Page 1 of 14 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 335

Thread: The Alternative Tactic League

  1. #1
    Jesus is offline Official Challenge Team
    Social Media Team
    Join Date
    04-03-12
    Posts
    3,534
    vCash
    681

    The Alternative Tactic League

    If you've been following the posts around this subforum recently you'll have realised that The Open Tactic League is a poor indication of how good a tactic is. It uses an outdated system which involves limiting a tactic to ten runs which is far too few a number of runs to really evaluate how good a tactic is. I intend to change that. Welcome to The Alternative Tactic League.

    How It Works

    I'll be using the benchmark .exe and save game that Tapani manipulated. Each tactic will be run 100 times.

    How To Enter

    Post any tactic you would like testing below. I'll create a spreadsheet similar to the Open Tactic League Spreadsheet so you can see how many goals are scored and conceded. (NOTE: I will only be testing tactics submitted to this thread, I'm not going out of my way to collate and run tactics which are quite simply outdated).

    Context (by Tapani)



    Current Table (Sorted by Points Average)


    Spoiler!
    Last edited by Jesus; 21-04-16 at 09:06 PM.

  2. The Following 19 Users Say Thank You to Jesus For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Join Date
    07-07-14
    Posts
    96
    vCash
    500
    31231 tembo_86 (non wib-wob)
    https://www.sendspace.com/file/0huvps

  4. #3
    Join Date
    06-03-12
    Posts
    559
    vCash
    600
    revamp7 (wibwob):
    https://www.sendspace.com/file/56409c

    Would it be a good idea to test the tactic with three different teams? de Graafschap, one good team (PSV?) and one really bad (Excelsior?). Just use the same benchmark. And of course as many runs as possible.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to AtomicAnt For This Useful Post:


  6. #4
    Jesus is offline Official Challenge Team
    Social Media Team
    Join Date
    04-03-12
    Posts
    3,534
    vCash
    681
    Quote Originally Posted by tembo_86 View Post
    31231 tembo_86 (non wib-wob)
    https://www.sendspace.com/file/0huvps
    Tactic Name Formation Centralised? For Against Points Games Won Drawn Lost Goals Average Conceded Points Points Average
    31231_tembo_86 31231 Yes 5474 3552 4929 2600 1475 504 621 54.74 35.52 48.02 - 50.56 49.29


    Spoiler!
    Last edited by Jesus; 09-03-16 at 12:05 AM.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Jesus For This Useful Post:


  8. #5
    Join Date
    03-03-12
    Posts
    2,590
    vCash
    5200
    Quote Originally Posted by Jesus View Post
    If you've been following the posts around this subforum recently you'll have realised that The Open Tactic League is a poor indication of how good a tactic is. It uses an outdated system which involves limiting a tactic to ten runs which is far too few a number of runs to really evaluate how good a tactic is. I intend to change that. Welcome to The Alternative Tactic League.

    How It Works

    I'll be using the benchmark .exe and save game that Tapani manipulated. Each tactic will be run 100 times.

    How To Enter

    Post any tactic you would like testing below. I'll create a spreadsheet similar to the Open Tactic League Spreadsheet so you can see how many goals are scored and conceded. (NOTE: I will only be testing tactics submitted to this thread, I'm not going out of my way to collate and run tactics which are quite simply outdated). As a bonus I'll also provide a screenshot of how similar the tactic submitted is to the infamous Iodine tactic by Tapani.
    Ooooofft, that's a tad harsh/disrespectful on those including me who spent hours of unpaid time, days in total added up testing nearly a thousand tactics 10 times. for the forum's benefit.

  9. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Cam F For This Useful Post:


  10. #6
    Jesus is offline Official Challenge Team
    Social Media Team
    Join Date
    04-03-12
    Posts
    3,534
    vCash
    681
    Quote Originally Posted by AtomicAnt View Post
    revamp7 (wibwob):
    https://www.sendspace.com/file/56409c

    Would it be a good idea to test the tactic with three different teams? de Graafschap, one good team (PSV?) and one really bad (Excelsior?). Just use the same benchmark. And of course as many runs as possible.
    I'm using the benchmark tool Tapani provided which makes it possible to run 100 seasons. Therefore it's limited to the one team.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cam F View Post
    Ooooofft, that's a tad harsh/disrespectful on those including me who spent hours of unpaid time, days in total added up testing nearly a thousand tactics 10 times. for the forum's benefit.
    Make of it what you will but the fact of the matter is it is a poor indication of how good a tactic is. A lot of Iodine clones fluked their position.
    Last edited by Jesus; 02-03-16 at 08:55 PM.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Jesus For This Useful Post:


