, absolutely stupid. 

Go to the tactics forum and look at Knap's testing thread. All the top tactics effectively leave 2 players in defence.

- two attacking wing-backs

- two DMs with forward runs

- am (a)

Etc etc 

Most also use universal hard tackling, high pressing, high tempo, low crosses.

These are all massively overpowered regardless of attributes. i.e. it is better to cross low to a big striker, better to gegenpress with an unsuitable team etc etc etc.

Not to mention near post corners. 

This is a version of the game where football logic (as you are trying to apply) is almost completely out the window. If you try to use it, you put yourself at a massive disadvantage. 

Some simple logic still works. Like, if you have a big guy on the back post and cross to him, yay, it works. But overall trying to create a balanced system is no match for this hyper attacking BS which IRL would get smashed every second week.

Edited February 4 by whatsupdoc

[Rodrigogc]

20 minutos atrás, whatsupdoc disse:

The top tactics are all, without exception, absolutely stupid. 

Go to the tactics forum and look at Knap's testing thread. All the top tactics effectively leave 2 players in defence.

- two attacking wing-backs

- two DMs with forward runs

- am (a)

 

 

Isn't that how Bayern Munich plays with tuchel this season ? I'm not watching their games at all, but I saw people discussing how their DMs are not working togheter, etc.. yet in FM this tactic would steamroll Bundesliga with a squad as Bayern's. Their are getting the results, but 1st is Bayer Leverkusen play way more efficient football.

 

What I feel is that wing play is OP. I play Fulham with Palhinha as my Central Defender, my fullbacks are actually Central defenders, and one of them, Adarabioyo, is assisting more than my midfielders. Bizarre.

Edited February 3 by Rodrigogc

[whatsupdoc]

10 minutes ago, Rodrigogc said:

 

Isn't that how Bayern Munich plays with tuchel this season ? I'm not watching their games at all, but I saw people discussing how their DMs are not working togheter, etc.. yet in FM this tactic would steamroll Bundesliga with a squad as Bayern's. Their are getting the results, but 1st is Bayer Leverkusen play way more efficient football.

 

What I feel is that wing play is OP. I play Fulham with Palhinha as my Central Defender, my fullbacks are actually Central defenders, and one of them, Adarabioyo, is assisting more than my midfielders. Bizarre.

Haven't watched Bayern this year but coming 2nd with that squad isn't a great advertisement. 

[whatsupdoc]

Some of the top tactics based on Knap's testing:

[whatsupdoc]

 

Refer to his thread linked above.

[whatsupdoc]

I haven't looked super deeply at why these types of tactics are so strong, or at why reasonable tactics are so frustrating. The first places I'd look though would be:

- in possession in defence, very high number of mistakes on the ball. 

- defending 1v1 players let their opponents past them too easily. 

- stopping crosses is not effective enough. If teams focus on it they can get massive numbers of crosses per game. 

- attackers score too many difficult chances especially from low crosses. Even a backup GK can regularly score first time shots from low crosses on his weak foot. 

- generally speaking, you're overly vulnerable with the ball in your half. They're overly vulnerable with the ball in their half. 

- there is not enough weight given to critical zones of the pitch. Abandoning defensive or central midfield areas doesn't seem to cause enough problems. 

Edited February 3 by whatsupdoc

[Rodrigogc]

9 minutos atrás, whatsupdoc disse:

I haven't looked super deeply at why these types of tactics are so strong, or at why reasonable tactics are so frustrating. The first places I'd look though would be:

- in possession in defence, very high number of mistakes on the ball.  

- there is not enough weight given to critical zones of the pitch. Abandoning defensive or central midfield areas doesn't seem to cause enough problems. 

- 1st one: Must be the reason why pressing is so effective. Some sort of compensation, since possession in defence is weak, pressing will be OP. 

-2nd one: Must be the reason why tactics with CM-at and Mezzala-at work so much. You abandon the midfield and attack the area. If you have more attackers on the final third than the opposition defence, you will score. This was a problem in FM23 as well. 

 

What is even more bizarre to me is that football work the other way around actually. In any sport you first try to control the midfield, even in chess works this way. In FM this logic does not apply, which is illogical. I watch a lot of full matches, and I simply don't understand why the tip of the opposition area is almost bypassed when you're in possession. Players simply hoof the ball or play wide. You can see space there from your screen, but the players in the pitch can't. The space seems tighter to them than it truly is. In the central midfield, opposition cast a bigger shadow than they should, in the wide areas of the pitch, opposition cast no shadow at all. Sometimes Wing backs and wingers simply go on carrying the ball without any obstacle and cross the ball easily. 

[whatsupdoc]

1 hour ago, Rodrigogc said:

- 1st one: Must be the reason why pressing is so effective. Some sort of compensation, since possession in defence is weak, pressing will be OP. 

-2nd one: Must be the reason why tactics with CM-at and Mezzala-at work so much. You abandon the midfield and attack the area. If you have more attackers on the final third than the opposition defence, you will score. This was a problem in FM23 as well. 

 

What is even more bizarre to me is that football work the other way around actually. In any sport you first try to control the midfield, even in chess works this way. In FM this logic does not apply, which is illogical. I watch a lot of full matches, and I simply don't understand why the tip of the opposition area is almost bypassed when you're in possession. Players simply hoof the ball or play wide. You can see space there from your screen, but the players in the pitch can't. The space seems tighter to them than it truly is. In the central midfield, opposition cast a bigger shadow than they should, in the wide areas of the pitch, opposition cast no shadow at all. Sometimes Wing backs and wingers simply go on carrying the ball without any obstacle and cross the ball easily. 

Yeah that kind of thing...

The reason I suggest those as the first place to look are:

 

- in possession in defence, very high number of mistakes on the ball. 

• low tempo systems which recylce possession using defenders seem underpowered. 
• high tempo systems or systems which get the ball forward to numbers in advanced areas seem to work better than those that build up.

- defending 1v1 players let their opponents past them too easily. 

• This has been an issue since 24.0. 
• More direct systems which put defenders 1v1 repeatedly seem OP.

- stopping crosses is not effective enough. If teams focus on it they can get massive numbers of crosses per game. 

• Basing this on what a guy in our network save is doing. Playing as villa 2nd season and he's found a way to get 70 crosses per game and is just annihilating all the top teams by 6+ goals on the way to a quadruple: 

- attackers score too many difficult chances especially from low crosses. Even a backup GK can regularly score first time shots from low crosses on his weak foot. 

