Here's the deal, I don't have FM2011, and I've gotten bored of things to do with FM2010, but still enjoy the game. Because I've always found the match-engine, and football tactics in general, interesting, I'm offering a chance for the FMers here to face off on a balanced battlefield to see who is the best tactitian.

Basically, every competitor will get a team of 18 perfect players. Using an in-game editor I will make every player have perfect stats as well as morale and fitness, there will be no variables except for the tactics, which every competitor will submit (preferably uploaded, sliders/creator). I could be persuaded to edit in preferred moves if you justify why it's important for the tactic, since what I want to see is the most perfect sides possible competing, and any nuance could aler the results. I won't be making 18 players with 20 preferred moves each, though.

There will be 8 spots, and it will be a knock-out format, with each pair of competitors pitted against each other 6 times (3 home, 3 away), with the overall winner advancing. I will post pics of the stats and matches, and possibly some analysis.

I think it would be interesting to see who understands the match-engine, and tactics, best. Anyway, it's first come, first served basis (you don't have to submit your tactic immediately). That said, I will favour veterans over n00bs, I don't care that it's not fair. I won't be competing, btw.

So, anyone interested?

I'm in but only because this makes no sense whatsoever.

What doesn't make sense?

"There will be no variables except for the tactics" is somewhat wrong. From the weather to the team-talks, there are things which come to play that aren't tactic related.

Exactly, they do, and player quality is another thing that comes to play, but it won't be regarded. Everyone will get the same shot, with the same weather, same pitch, same players, same team talks (none), etc. It's basically a chance to see who is the best tactitian. With 6 matches, it should weed out the randomness in the match engine and give a fair result.

If we wanted to see who the best overall player was, we'd play an online game.

This is seriously not a good idea. Or at least the broad idea is good, but your method is not. I don't want to participate.

I like the idea of an 'all else equal' tactical competition...And team talks etc could be part of this.

But I'm not sure all players should be equal, so much as all teams should have equivalent players...Maybe everyones RB is CA:150, really unprofessional and moody, whilst the striker is a model professional CA: 130, etc etc.

I like the idea of a tactical showoff and I very much support it. I only think the concept needs some polishing. I agree with Alex, all players shouldn't be equal. Tactics (or atleast mine) work on the fact that there's difference between players and teams. Exploiting your own strenghts and your opponents weakness is the key to designing a succesful tactic. If everybody's equal the whole thing won't work. That leads us to my second objection, which is that the participants won't have the chance to adapt the tactics to the opponent they're facing, which is imperative for a tactic to work. I rarely or never play exactly the same tactic twice in a row, I always adapt it to the opponent and the circumstances of the game and my team.

Frankly, the only solution I see is that the participants join in a network game and face each other that way.

Yeah, if I were to allow players to tinker with their tactics, it would just be too much work for me, making the only solution possible a network game. Although I still think having players with identical stats is the best way to show who is the best tactical genius, because it would require you to beat the weaknesses and strengths of a tactic, and not its players.

Zlatan, I think you could have best of both worlds...

Have big squads, of about 30 players, with a range of skills.

Generally, managers will make their side play in a certain way, and use a similar 11 most matches.

So you could have 3 in each position:
3 X RBs (all similar CA, but one a running, attacking RWB, one a steady, great in defence RB etc)
5 X CBs
3 X LBs
2 X DMs
4 x CMs
3 X RM
3 X LM
3 X AM
6 X ST (including CF, target man, poacher, all rounder, number 10 etc etc)

What's the point of doing all that when you can have 18 players who can everything? When making your tactic, you just tell them what to do, instead of being restricted into conforming your tactic to your players' ability.

Because part of playing tactically is putting the right sort of players in the right sort of roles. You need to know what sort of player suits your system.

Indeed, but the point here is to see which tactic is best, not just which manager.