  12. #7
    Jesus is offline Official Challenge Team
    Social Media Team
    Join Date
    04-03-12
    Posts
    3,534
    vCash
    681
    Quote Originally Posted by AtomicAnt View Post
    revamp7 (wibwob):
    https://www.sendspace.com/file/56409c

    Would it be a good idea to test the tactic with three different teams? de Graafschap, one good team (PSV?) and one really bad (Excelsior?). Just use the same benchmark. And of course as many runs as possible.
    Tactic Name Formation Centralised? For Against Points Games Won Drawn Lost Goals Average Conceded Points Points Average
    revamp7 361 No 6259 2898 5909 2600 1824 437 339 62.59 28.98 57.86 - 60.32 59.09

    Spoiler!
    Last edited by Jesus; 09-03-16 at 12:06 AM.

  13. #8
    Join Date
    06-03-12
    Posts
    559
    vCash
    600
    Quote Originally Posted by Jesus View Post
    I'm using the benchmark tool Tapani provided which makes it possible to run 100 seasons. Therefore it's limited to the one team.
    I understand if you don't like the idea, but it could easily be done by adding another manager and retiring the first manager, couldn't it? And then saving as 'benchmark2.sav' or smthing.

  14. #9
    Jesus is offline Official Challenge Team
    Social Media Team
    Join Date
    04-03-12
    Posts
    3,534
    vCash
    681
    Quote Originally Posted by AtomicAnt View Post
    I understand if you don't like the idea, but it could easily be done by adding another manager and retiring the first manager, couldn't it? And then saving as 'benchmark2.sav' or smthing.
    Nope. The save file only has Greece loaded and is stripped down to make processing quicker. This is how it's going to be done.

    I am also automating my test runs and can get 100 seasons done in 20 minutes.

  15. #10
    Join Date
    06-03-12
    Posts
    559
    vCash
    600
    Quote Originally Posted by Jesus View Post
    Nope. The save file only has Greece loaded and is stripped down to make processing quicker. This is how it's going to be done.

    I am also automating my test runs and can get 100 seasons done in 20 minutes.
    Fine by me!

  16. #11
    Join Date
    01-11-12
    Location
    GREECE
    Posts
    99
    vCash
    500
    can u test this for me pls ? it gave me 28w 4d 2d with scored 90 and conceaded 20, points 88 with one test i did cause of a slow pc.

    https://www.sendspace.com/file/zqj9oe
    Last edited by minusmf; 01-08-16 at 01:08 PM.

  17. #12
    Join Date
    20-09-15
    Posts
    169
    vCash
    300
    Hi Jesus,
    could you test below tactics? thanks
    3-5-2 Attacking_g5mm.tct : https://www.sendspace.com/file/zm0co7
    3-5-2 Xenoss.tct https://www.sendspace.com/file/9rl5pn

  18. #13
    Join Date
    08-08-14
    Location
    Istanbul / Turkey
    Posts
    74
    vCash
    500

  19. #14
    Join Date
    21-01-13
    Posts
    226
    vCash
    700
    Should be ok ! Thank You for givin motivation me about my tactic in future

  20. #15
    Jesus is offline Official Challenge Team
    Social Media Team
    Join Date
    04-03-12
    Posts
    3,534
    vCash
    681
    Quote Originally Posted by minusmf View Post
    can u test this for me pls ? it gave me 28w 4d 2d with scored 90 and conceaded 20, points 88 with one test i did cause of a slow pc.

    https://www.sendspace.com/file/czc18c
    I'll test it if you learn how to use [SPOILER] tags

    Put [SPOILER][/SPOILER ] (remove the spacer before the bracket) around your images in your post.

  21. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jesus For This Useful Post:


  22. #16
    Join Date
    04-03-12
    Posts
    132
    vCash
    500
    I've been working on a few 3-4-3 formations. I am not happy with my CBs and my main FC so I want to fix them up a bit.

    That said can you test these please?