• I've tested it. 

- generally speaking, you're overly vulnerable with the ball in your half. They're overly vulnerable with the ball in their half. 

- there is not enough weight given to critical zones of the pitch. Abandoning defensive or central midfield areas doesn't seem to cause enough problems. 

• Again, I've done a couple of initial tests on it: 

 

I don't know what can be done about any of the above realistically...

Recreating football with it's trillions of moments and possibilities is a truly impossible task.

Edited February 4 by whatsupdoc

[batsy23]

8 saat önce, whatsupdoc said:

The top tactics are all, without exception, absolutely stupid. 

Go to the tactics forum and look at Knap's testing thread. All the top tactics effectively leave 2 players in defence.

- two attacking wing-backs

- two DMs with forward runs

- am (a)

Etc etc 

Most also use universal hard tackling, high pressing, high tempo, low crosses.

These are all massively overpowered regardless of attributes. i.e. it is better to cross low to a big striker, better to gegenpress with an unsuitable team etc etc etc.

Not to mention near post corners. 

This is a version of the game where football logic (as you are trying to apply) is almost completely out the window. If you try to use it, you put yourself at a massive disadvantage. 

Some simple logic still works. Like, if you have a big guy on the back post and cross to him, yay, it works. But overall trying to create a balanced system is no match for this hyper attacking BS which IRL would get smashed every second week.

Unfortunately, you're right. I said unfortunately because you're right and this is not how football works. Of course maybe last five or ten minutes you can send your two wingbacks to the attack, use your midfielders like amc and high press every part of the pitch but you can't do this 90 minute or you can't do this with every team. I try this gyr433 tactic with basel, blackburn, galatasaray and santa clara and results are perfect. Doesn't matter who is your players. Is your wingback can't drible? No problem because you can't lose with this type of tactics. Hard tackle, high press, attacking, both midfielders with attack duties etc. It's bad. Really bad. And i stop playing because this isn't "football manager" anymore. This is "play the way we want manager". 

 

7 saat önce, Rodrigogc said:

 

Isn't that how Bayern Munich plays with tuchel this season ? I'm not watching their games at all, but I saw people discussing how their DMs are not working togheter, etc.. yet in FM this tactic would steamroll Bundesliga with a squad as Bayern's. Their are getting the results, but 1st is Bayer Leverkusen play way more efficient football.

 

What I feel is that wing play is OP. I play Fulham with Palhinha as my Central Defender, my fullbacks are actually Central defenders, and one of them, Adarabioyo, is assisting more than my midfielders. Bizarre.

Not exactly. And Bayern's attacking mentality it has its own logic. For transition defence, they got kim-min jae, davies and sacha boey. So most of the time, they send too many players to the attack because this players are crazy fast. They can go back quickly. But even bayern does not go attacking with everybody all the time. And of course blackburn, gala, aik stockholm or santa clara isn't bayern. But with this type of tactics, you can do almost everything with any team. 

 

7 saat önce, whatsupdoc said:

Some of the top tactics based on Knap's testing:

This knap tactics kills me. If this is football, I don't like football. If this is football manager, i never wanna play again football manager. How? How you can send your both wingback, midfielders, wingers to the attack and high pressing 90 minutes? Are you playing with hulk, thanos, flash, thor and spiderman? You can't do this with humans. This type of tactics kills me. And the problem is not that they work. The problem is, you need to play like this. If you don't, you're in a nightmare.

 

6 saat önce, Rodrigogc said:

- 1st one: Must be the reason why pressing is so effective. Some sort of compensation, since possession in defence is weak, pressing will be OP. 

-2nd one: Must be the reason why tactics with CM-at and Mezzala-at work so much. You abandon the midfield and attack the area. If you have more attackers on the final third than the opposition defence, you will score. This was a problem in FM23 as well. 

 

What is even more bizarre to me is that football work the other way around actually. In any sport you first try to control the midfield, even in chess works this way. In FM this logic does not apply, which is illogical. I watch a lot of full matches, and I simply don't understand why the tip of the opposition area is almost bypassed when you're in possession. Players simply hoof the ball or play wide. You can see space there from your screen, but the players in the pitch can't. The space seems tighter to them than it truly is. In the central midfield, opposition cast a bigger shadow than they should, in the wide areas of the pitch, opposition cast no shadow at all. Sometimes Wing backs and wingers simply go on carrying the ball without any obstacle and cross the ball easily. 

This. 

In this game, you don't need to control anything. You need to RUN AND SMASH. Why? Because developers want this way. I Quit fifa years ago because of this. I don't wanna beat zidane, george best, xavi and kevin de bruyne with henry onyekuru and adama traore. In real life football, "meta" is controlling the midfield, choose players for rest defence, attack & transition. If you choose wisely and do little tweaks in time, you're good. But in the football manager, doesn't matter who is in your squad. Go attacking, high press every side, doesn't control anything. This kills the immersion for me. C'mon, even in our friday 7-a-side matchs we wanna control the midfield first. 

 

6 saat önce, whatsupdoc said:

Yeah that kind of thing...

The reason I suggest those as the first place to look are:

 

- in possession in defence, very high number of mistakes on the ball. 

• low tempo systems which recylce possession using defenders seem underpowered. 
• high tempo systems or systems which get the ball forward to numbers in advanced areas seem to work better than those that build up.

- defending 1v1 players let their opponents past them too easily. 

• This has been an issue since 24.0. 
• More direct systems which put defenders 1v1 repeatedly seem OP.

- stopping crosses is not effective enough. If teams focus on it they can get massive numbers of crosses per game. 

• Basing this on what a guy in our network save is doing. Playing as villa 2nd season and he's found a way to get 70 crosses per game and is just annihilating all the top teams by 6+ goals on the way to a quadruple: 

- attackers score too many difficult chances especially from low crosses. Even a backup GK can regularly score first time shots from low crosses on his weak foot. 

• I've tested it. 

- generally speaking, you're overly vulnerable with the ball in your half. They're overly vulnerable with the ball in their half. 

- there is not enough weight given to critical zones of the pitch. Abandoning defensive or central midfield areas doesn't seem to cause enough problems. 

• Again, I've done a couple of initial tests on it: 

 

I don't know what can be done about any of the above realistically...

Recreating football with it's trillions of moments and possibilities is a truly impossible task.

