herne79

Your issue is that your striker in this particular system - as an AF - is isolated and lacks support. I know this has been said: There isn’t ample support. You are playing an AF who by its nature plays in a very advanced position. That’s combined with 2 wide players with a support duty and 2 midfielders also with a support duty. Nobody’s running through to support the AF, nobody’s trying regularly to make killer passes to him, nobody’s up in close support. You can absolutely play with an AF in that formation, but not like that. Pesonally, whenever I play such a formation I want my striker to be much more involved (say a DLF or CF) and combine that with a creative player/role either in midfield or out wide and a decent attacking midfielder (CM or Mez attack). Your attacking mentality and some TIs also aren’t helping in this scenario. You’re telling your players to get the ball forward quickly, whip in crosses and pass into space. Your poor old isolated AF will just get gobbled up by the opposition defenders because the ball’s getting to him too quickly for anyone else to be close by helping him.

Given that the AF, defenders vs long balls and GK distribution is so “broken”, “stupid” and “mentally challenged” please start a new thread in the Bugs forum which details these issues and include lots of match pkms with time stamps of the issues occurring as examples for SI to investigate . As an aside (and imo) it’s not necessarily the individual things which are broken as you outline, it’s more to do with the overall setup. As an example: in one of my saves I use an AF + CF(s) with a TQ behind an AMC - my CF(s) is my top scorer, scores far more than my AF and my TQ even scores more than my AF. I could of course change things so that my AF is my top scorer but that would involve an extensive rethink of my overall system. Are AF’s strong? Yes but imo no more so than many other roles when part of a suitable system. Anyway, back to the original topic, imo “exploit” systems are made - either by accident or design - to take specific advantage of issues in the ME. That does not mean that 3xAF with lots of attacking roles elsewhere, counter pressing and an Attacking mentality (for example) is part of an “exploit”. The ME is extremely flexible and is perfectly capable of being used in different and creative ways: not everyone wants to play in the same manner. I’d much rather have that flexibility than being constrained into specific ways of playing. The issue for me relates to this creativity - us humans can be far far more creative than our AI opponents. So if we want more of a challenge we can (usually) choose to play in a manner similar to the AI - ie., realistically; on the other hand we can also choose to have an easier time of things and do things that the AI cannot do. So for me, if anything is currently “exploitable” it’s the AI, not the ME.

We seem to be following the same path this year - our deep 4411s and we're also using a narrow diamond. Narrow formations can indeed be very successful as you say, some good advice for the OP above. I'll also add to not ignore the Trequartista role at AMC as an option (think Totti for example) with an AF + DLFs or CFs ahead and hard working supporting midfielders behind.

The things I like about that second player is he has good Positioning, Anticipation and Decisions. So he should at least be in the right spot more often than not, and being in the right place at the right time is imo important. It’ll help with cutting out passing lanes, pressing and interceptions. Some additional tackling skill could be useful, but it’s not like he can’t tackle at all. Sure he may not be everyone’s idea of a BWM, but there’s no reason why you can’t try him out and if he doesn’t perform there’s plenty more fish in the sea .

Yes mostly. With this system I want to avoid using an aggressive mentality and/or a high defensive line/LoE/pressing etc. I know I’ve set the “Higher Defensive Line” TI but using a DM will push the def line a little deeper, so that one notch extra kinda compensates. TBH the BWM is the tricky role. I love using them (I like how they defend and attack), but it needs the right player for what you want to achieve. A simple DM(s) would probably do as an option.

I won't go into much detail as it's a 442 thread. The following did start life as a 442 but I didn't like how it was playing. I could have resolved issues by using several TIs but it was getting complicated - a much simpler solution was to slightly amend the formation to use 2 x DMs rather than 2 x CMs. I swapped one of the strikers for an AMC simply because I didn't have many strikers at the club but I did have lots of decent midfielders. The system (note - I pretty much always start matches with this but I will make small adjustments if I see the need during matches, so this is not plug and play): However, this is just one side of the coin. The type of player used is the other side which I think often gets overlooked. I'll give you some examples of the type of players I use. 1) For the WM(su) on the right I use James Ward-Prowse (I've been buying him since FM16 and playing him on the right): Perhaps not everyone's idea of a "winger" - he's slow and only "competent" in position. But work rate, stamina, crossing & passing ability is exactly what I'm after. Leadership and free kick taking is the icing on the cake. He's kind of a current day David Beckham. His position "rating" (not that I ever pay much attention to that) can always be trained anyway. So I don't give him the "winger" role - he's not a winger - I play him as a much more free wide midfielder. It's the combination of the role and player that's important. 2) The Vol(su) is kind of a key role to help link defence to attack. I could have given it an attack duty, but this is the player I use (Soucek, to begin with): The key for me here is his work ethic and those Traits. I simply don't need to give the role an attack duty when combined with that work ethic and Traits. His passing lets him down so eventually this was my upgrade (I won't mention his name): Again, that combination of working hard and a Trait to encourage him forward, but this time with some passing ability as well. Anyway, I won't go through each position and there's one or two PIs dotted around as well. Hopefully you get the idea that I'm not just looking at the tactic but also the available players and how it all combines.