    3-4-3 Mark Best (Seems to do well enough on the De Gra test)
    https://www.sendspace.com/file/3p3yy0

    3-4-3 Mark Best edit 2
    https://www.sendspace.com/file/kfzf84

    1ObiWonKonobi
    https://www.sendspace.com/file/qd4kwk

    Thanks.

    I have more in the wood but 3 is loads to ask to test for now.

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to Centurion For This Useful Post:


  24. #17
    Jesus is offline Official Challenge Team
    Social Media Team
    Join Date
    04-03-12
    Posts
    3,534
    vCash
    681
    Quote Originally Posted by minusmf View Post
    can u test this for me pls ? it gave me 28w 4d 2d with scored 90 and conceaded 20, points 88 with one test i did cause of a slow pc.

    https://www.sendspace.com/file/czc18c
    Tactic Name Formation Centralised? For Against Points Games Won Drawn Lost Goals Average Conceded Points Points Average
    KLIP 22312 Yes 6240 2591 5999 2600 1861 416 323 62.4 25.91 58.82 - 61.16 59.99

    Spoiler!
    Last edited by Jesus; 09-03-16 at 12:07 AM.

  25. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jesus For This Useful Post:


  26. #18
    Jesus is offline Official Challenge Team
    Social Media Team
    Join Date
    04-03-12
    Posts
    3,534
    vCash
    681
    Quote Originally Posted by Centurion View Post
    I've been working on a few 3-4-3 formations. I am not happy with my CBs and my main FC so I want to fix them up a bit.

    That said can you test these please?

    3-4-3 Mark Best (Seems to do well enough on the De Gra test)
    https://www.sendspace.com/file/3p3yy0

    3-4-3 Mark Best edit 2
    https://www.sendspace.com/file/kfzf84

    1ObiWonKonobi
    https://www.sendspace.com/file/qd4kwk

    Thanks.

    I have more in the wood but 3 is loads to ask to test for now.
    Tactic Name Formation Centralised? For Against Points Games Won Drawn Lost Goals Average Conceded Points Points Average
    3-4-3 Mark Best_edit_2 343 No 5591 2438 5829 2600 1786 471 343 55.91 24.38 57.13 - 59.45 58.29
    3-4-3 Mark Best 343 No 5551 2469 5774 2600 1756 506 338 55.51 24.69 56.47 - 59.01 57.74
    1ObiWonKonobi 343 No 4984 2740 5235 2600 1572 519 509 49.84 27.40 50.94 - 53.76 52.35

    Spoiler!
    Last edited by Jesus; 09-03-16 at 12:05 AM.

  27. The Following User Says Thank You to Jesus For This Useful Post:


  28. #19
    Join Date
    15-12-11
    Location
    Your Mother
    Posts
    25,859
    vCash
    4300000
    Time to join the party

    Burton Albion 4411v1

    https://www.sendspace.com/file/60u2yo

  29. #20
    Jesus is offline Official Challenge Team
    Social Media Team
    Join Date
    04-03-12
    Posts
    3,534
    vCash
    681
    Quote Originally Posted by Dermotron View Post
    Time to join the party

    Burton Albion 4411v1

    https://www.sendspace.com/file/60u2yo
    Tactic Name Formation Centralised? For Against Points Games Won Drawn Lost Goals Average Conceded Points Points Average
    Burton_Albion_4411v1 4411 No 4910 2493 5377 2600 1610 547 443 49.10 24.93 52.62 - 54.93 53.77


    Spoiler!
    Last edited by Jesus; 09-03-16 at 12:03 AM.

  30. The Following User Says Thank You to Jesus For This Useful Post:


  31. #21
    Join Date
    30-06-14
    Posts
    420
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Jesus
    Post any tactic you would like testing below. I'll create a spreadsheet similar to the Open Tactic League Spreadsheet so you can see how many goals are scored and conceded. (NOTE: I will only be testing tactics submitted to this thread, I'm not going out of my way to collate and run tactics which are quite simply outdated).
    Maybe add instructions on how someone else might be able to test tactics as well. We know from OTL and the like that people's enthusiasm can come and go.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cam F View Post
    Ooooofft, that's a tad harsh/disrespectful on those including me who spent hours of unpaid time, days in total added up testing nearly a thousand tactics 10 times. for the forum's benefit.
    Understanding where that comes from, and it is always a pity to throw away a lot of work.
    Do you have any better suggestions on how to mitigate the shortcomings of the OTL?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nurishi View Post
    You better make sure Iodine never gets beaten on this one, or Tapani might get offended again and go on hiatus for another 3 years..
    Actually Iodine was #1 when that happened. So rather think that I got so bored by the lack of tactical skillz around here so I left :p

  32. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Tapani For This Useful Post:


  33. #22
    Join Date
    30-06-14
    Posts
    420
    vCash
    1500
    In case this is going to take off, lets try to do it right.