Whoever did this one-libero tactic should be tried in court...

I'm not crying, i'm sad because i lost my ambition for football manager. I think what happened to FIFA also happens to football manager. Same road, same mistakes. I'm screaming for two things. First, please correct me if i'm wrong. Second, i don't wanna lose football manager. This game is gave us memories, joy, sadness, even proud. I don't wanna lose my beautiful Football manager playtimes. But if that's the way, i cannot walk this road. Because i don't believe this is football.

Edited February 4 by batsy23
Some addings

[whatsupdoc]

24 minutes ago, batsy23 said:

I'm not crying, i'm sad because i lost my ambition for football manager. I think what happened to FIFA also happens to football manager. Same road, same mistakes. I'm screaming for two things. First, please correct me if i'm wrong. Second, i don't wanna lose football manager. This game is gave us memories, joy, sadness, even proud. I don't wanna lose my beautiful Football manager playtimes. But if that's the way, i cannot walk this road. Because i don't believe this is football.

 

I'd suggest you wait for the 3rd patch, the game is usually playable by then. This time however many of the devs seem to have moved on to fm25 so who knows. 

FM24 may be one for the purists to forget...

[batsy23]

I know usually last patch fixed too many thing but i have two question: Why always we need to wait last patch? And if the product they make is fm24, how can they say "please buy fm25"? 

[DC2525]

18 hours ago, whatsupdoc said:

Yeah that kind of thing...

The reason I suggest those as the first place to look are:

 

- in possession in defence, very high number of mistakes on the ball. 

• low tempo systems which recylce possession using defenders seem underpowered. 
• high tempo systems or systems which get the ball forward to numbers in advanced areas seem to work better than those that build up.

- defending 1v1 players let their opponents past them too easily. 

• This has been an issue since 24.0. 
• More direct systems which put defenders 1v1 repeatedly seem OP.

- stopping crosses is not effective enough. If teams focus on it they can get massive numbers of crosses per game. 

• Basing this on what a guy in our network save is doing. Playing as villa 2nd season and he's found a way to get 70 crosses per game and is just annihilating all the top teams by 6+ goals on the way to a quadruple: 

- attackers score too many difficult chances especially from low crosses. Even a backup GK can regularly score first time shots from low crosses on his weak foot. 

• I've tested it. 

- generally speaking, you're overly vulnerable with the ball in your half. They're overly vulnerable with the ball in their half. 

- there is not enough weight given to critical zones of the pitch. Abandoning defensive or central midfield areas doesn't seem to cause enough problems. 

• Again, I've done a couple of initial tests on it: 

 

I don't know what can be done about any of the above realistically...

Recreating football with it's trillions of moments and possibilities is a truly impossible task.

What are the instructions your friend is  using to get so many crosses in? 

[whatsupdoc]

1 hour ago, DC2525 said:

What are the instructions your friend is  using to get so many crosses in? 

He's not my friend, I'd like to see his empire in tatters. 

[batsy23]

I'm looking this knap & ridiculous one libero tactic again. gyr 433 too. Again, i cannot understand. Right now, i'm watcing real madrid-atletico madrid game. Real scores 3 minute ago. Real starts with overwhelming pressure but they do it with low tempo! When they're in possession, they're lower the tempo and using the ball. They're carrying the ball into box; sometimes with short passes, sometimes with mid-distance crosses. They're holding the midfield and they're using their right back for rest defence. I understand this football. They're using the right wing, holding the ball, run smart. How can you do this in fm24? High press, tackle harder, attacking mentality, dribble more, passes into space. Same thing. I cannot understand this. I regret using double mezzala with attack duty. This is not normal. This is not logical. And for me, this is not football. Everybody loves adel taarabt, ronaldinho & this epic skillset but nobody using them in the midfield with mezzala(a) together. 

Edited February 4 by batsy23

[whatsupdoc]

5 minutes ago, batsy23 said:

I'm looking this knap & ridiculous one libero tactic again. gyr 433 too. Again, i cannot understand. Right now, i'm watcing real madrid-atletico madrid game. Real scores 3 minute ago. Real starts with overwhelming pressure but they do it with low tempo! When they're in possession, they're lower the tempo and using the ball. They're carrying the ball into box; sometimes with short passes, sometimes with mid-distance crosses. They're holding the midfield and they're using their right back for rest defence. I understand this football. They're using the right wing, holding the ball, run smart. How can you do this in fm24? High press, tackle harder, attacking mentality, dribble more, passes into space. Same thing. I cannot understand this. I regret using double mezzala with attack duty. This is not normal. This is not logical. And for me, this is not football. Everybody loves adel taarabt, ronaldinho & this epic skillset but nobody using them in the midfield with mezzala(a) together. 

The one libero tactic I made to prove a point: that the ME does not give enough weight to certain critical zones.

Namely, central defence and central midfield. 

[Rodrigogc]

9 minutos atrás, whatsupdoc disse:

The one libero tactic I made to prove a point: that the ME does not give enough weight to certain critical zones.

Namely, central defence and central midfield. 

 

It is absolute insanity that center midfield is not more important than other zones in the field. Teams in football always try to attack through the center by default, that is why the opposition always congest this zone. Attacking wide zones serves the purpose to open space in the center zones. This is basic football.  I mean, look at all the great teams in 21th century football. You won't see bad midfielders, you will see the best ones, because they will control the center, hence controlling the game.

 

Milan with pirlo seedorf kaka, Real madrid with casemiro kroos modric, Barcelona with busquets xavi iniesta.. The  fact that you can use roles where players will burst forward with no regard to initial position should be easily exploited by the AI. Teams like that will leave space in the whole center midfield, any basic coach will be able to exploit it. Space in the center is all that players look for.

 

 

Somebody should try out a tactic like that, I doubt it won't work given the state of the game. I just made it up for fun.  

[batsy23]

21 dakika önce, whatsupdoc said:

The one libero tactic I made to prove a point: that the ME does not give enough weight to certain critical zones.

Namely, central defence and central midfield. 

If i made this tactic just for fun and i win, i'll close the game immediatly. This isn't true. It's wrong in every ways. People doesn't understand this: FM community is different. Most of the players got crazy ambition for football and managing. And when we see something like that, it's broke our hearts. 

 

2 dakika önce, Rodrigogc said:

 

It is absolute insanity that center midfield is not more important than other zones in the field. Teams in football always try to attack through the center by default, that is why the opposition always congest this zone. Attacking wide zones serves the purpose to open space in the center zones. This is basic football.  I mean, look at all the great teams in 21th century football. You won't see bad midfielders, you will see the best ones, because they will control the center, hence controlling the game.

 

Milan with pirlo seedorf kaka, Real madrid with casemiro kroos modric, Barcelona with busquets xavi iniesta.. The  fact that you can use roles where players will burst forward with no regard to initial position should be easily exploited by the AI. Teams like that will leave space in the whole center midfield, any basic coach will be able to exploit it. Space in the center is all that players look for.

 

 

Somebody should try out a tactic like that, I doubt it won't work given the state of the game. I just made it up for fun.  

You can use double mezzala or central midfielder with attack role, you can go to the attack like there is no tomorrow. Nobody can't touch you. Massive flanks in midfield? Not a problem, of course you can run like hell in every side of the pitch. But if you try a solid defensive midfielder with a box to box & mezzala with attack duty, no. Why?  Because your box to box midfielder isn't going attack like there is no tomorrow. And of course you need to play with high tempo, attacking, high press, high line. Wingers, midfielders, striker, everybody needs to go attacking. You can't use your dlp for link up and score with your mezzala and inside forward. You need to go to the attack with your whole team.

[warlock]

1 hour ago, batsy23 said:

if you try a solid defensive midfielder with a box to box & mezzala with attack duty, no. Why?  Because your box to box midfielder isn't going attack like there is no tomorrow. And of course you need to play with high tempo, attacking, high press, high line. Wingers, midfielders, striker, everybody needs to go attacking

Would you stop this nonsense.

I've just won the Championship with Southampton; we played this tactic pretty much all season:

As you can see it does exactly what you say doesn't work - it's not all-out attacking, high tempo, relentless pressing. It does use a solid DM, attacking mez, and my IF was my leading scorer. We lost one game all season:

 

[Rodrigogc]

16 minutos atrás, warlock disse:

Would you stop this nonsense.

I've just won the Championship with Southampton; we played this tactic pretty much all season:

As you can see it does exactly what you say doesn't work - it's not all-out attacking, high tempo, relentless pressing. It does use a solid DM, attacking mez, and my IF was my leading scorer. We lost one game all season:

 

What I just saw in your tactic is exactly attacking team (positve mentality combined with the TIs you gave is attacking anyway), high tempo (slightly higher tempo is high tempo anyway), pressing (higher defensive line, step up more, more often is pressing anyway), 2 mezzalas (exactly what we've been discussing). Your tactic is basically what people are complaining about, the type of tactic that the AI won't be able to stop. The fact that you lost 1 game the whole season says it all.

Edited February 4 by Rodrigogc

[warlock]

1 hour ago, Rodrigogc said:

What I just saw in your tactic is exactly attacking team

More nonsense  Positive is attacking? Mid-block is high press? Step up more is high press? Slightly higher tempo is high tempo? Pure nonsense! And you'll need to explain how a mez on support is an exploit while B2B isn't.

 

[Kewan]

The ME doesn't simulate IRL football managing, at all. I just can't stand the OP 4-2-3-1 using 2DM on support and 2 FB/WB on Attack. Ah! Also the "realistic" assymetric tactics are very good too, specially with 2 positions, that according to the in-game tips doesn't match AM/AF on attack duty but still...they are the best atm. Better wait for another patch.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, warlock said:

Would you stop this nonsense.

I've just won the Championship with Southampton; we played this tactic pretty much all season:

As you can see it does exactly what you say doesn't work - it's not all-out attacking, high tempo, relentless pressing. It does use a solid DM, attacking mez, and my IF was my leading scorer. We lost one game all season:

 

It's not simply about attacking mentality. With 2 mezzalas roaming out of position and one static DM on defensive duty with hold position, this tactic should result in huge gaps in midfield. Not to mention other less than ideal things: 2 wingbacks with focus down both flanks (i.e. even higher mentality) - with the static DLP-D presumably the only cover (whilst also covering for the mezzalas!). Wingback (on higher mentality) on the same flank as a winger, mezzala and IF attacking the same channel (maybe the integrated positional play prevents this from happening?). Then you have wider coupled with counterpress and trap outside. So the players are typically in a wide build-up (positive + fairly wide). What happens when they lose the ball? They are instructed to counterpress (they must cover more distance owing to the wide starting position), and, if that fails, retreat back to protect the middle. Those instructions should absolutely knacker your players out. Such tactics shouldn't be that successful, not even when playing favourites.

[batsy23]

8 saat önce, warlock said:

Would you stop this nonsense.

I've just won the Championship with Southampton; we played this tactic pretty much all season:

As you can see it does exactly what you say doesn't work - it's not all-out attacking, high tempo, relentless pressing. It does use a solid DM, attacking mez, and my IF was my leading scorer. We lost one game all season:

 

Unfortunately, you're proving what i said again. Higher defensive line, step up more, counter press, slightly higher tempo, double mezzala. You're using double mezzala and you're southampton. if it's normal for you, ok. And don't be rude. You can't talk to anyone like that. I won't answer you until you speak in more respectful language.

 

6 saat önce, Kewan said:

The ME doesn't simulate IRL football managing, at all. I just can't stand the OP 4-2-3-1 using 2DM on support and 2 FB/WB on Attack. Ah! Also the "realistic" assymetric tactics are very good too, specially with 2 positions, that according to the in-game tips doesn't match AM/AF on attack duty but still...they are the best atm. Better wait for another patch.

I think we're on the same page. I can't stand too. Did you watch galatasaray-bayern munich matches this year? galatasaray is really good, they're pressing & running 90 minutes. They're lost but they're really good. But when they returning the local league, smaller clubs plays against galatasaray in deep. And Galatasaray had difficulty opening the teams. But in fm, doesn't matter. If you use some "meta things", you'll be allright. You can use your double mezzala in the midfielder. Who's winning the ball? Your attack duty wingers/wingbacks and mezzalas. Who's in the rest defence or holding the midfield? What is holding the midfield? We're waiting another patch but it's same story always. And they will say "buy fm25". Why? How? How we can trust this company?

 

4 saat önce, Ein said:

It's not simply about attacking mentality. With 2 mezzalas roaming out of position and one static DM on defensive duty with hold position, this tactic should result in huge gaps in midfield. Not to mention other less than ideal things: 2 wingbacks with focus down both flanks (i.e. even higher mentality) - with the static DLP-D presumably the only cover (whilst also covering for the mezzalas!). Wingback (on higher mentality) on the same flank as a winger, mezzala and IF attacking the same channel (maybe the integrated positional play prevents this from happening?). Then you have wider coupled with counterpress and trap outside. So the players are typically in a wide build-up (positive + fairly wide). What happens when they lose the ball? They are instructed to counterpress (they must cover more distance owing to the wide starting position), and, if that fails, retreat back to protect the middle. Those instructions should absolutely knacker your players out. Such tactics shouldn't be that successful, not even when playing favourites.

Thank you very much. This double mezzala thing is very unrealistic. Maybe, maybe if you're an elite plus team, you can combine this with ball winning midfielder in dm + double inverted wingbacks with defend or support role. If you're desperate and elite + team, maybe. You said huge gaps in the midfield. You're right, but in fm, this huge gaps isn't important. When mezzala's on the attack & dlp is sitting deep, this gap is at least 30-40m distance. But there is no problem because higher defensive line & pressing more often solves everything.

[forameuss]

It's not exactly surprising that an incredibly complicated match engine has weaknesses like this.  In that sense, it would be more surprising if unrealistic input didn't lead to unrealistic output.  Obviously that's the aim, but you're in for some disappointment if that's your minimum standard.

A lot of people need to get away from holding a close comparison between real life and the game.  Again, the ideal is obviously that they're very closely aligned, but that's unlikely to ever happen.

[batsy23]

2 saat önce, forameuss said:

It's not exactly surprising that an incredibly complicated match engine has weaknesses like this.  In that sense, it would be more surprising if unrealistic input didn't lead to unrealistic output.  Obviously that's the aim, but you're in for some disappointment if that's your minimum standard.

A lot of people need to get away from holding a close comparison between real life and the game.  Again, the ideal is obviously that they're very closely aligned, but that's unlikely to ever happen.

The problem is that there have been years when the game allowed for other styles. If you had the right players for the tactic you had in mind, or if you found the right tactic for the players you had, you could be successful with tight control. Is the opposing team attacking from the right wing? You would take extra precautions in that direction. Look at the meta tactics, the overwhelming majority say they skip the opposition instructions. This community doesn't wanna "play" "real football" in the "game." We just want this: If we have physically strong winger in our team, we just wanna use him for opponent's weak winger. But this game says no, if the opponent pressing hard, tackle hard, running everywhere, pass into space and using attack mentality, nothing is important. 

We want to think, create, imagine, select right tactics first and after, select right players for our dreams. We want this because football manager gave us this. We didn't wake up one morning with such a desire. In fm13, i win the bundesliga with hoffenheim. I use 3 amc because i have great personel for this. Game allows me for this. In fm23, i used low tempo for Galatasaray and it worked! Why? Because i got the right personel for this. I can give countless examples. I've been playing this game for years and have enjoyed it with many different formations and many different teams. 

I don't want real life. I just want to think, create, imagine and build. 

[turnip]

I do think that some formations are too strong at the moment - the 4-2-3-1(DM) formation mentioned is the absolute worst right now for a number of reasons - but this is always the case for at least one formation in FM. The difference is that the AI is better now at identifying strong tactics, which means that more managers seem to use them. In previous FMs, a head coach would tend to stick to their preferred formation, even if it was complete rubbish. 

[batsy23]

28 dakika önce, turnip said:

I do think that some formations are too strong at the moment - the 4-2-3-1(DM) formation mentioned is the absolute worst right now for a number of reasons - but this is always the case for at least one formation in FM. The difference is that the AI is better now at identifying strong tactics, which means that more managers seem to use them. In previous FMs, a head coach would tend to stick to their preferred formation, even if it was complete rubbish. 

There is no problem in the fact that it is easier to set up 4-3-3. Of course finding a dm is easier than finding a raumdeuter or maybe defensive winger. You can easily set up a solid 4-3-3. And after this, you upgrade some players, maybe some tweaks and in-game changes. That is football manager. And of course you keep the morale high with the tactical stuff. But in fm, some one libero all amc formation can destroy your tactic with high tempo, attacking mentality, attacking duties and high press. Why? Because game dictates this. I cannot understand this. I cannot accept this. 

[Malicious Penguin]

Personally, if SI were to go through Knap's thread and use their internal data with it, they'd be able to at the very least look at the flaws in the ME.

[batsy23]

 

20 dakika önce, Malicious Penguin said:

Personally, if SI were to go through Knap's thread and use their internal data with it, they'd be able to at the very least look at the flaws in the ME.

I doubt about their willingness to do this. Unfortunately, there's a lot of people who likes to say "it's your tactics". Secondly, they are always looking for proof of the obvious. I guarantee you, I would happily deal with this if I knew there would be a solution. But in the end, generally they say "there's nothing wrong". 

[Bahnzo]

3 hours ago, batsy23 said:

there's a lot of people who likes to say "it's your tactics". 

I can't tell you how much I'm starting to hate this. Ask any question about the game? "You need to show us your tactic" as if that's the answer to everything. 

[batsy23]

 

10 saat önce, Bahnzo said:

I can't tell you how much I'm starting to hate this. Ask any question about the game? "You need to show us your tactic" as if that's the answer to everything. 

And usually, whenever you show your tactics, they criticize based on the match engine, not the football. This is my question, is it find-the-meta/play like match engine wants or football manager? I show my tactic on the first post, i have right personal and this is a good tactic for me. It's frustrating that the criticism is about the match engine, not football. 

[forameuss]

It's almost like it's a game, and the best way to assess a tactic is going to be how it interacts with the core of said game, and not a sport it is only loosely modelling.

[DolphinSpain]

1 hour ago, forameuss said:

It's almost like it's a game, and the best way to assess a tactic is going to be how it interacts with the core of said game, and not a sport it is only loosely modelling.

And yet I can guarantee that if knap went on to show his tactics before ever using them, and asked the same opinion of whether they would work or not, he would be met with a resounding no, and that he should make changes as they aren't good tacitcs. Now, I don't mean good as in the ethos of the game, I mean good as in successful. 

Edited February 6 by DolphinSpain

[AntSou]

On 03/02/2024 at 20:33, batsy23 said:

Simple question: How is this tactic successful? 

I'm not trying to tarnish anyone. But i cannot understand. When i make a tactic with deep lying forward, inside forward, inverted wing, one fullback & one wingback, one mezzala with attacking duty & trying to play positive mentality, all i see is totally garbage. I'm trying to play a realistic game that suits my team. So, please look, this is my tactic: 

Is it so bad? Is it so ridiculous? Is it so stupid? I'm watching football, i'm playing football every friday, i think i know "football" and for me, this tactic suits my team well. But in the game, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE. Basel or Galatasaray, City or Blackburn, Santa Clara or AIK Stockholm, doesn't matter, this double mezzala full attacking & running tactic wins everyting. How? Why? 

I'm in the top spot because for test, last two match i use gyr's c'mon everybody run tactic. And of course it's "perfect". 

Question is simple: This is football manager or find-the-meta manager? I don't wanna go full attacking with everybody & score nonsense goals. I wanna play a tactical game. 

 

 

 

 

Watch it in full match so that you can tell exactly where the screw ups are occurring. My suspicion:

- Your DLF is overly isolated and is not sufficiently effective as he doesn't have anyone to pass the ball to, other than Gabriel Silva;

- Your Inverted Winger on the right is not making sufficient runs through the middle to support Martins and Silva because you're instructing him to old the ball and wait for an overlap on the right... which often will probably just result in him losing the ball or Lucas Soares not finding a target with his crosses. You're also already "working the ball into the box", so the extra instruction might be too much.

- Try to narrow the field to bring the IF closer to the DLF;

- Is your BPD actually being helpful, or just screwing things up?

 

Mine isn't too different from yours and it works (ignore the "custom wing play". It's got little left of that preset tactic.)

 

[CAE82]

The ‘meta’ tactics are essentially a form of primitive machine learning.

The match engine is obviously just a simulation of football. Tactics are then trained on this model and you end up with an ‘optimised’ solution of the match engine that produces the most points/GD (or whatever target you wish to define as being ‘successful’)

There is no saying that this solution will work on a real-life model and resemble real-world football tactics. 

This is just the same as with all simulation software. Just look at the COVID-19 modelling that was used to decide government policy and how COVID-19 actually played out in reality.

The match engine is clearly not a perfectly accurate model of football; but to be fair to SI, I’ve not come across  or heard of a better one on the planet? Even other sports. Overall it does a pretty good job of simulating an 11 vs 11 team sport over a period of 90 minutes.

If you want a perfect simulation of a game, then probably the best bet is a 1 vs 1 game of Chess!

[santy001]

Do people actually find tactics they download are anywhere near as effective in their own gameplay as they are in the "testing" that pops up? A lot of the tactic testing methodologies leave an awful lot to be desired. It's partly why they're of so little use to SI overall I feel. 

Any game that has thousands of minds throwing their collective effort at it will have a meta emerge though. FM isn't some rare exception, games just can't stand up to that level of scrutiny and not fold in some way.

[CAE82]

28 minutes ago, santy001 said:

A lot of the tactic testing methodologies leave an awful lot to be desired. It's partly why they're of so little use to SI overall I feel. 

I'd be interested in you expanding on this. In your opinion, what are the main flaws in testing? How would you improve on them?

Overall, I'd say tactic testing has a massive and important place in the FM Community. FM is a very deep and complex game. Sure, some members have been playing CM/FM for 25+ years and so have kept up with the (often very minor!) increments between editions. But for a completely new player it must be extremely over-whelming and it's kind of a given that it will take several years/thousands of hours of gameplay to get a deep feel for the FM game world.

Let's be honest, apart from the default Gegenpressing template tactics, has anyone had any success with the others? I'd love to see an example of someone winning the league, even with PSG, using the 'Park The Bus' templates. That is where tactic testing has come in useful. It has helped to identify the 'meta' formations and instructions that people can now use to help them get success. I don't believe full 'Plug & Play' exploits like Diablo exist anymore, but it is clear that certain 'meta' things do work and these tactcs are a much better starting point than the default template tactics.

Of course, there are plenty of purists who turn their noses up at this approach. But FM is a game and if someone spends their hard-earned cash on a game then they are entitled to play it how they see fit. Not everyone has the time nor inclination to micro-manage each aspect of the game and play each match on comprehensive highlights. If someone wants to grab a 'meta' tactic and use it, then good luck to them and I hope they enjoy the game.

I will say that testing needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. FM is pretty much a chaotic system and the same input can give wildly different outputs. But when a tactic has been tested with multiple teams and over hundreds/thousands of games, then there is some weight in the results. But a player needs to use that tactic and ensure they build a squad that suits it and keeps the squad happy and fit etc. Once you do that, then success will often follow.

Another 'pinch of salt' that needs to be taken into account is the creator themselves. I'm personally a bit suspcious of creators who use their testing results to sell their YouTube channels/Patreons etc. Anyone who has a vested financial interest in their tactic doing well should be approached with caution...but the creators who have freely released their tactics to the community for years for no gain and consistently get positive feedback deserve all the credit and praise that they receive.

[santy001]

Frozen morale, frozen condition/jadedness, frozen CA, normalising player stats, normalising coach stats. Some formations test reasonably well when you have a Day 1 of the season squad all year long. Also strips out player development/regression and often times negates the huge differences between squads and what they have in terms of support structure. 

Often times the particular testing method used is unclear so its not particularly informative to see the results since you then don't know how they got from point A to point B. It isn't necessarily cynical (although there can be situations you highlight where it may be) but rather just operating from such a flawed base point it has little semblance to an actual average played experience. 

It also means there are very few who actually produce effective tactics that your side can utilise when weary on game 3 of the week or game 10 of the month. A lot of users who download or follow these metas then get frustrated when middle of the season they're playing some lower end team who have less fixtures who end up beating them on the counter because they're fresher later in the game. 

[forameuss]

Put simply, it's going to be incredibly difficult for any user outside of SI to perform a truly useful test on anything.  Ideally you keep everything you don't care about constant, then only change whatever it is you want to test.  You simply can't do the first part to a reliable enough degree to make the second part particularly reliable.  It's not for want of trying, of course, some people are going to do the best they possibly can in the situation, but still, they're all going to be flawed to some degree, and some will be extremely flawed.

[CAE82]

10 minutes ago, santy001 said:

Frozen morale, frozen condition/jadedness, frozen CA, normalising player stats, normalising coach stats

Your point expands on my point below.

1 hour ago, CAE82 said:

The match engine is obviously just a simulation of football. Tactics are then trained on this model and you end up with an ‘optimised’ solution of the match engine that produces the most points/GD (or whatever target you wish to define as being ‘successful’)

The point of doing those things is to keep things consistent, so the test of the match engine is more fair and comparative. Tactics tested like this help to identify 'weaknesses' in the match engine that are possibly open to exploit and can lead to success.

However, as we all know, the FM 'game world' is much bigger than just the match engine and so it takes the things you (and I) mention above (building and developing a squad to fit the tactic, managing fitness/rotation etc.) on top of the tactic to get success in a real save.

Of course, there are still some users who may miss the point at the start and think it is just 'Plug & Play' but once they understand that, then using those meta tactics can be very successful.

[CAE82]

9 minutes ago, forameuss said:

Put simply, it's going to be incredibly difficult for any user outside of SI to perform a truly useful test on anything.  Ideally you keep everything you don't care about constant, then only change whatever it is you want to test.  You simply can't do the first part to a reliable enough degree to make the second part particularly reliable.  It's not for want of trying, of course, some people are going to do the best they possibly can in the situation, but still, they're all going to be flawed to some degree, and some will be extremely flawed.

I agree in general and that is why I said testing needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. But I don't agree in that testing cannot be useful. It has its place just so long as people understand it's limitations.

[whatsupdoc]

1 hour ago, santy001 said:

Do people actually find tactics they download are anywhere near as effective in their own gameplay as they are in the "testing" that pops up? A lot of the tactic testing methodologies leave an awful lot to be desired. It's partly why they're of so little use to SI overall I feel. 

Any game that has thousands of minds throwing their collective effort at it will have a meta emerge though. FM isn't some rare exception, games just can't stand up to that level of scrutiny and not fold in some way.

Yes, they dominate.

[XaW]

2 hours ago, CAE82 said:

I agree in general and that is why I said testing needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. But I don't agree in that testing cannot be useful. It has its place just so long as people understand it's limitations.

My major issue with all those who posts various tests almost always uses wording that really tries to hide this. I see "proof", "evidence", "guaranteed", etc, when it's just wrong. All anyone outside SI can do is provide examples trends they see based on their limited control. As I always say whenever someone posts another link to a youtube video with "proof" of something, is that the poster should have provided this to SI, and asked for feedback to their video around the claim they made. Doing so would either give some legitimacy to the claim, no matter the actual validity of the test. I've seen SI ask for the examples before. Any developer would love to get examples of issues in their game, especially with good explanations and ways to reproduce it.

I've tested a few of the "super tactics" in previous versions, and while some work well, they mostly look to exploit the game, rather than be better than the tactics opponents use. The most popular ones are almost always some form of overload that the AI can't handle, or some other form of exploiting the match engine. That's why you almost always see those tactic scoring a lot, but also conceding a lot, no matter how high scoring the game is with "normal" tactics. I went into one of the bigger fan sites for FM that has tactics with a tester and ratings for them. Almost all the top rated tactics have a conceded per match stat of 1.5 goals or more. Sure, they have 2-3 goals per game on average, but that means there are no solidity to their tactics, just overload overload overload.

That's not to say these tactics don't work, but most of them will stop working as soon as there is another update to the game. And I don't mean to look down on anyone using them, hell I used the diablo one back in the old days. Not everyone has the time or willingness to make one themselves. Also, people can, and should, play the game as they see fit anyway. Personally though, I find a lot more enjoyment in using my own creation than using someone else's. And I've been using the same one since FM17 with only small changes, and I'm mostly slightly overachieving with it.

Anyway, just adding my 2 cents to this discussion.

[XaW]

2 hours ago, whatsupdoc said:

Yes, they dominate.

Find me one that are highly rated in the tests and also concede less than a goal per game, if you don't mind. I'd like to try one of those, but I haven't found one.

[Rodrigogc]

11 minutos atrás, XaW disse:

My major issue with all those who posts various tests almost always uses wording that really tries to hide this. I see "proof", "evidence", "guaranteed", etc, when it's just wrong. All anyone outside SI can do is provide examples trends they see based on their limited control. As I always say whenever someone posts another link to a youtube video with "proof" of something, is that the poster should have provided this to SI, and asked for feedback to their video around the claim they made. Doing so would either give some legitimacy to the claim, no matter the actual validity of the test. I've seen SI ask for the examples before. Any developer would love to get examples of issues in their game, especially with good explanations and ways to reproduce it.

I've tested a few of the "super tactics" in previous versions, and while some work well, they mostly look to exploit the game, rather than be better than the tactics opponents use. The most popular ones are almost always some form of overload that the AI can't handle, or some other form of exploiting the match engine. That's why you almost always see those tactic scoring a lot, but also conceding a lot, no matter how high scoring the game is with "normal" tactics. I went into one of the bigger fan sites for FM that has tactics with a tester and ratings for them. Almost all the top rated tactics have a conceded per match stat of 1.5 goals or more. Sure, they have 2-3 goals per game on average, but that means there are no solidity to their tactics, just overload overload overload.

That's not to say these tactics don't work, but most of them will stop working as soon as there is another update to the game. And I don't mean to look down on anyone using them, hell I used the diablo one back in the old days. Not everyone has the time or willingness to make one themselves. Also, people can, and should, play the game as they see fit anyway. Personally though, I find a lot more enjoyment in using my own creation than using someone else's. And I've been using the same one since FM17 with only small changes, and I'm mostly slightly overachieving with it.

Anyway, just adding my 2 cents to this discussion.

Why can't the AI deal with overload ? I'm asking because I really don't know and I've seen it in FM23 as well in the tactics I created. 

 

That's not to say these tactics don't work, but most of them will stop working as soon as there is another update to the game - That's excellent news !

[XaW]

Just now, Rodrigogc said:

Why can't the AI deal with overload ? I'm asking because I really don't know and I've seen it in FM23 as well in the tactics I created. 

Well, it's all about exploiting things. The ME is complex and, as SI have said, some times when they fix something another thing breaks. Most of the time, they catch it before we every see it, but some times they slip through. When it's caught though, SI will remove it in a future patch, which in turn will make some of the most exploitative tactics no longer work. As for overloads, I mean using many players that attack the same space. In real life a manager would see it and change tactics to counter it, but the AI managers in FM aren't inherently intelligent. They have a lot fewer options to use than us human players, so if a tactic overloads on something that the AI managers are not capable of responding to, then you will have a much higher chance of winning since you are always in a 2v1 or something similar. This is often why these tactics have a lot of roles on attack, and are very aggressive in pressure.

It also means those types of tactics concede a lot more too, as I wrote about above. The times the overload fails, you get high chance of conceding. And if you then have strikers with a bad day, you see all those complaints about being FM'ed, where they lose to a single shot while they have many big chances. Note, this does also happen at times with normal tactics though, as in real life. But it often causes the exploit tactic to have very high scorelines, like 7-2, 5-4, and the like.

[CAE82]

@XaW The wording is typical now of any YouTube video (presumably to try and game the views algorithm) - "GUARANTEED BEST WAY EVER TO BOIL AN EGG" (coupled with a ridiculous 'The Scream' pose).

"Only 0.01 xG Against!"

It is what it is and it's always been the case. SI have developed the ME according to how they interpret football (within the technology and skill available to them). Users then have a choice how to develop tactics:

• How they see real teams play
• How SI 'want' the ME to play
• How to exploit the ME

It's obvious (by definition) that trying to exploit and push the ME is the best way to get success, as is the case with all games/simulations.

As I said above, it has always been the case. The following is from TFF '09:

"Its first iteration originated from a series of experiments during the early days of FM06 that were undertaken in the belief that there were serious flaws in the Match Engine. These experiments disproved the hypothesis, showing the original writer that he didn’t know as much about football as he had previously thought and the first TT&F, posted in November 2005, which both praised and explained the FM06 engine. The thread was stickied in the GQ section of the SI Games forums and quickly became a significant player in the development of virtual tactical theory. With later versions of Football Manager, TT&F became more sophisticated, expanding its ambitions and tactical strategies and recruiting a large and knowledgeable following that significantly contributed to its development. Unfortunately, it began to drift towards jargon, heavyweight managerial references and excessive numerical detail, thus becoming largely inaccessible for the casual user. By FM08, while still being congratulated by contributors, it had lost direction and was being overwhelmed by threads promising super‐tactical solutions to the Match Engine. These ‘super‐tactics’ were not just in fundamental opposition to TT&F, but often generated frustration and anger for users, as they tended to produce unrealistic matches in which possession and chances were dominated by the losing team. Despite this seeming domination, the numerous chances created were often very poor and easily defended by the AI team. Many users failed to recognise the half‐chance nature of the attacks and some resorted to accusations of a random Match Engine, super‐keepers and a cheating AI."

Clearly not much has changed in the last 15 years...

[XaW]

2 minutes ago, CAE82 said:

@XaW The wording is typical now of any YouTube video (presumably to try and game the views algorithm) - "GUARANTEED BEST WAY EVER TO BOIL AN EGG" (coupled with a ridiculous 'The Scream' pose).

"Only 0.01 xG Against!"

It is what it is and it's always been the case.

It is, but that means I'll equally reject all claims from those types of videos whenever someone use those as backup for their claims. See this thread as an example.

3 minutes ago, CAE82 said:

SI have developed the ME according to how they interpret football (within the technology and skill available to them). Users then have a choice how to develop tactics:

• How they see real teams play
• How SI 'want' the ME to play
• How to exploit the ME

It's obvious (by definition) that trying to exploit and push the ME is the best way to get success, as is the case with all games/simulations.

Yes and no. I know I've done, as well as others (and I'm looking at you @Johnny Ace) do, tactical setups for fun to see how they play out rather than win. The goal isn't always to just "win the most", as in many other games and simulations, the goals can vary a lot depending on the user and their preference. And not everyone is a min-max'er in FM or most other games. Sure, there are those who will do everything while following guides and use "known setups" etc in any game, but not everyone needs to follow that path. Sure, winning is fun, but a lot also enjoy the journey. Remember most of the people who frequent this board is quite invested and knowledgeable of the game, and it's important to know that we are not the average FM player. There are very many people who ONLY play FM as their only game, and don't consider themselves gamers. They play on a pc with the processing power of a toaster, while playing a match here and there and only get a few seasons done in a year. Most of these don't even know you can download a tactic, never mind an exploit tactic.

 

10 minutes ago, CAE82 said:

As I said above, it has always been the case. The following is from TFF '09:

"Its first iteration originated from a series of experiments during the early days of FM06 that were undertaken in the belief that there were serious flaws in the Match Engine. These experiments disproved the hypothesis, showing the original writer that he didn’t know as much about football as he had previously thought and the first TT&F, posted in November 2005, which both praised and explained the FM06 engine. The thread was stickied in the GQ section of the SI Games forums and quickly became a significant player in the development of virtual tactical theory. With later versions of Football Manager, TT&F became more sophisticated, expanding its ambitions and tactical strategies and recruiting a large and knowledgeable following that significantly contributed to its development. Unfortunately, it began to drift towards jargon, heavyweight managerial references and excessive numerical detail, thus becoming largely inaccessible for the casual user. By FM08, while still being congratulated by contributors, it had lost direction and was being overwhelmed by threads promising super‐tactical solutions to the Match Engine. These ‘super‐tactics’ were not just in fundamental opposition to TT&F, but often generated frustration and anger for users, as they tended to produce unrealistic matches in which possession and chances were dominated by the losing team. Despite this seeming domination, the numerous chances created were often very poor and easily defended by the AI team. Many users failed to recognise the half‐chance nature of the attacks and some resorted to accusations of a random Match Engine, super‐keepers and a cheating AI."

Clearly not much has changed in the last 15 years...

I doubt we'll ever "get rid" of exploit tactics totally, unless the AI managers get more reactive to what actually happens in the match, and if that happens, most of us will be outed as the poor managers we actually are rather quick! If anything I think they are a good thing for many users who only want to win and play as the best teams, using the best player, and tinkering as little as possible. The "Timmy", if you're familiar with MTG  And exploit tactic gives them all they want. And then the rest of us Johnny and Spike players can experiment, self limit, or tinker away as we please.

[forameuss]

3 hours ago, CAE82 said:

I agree in general and that is why I said testing needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. But I don't agree in that testing cannot be useful. It has its place just so long as people understand it's limitations.

Good luck with that.  It's a well worn tale of someone taking what some YouTuber has done as definitive "proof", even as someone in SI - with access to the code - disputes it.  I also wouldn't have much of an issue if experiments admitted their limitations each time, but that isn't going to happen.