Nope. I think he is genuinely trying to help. I was going to reply again to other points mentioned but it's kinda pointless at this stage. If he'd just open a bug report and give SI his data all of this goes away, one way or another.

Aaaand you win the thread. This is getting silly now.

*sigh*

I'll try one last time because people just aren't getting it, maybe I'm not being clear enough. There is no problem at all with tests being run. That's great, everyone welcomes it including SI. The issue starts when the results of those tests are made public before the data and results have been checked by SI. Without that check, viewers may be misled by potentially erroneous and inaccurate information. The only thing that the "crazies" want is to avoid this. We're actually trying to help people like you to get accurate information and the only way to ensure you get that accuracy is to point out that SI needs to verify the findings of these type of videos, ideally before the videos get released. It's pointless you getting the data to make your own opinion if that data is unchecked. You checking (potentially) bad data is going to give you a bad result. So yeh, call me crazy all you like, but the fact remains there is only one group of people who know exactly how the game works, and that's SI. As I said before, just have EBFM (and others) give their data to SI before releasing videos and threads like this wouldn't even begin.

You are of course missing the point. If people want to test things out have at it, not a problem. The problem starts when said people release videos which appear to show either issues with the game and/or “how the game works”. This gets into the mindset of others and it quickly becomes “fact”. But at no point is the data given to SI for them to check and investigate. But you’d like SI to monitor every video that gets released in the hope that they can find the data? Come on. All EBFM (and others) need do is open a bug report, say “hey SI something seems off here can you take a look” and upload the data to SI’s servers. It takes 30 seconds. And once SI have looked into it they can include the results in their video. But they don’t do that. So this is nothing to do with “cozy relationships”, not liking people testing things or being “fans” as someone else above said. It’s about integrity of data and people in the community being affected by the lack thereof. Just give the data to SI and all of this goes away. Hilarious indeed.

Except we did. If that still isn’t enough, find the part of the video where he demonstrates how his own unrealistic inputs do not impact the results generated by a system based on realism. And if you still want more, how does he account for natural player performance differences between matches, which impact player behaviour? Even if you replay the same match over and over, let alone from match to match, the same player can behave very differently due to a whole host of issues such as (and not limited to) complacency; consistency; morale; team talks; Touchline shouts; opposition players; the weather; altitude; pre-match build up; training; receiving (or not) a hard tackle at the beginning to put him off his game; cohesion; substitutions; whether it’s a competitive match or a friendly; and so on. There is so much which goes into the ME calculations it’s mind blowing. As a former Tactics mod I was exposed to only a small amount of that. Rashidi much more. EBFM, unless he’s an ex-SI programmer - none. I’m sorry stopazricky but you are a prime example of how these “tests” are damaging to the community. You’ve seen something which you consider to be an issue. You then find a video which appears to validate your frustrations, ergo SI apparently don’t know what they’re doing but this video guy does. It just breeds mistrust in SI and is classic confirmation bias. SI are not perfect by any means and there is certainly room for improvement (SI themselves say that) but these videos do more harm than good. For example, from your OP: SI are the only people who know exactly how the ME works. Not me, not rashidi and certainly not EBFM. And yet this video, which appears to confirm your fears, has got you to the point of writing this. That’s why I say he’s doing more harm than good - you now believe a guy on YouTube rather than the people who actually make the game. I’d love it if this guy gave his data to SI for them to check and validate before releasing his videos. SI are always open to that. But he doesn’t and you have to ask yourself why.

Gegenpress is no more “overpowered” than any well thought through tactical system. It’s just easier to set up and maintain than most others. No. I’m afraid that is where this argument falls down, because any tactical system is relative to the level at which you play. We’ve been saying that for years in the tactics forum. Playing gegenpress (to continue the example) at Nonleague Utd is not the same thing as playing gegenpress at Eliteclub FC. This is also why we can play tiki-taka at low levels, or pretty much any tactical style we choose - it’s all relative. Here’s a recent quote from SI themselves: And that is just one of the reasons why “E”BFM’s videos are fundamentally flawed and actually damages the community. He’s not doing it on purpose, but in his ignorance he’s giving out misleading information which fans the flames of doubt. I don’t hate on him. But what I dislike is unverified information being given out as fact. All the guy (and others who do similar “tests”) needs to do is give their data to SI for them check and review before releasing their videos. Why do they never do that? Imagine how powerful their videos would be if SI did confirm their findings. Of course on the flip side if SI deem their data to be flawed and findings erroneous…. Phnom, I know you (and others) have found some of his videos helpful, especially in relation to things such as training schedules and other strategies you can employ to help your club management. And that’s great. But videos which get into “evidence” of things apparently wrong or flawed in the actual game mechanics must be treated with scepticism unless SI themselves have verified findings.

I stopped watching after 3 mins, it's yet more nonsense and does the community more harm than good. If he's actually got a shred of integrity he'd give all of his data to SI to check over before releasing his videos - SI would even welcome it. But then SI debunking his "claims" wouldn't make for very good content on his channel would it? He talks a good talk and makes thing appear valid but unfortunately he simply doesn't understand the complexities. Case in point - the game is based on realism. And yet his "testing" uses teams of made up and unrealistic players being asked to do unrealistic things. That's not "testing", that's making stuff up. Just because we change something in an editor doesn't make it valid. The game can certainly get better - SI themselves know this - but the only thing this kind of BS video does is to feed doubts in people's minds. And that's not helpful. A message to "Evidence" Based Football Manager:- give your data to SI before releasing your videos for them to review. If SI do actually find something beneficial (and in my experience they'd be open and honest about it) then your videos would carry a lot more weight and would help us all. But until you start doing that, please stop.

If that was the case nobody would ever win anything. Stop blaming the game for something that’s your problem. As said above, if you need help post your system and somebody might be able to help.

The game doesn’t “know” anything, it’s a computer program. Likewise the game doesn’t “stop you from scoring” - what stops you scoring can be for a wide variety of reasons, but the game stopping you would imply some sort of scripting, which isn’t a thing. To answer your question in the title, the indication that your tactic isn’t working is watching matches and seeing your team underperform. You could also extract some conclusions from data analysis. If you’re having problems underperforming and need help, the best thing you can do is post your system and detail what your problems are .

That's not my experience. For context I use an AMC in a 4411 2DM formation. The Board (and the Media) think I use a Wingplay style. My assists table (last 45 league matches) below says otherwise. I play in English League 1 (Championship next season). The main player I use in the AMC position has 13 goals and 7 assists in 28 league appearances (and no, he doesn't take corners or freekicks). Things can be improved for sure, but saying "barely nothing happens there" may be the case for you but not for others, myself included. I see similar results using the same tactic in my Premier League save. As an aside there seems to be something wrong with the data - according to the data below I've scored 67 goals along with 57 assists (positional map) or 61 assists (assist types). The funny thing is I actually scored 98 league goals in the last 45 matches, so something's not adding up. I've included my tactic for reference but note that I will tweak it during some matches if I see issues which need addressing, so it's probably not something to copy.

Nope. If you’re concerned it may be tactical, head over to the Tactics forum, post your system and someone may be able to offer advice.

Your promising players are in the senior squad? If so then they are getting plenty of match time at present given your hectic schedule due to rotation and/or substitutions? Playing matches is important for player development so it’s not something I’d worry about. However you haven’t mentioned what their development is currently like - if they are getting match time as I mentioned I’d expect their development to be ok. If they’re not being rotated/substituted in, why not? You can always make them available for your U21s matches if not.

The presets are not designed to be finished tactics. They’re just starting points for us to change (or not) as we see fit. It can also be perfectly normal for different formations playing the same style to have different instructions. The 4231 and 433 as you mention have players positioned differently so different instructions around LoE and pressing could be useful there.

He has. That being said, lots of people find some of his videos useful so if it helps their enjoyment of the game then have at it . Just keep eyes open and don’t accept everything as gospel .

Rather than saying the game is easy and you'd like a hard mode, it could be very constructive if people detail exactly how they play the game. eg., how do you set up the game and your manager? What tactics do you use? How do you handle transfers, contract negotiations, staff, morale, dynamics, training, youth development? Do you watch matches? If you do what highlights do you use and how do you deal with team talks, touchline shouts, opposition instructions and tactical adjustments? etc etc. This can have 2 benefits: 1) It might give SI further knowledge of how they might be able to make aspects of the game "harder". 2) There are plenty of people in the community who find the game difficult, so providing tips and tricks could help them in their enjoyment.

There's no such thing as conflicts. Instructions and Traits are just tendencies - if a player has an instruction and/or a Trait they will tend to do that a bit more/less often. So, to follow the example, if you add "Pass Shorter" players will generally try to do just that but a player who has the Trait to "try long range passes" may still do that as well if they see the opportunity to do so. (Any player, even without the Trait, may still on occasion attempt a long range pass even if you add "Pass Shorter". They just won't attempt them quite so often as a player with the Trait). Players can still decide what to do for themselves, regardless of our instructions and their Traits. Our instructions (and their Traits) just encourages them to do something more or less often than they may otherwise do.

I was perhaps too brief. What's most important is long term progression. It's perfectly normal to see even whole value drops (red arrow) on occasion (example a monthly attribute change may go something like 10, 10, 11, 12, 12, 11, 11, 12, 13, 13) so long as over 6 months or so growth is seen. In this particular example, where you see orange arrows across the board and given the player involved, it's more than likely just the game's own technical background stuff - either attribute rebalancing due to the potential cap being reached or rebalancing because the period's growth cap has been exceeded. Something to keep an eye on though just in case something untoward is happening .

Nothing. It’s just the game doing some technical stuff in the background. Only worry about red arrows, not those little pesky orange ones.