    First, 100 runs is not always enough. Actually, it is usually not enough. It is not me being snobby, it is unfortunate reality (try running the same tactic 100 times, but under different names -- you'll see some difference!).
    Also running enough runs for every tactic is too much work.

    Could we have something in between? Maybe increase the burden of proof for higher positions?

    Example: A tactic claiming to be in, say top 10 after 100 runs, would need 200 runs to prove their position.
    Similarily, a tactic claiming to be in top 5 after 200 runs, need 400 runs to prove it was not just luck.
    Top 3 would need whopping 800 runs, and to be the champion, you need to beat the old champ in 1600 runs.
    (Actually starting the doubling at top 20 is probably a better idea, but possibly too much work).

    CMTacTool displays the 95% confidence interval for the average score (as low - high). This means that the true average of the tactic is between those number for 19 tactics of 20.

  34. #23
    Jesus is offline Official Challenge Team
    Social Media Team
    Join Date
    04-03-12
    Posts
    3,534
    vCash
    681
    Quote Originally Posted by Tapani View Post
    In case this is going to take off, lets try to do it right.

    First, 100 runs is not always enough. Actually, it is usually not enough. It is not me being snobby, it is unfortunate reality (try running the same tactic 100 times, but under different names -- you'll see some difference!).
    Also running enough runs for every tactic is too much work.

    Could we have something in between? Maybe increase the burden of proof for higher positions?

    Example: A tactic claiming to be in, say top 10 after 100 runs, would need 200 runs to prove their position.
    Similarily, a tactic claiming to be in top 5 after 200 runs, need 400 runs to prove it was not just luck.
    Top 3 would need whopping 800 runs, and to be the champion, you need to beat the old champ in 1600 runs.
    (Actually starting the doubling at top 20 is probably a better idea, but possibly too much work).

    CMTacTool displays the 95% confidence interval for the average score (as low - high). This means that the true average of the tactic is between those number for 19 tactics of 20.
    The intention behind this is all well and good but I don't have the time to repeatedly test another person's tactic in to the thousands. The aim of this thread was to get a more accurate reading of a tactic by testing it ten times as many times as what the OTL does.

    Over the past week I've developed my own batch files which runs the tactic 100 times and then I have to take the benchresult.txt file and use a spreadsheet I designed to get the data in the right order.

    When I asked how you run in parallel you only gave me a snippet of code to work with and I have had to do some work to even get to this point (and bear in mind I don't have a background in programming, I've literally had to Google a solution and test my own batch file which, although it has been fun, there is a more efficient way of doing it).

  35. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Jesus For This Useful Post:


  36. #24
    Join Date
    02-03-12
    Location
    Poland/Lodz
    Posts
    3,732
    vCash
    6500
    http://www.mediafire.com/download/6o...40sting_v2.tct

    Here is something different for testing. Won't be anywhere near top, but worth trying

  37. The Following User Says Thank You to info0 For This Useful Post:


  38. #25
    Jesus is offline Official Challenge Team
    Social Media Team
    Join Date
    04-03-12
    Posts
    3,534
    vCash
    681
    Quote Originally Posted by info0 View Post
    http://www.mediafire.com/download/6o...40sting_v2.tct

    Here is something different for testing. Won't be anywhere near top, but worth trying
    Tactic Name Formation Centralised? For Against Points Games Won Drawn Lost Goals Average Conceded Points Points Average
    Be@sting_v2 41311 No 5416 2108 5950 2600 1830 460 310 54.16 21.08 58.45 - 60.55 59.50

    Spoiler!


    Not bad.
    Last edited by Jesus; 09-03-16 at 12:02 AM.

  39. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jesus For This Useful Post:


Page 1 of 14 1234511 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •