Jump to content

Is Football Manager 2009 a bit too 'sensitive'?


Recommended Posts

It often seems that one wrong team-talk or one wrong number on those sliders can result in a complete disaster for the team. I am consistantly left wondering what would have happened if I had moved that slider up one way or if I had encouraged my Winger at half-time.

I am often left baffled at where I have gone wrong. I will go through my my last steps, scratching my head, and will never really get where I have gone wrong.

I just think there are too many variables which can cost you in so many aspects of the game. Due to the lack of assosciation with the players, you never really know why they haven't performed.

A real life manager does not have to wonder in which aspect of his managing he has mucked up on. He will know if his team talk has cost his team; if his centre back looks visibly upset at the pre-match comments.

My real point is, there are too many factors that can cost the team and we are never really told or even indicated to where the problem lies. I am unsure on how this can be fixed, but I often find it frustrating that my team fail and I sometimes don't know where to start on analysing my failure. There are just too many variables that can cost the team and, due to the complexity of the factors I am in charge of, it isn't exacly clear what needs to be done next time around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the above post.....and it's a problem I'm dealing with right now....my team plays ok at home, but away they are utter rubbish....I tried making an away tactic (just like my home tactic, but more defensive minded) and it doesn't work....ho hum, back to 08 for now

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree also it is too sensitive. Plus id like to see some dial numbers to see at what point you have the slider at. My away tactics struggle also. Highly annoying. It takes for ever to tweak and you just keep on tweaking to try and get the best tactic. But eh it hardly comes around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the feeling. But i do have strong characters, maybe get a few tough guys in. It's the Denilsons of this world that'll reck your dreams :thup:

Lol, yeah, we could all use a little Alex Song here and there.....I've actually found some choice prospects in East Asia, but I have absolutely no money (managing Salamanca). The chairman is listening to offers, and hopefully a tycoon comes along and helps me out ::crosses fingers::

Link to post
Share on other sites

I concur. In one of my games I had passing style mixed and the team was playing absolute garbage. Change it to down both flanks and they start to play like barca...

Seems a bit stupid that something like that makes such a big difference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. I feel that the influence of team talks and press conferences are way too strong. For FM10, they should be toned down somewhat.

And in reference to The Smudges' thoughts, I also agree. I've always kind of felt, that the underlying inference of your tactics is counter the AIs. So, in theory, if you had two identical teams, playing with the exact same formation, instructions, etc... the AI would win. Why? Because the ME is set up so you have to counter the AIs Tactics and not the other way round.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My real point is, there are too many factors that can cost the team and we are never really told or even indicated to where the problem lies. I am unsure on how this can be fixed

This, word for word. Good post peter :thup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

My real point is, there are too many factors that can cost the team and we are never really told or even indicated to where the problem lies.

Good post and i have been saying the same thing for as long as i can remember.

From what i witness via the ME there is virtually no way to turn what your seeing into changes through the tactical sliders?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I concur. In one of my games I had passing style mixed and the team was playing absolute garbage. Change it to down both flanks and they start to play like barca...

Seems a bit stupid that something like that makes such a big difference.

Not really. If the opposition were playing a narrow formation with nobody on the flanks, then you need to play down the flanks because of the space they've exposed. Staying at mixed passing means there would have been more passes made through the middle, which they would have been able to pick up more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really sure if this belongs here or to start a new thread with it but here goes. Well, its about team bonding/gelling. Does anybody fell that this is another stealth statistic that can invariably work so hard against you. My team had a ropey start, i signed 6 players and results were patchy to say it at its best, resulting in me having press speculation about my job. I persevered with the same tactics only slightly modifying them for away games or games against bigger clubs.

Suddenly my results changed, i was no longer having patchy results, winnong home games by 2-3 goals and picking up draws and scraping wins away from home. Result, evreyone is happy, my team (predicted 11th place finish) finished 6th. Get in.

I searched all through the game, looked at stats, histories of player interaction, team talks, evrything. You name it and i looked at it, and it took me ages! The only thing i found that changed was my assman reporting that player now had a good understanding and were gelling well.

Now i understand that players who played together more regular than players that dont will have a better understanding, but surely they wouldnt lose the fundamentals of being able to pass/shoot/tackle where they see fit if they had just been thrust together to play. I just wonder about anybody elses feeling on this whilst were (sort of) on the subject.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who has just started to come up with tactics myself after downloading various ones I have to agree with peter about the fact that one click out of place on a slider and your team will be heavily beaten etc and you have to work out where you went wrong. All i would like to see is maybe a numerical value next to each slider telling you where you are with it. good post peter

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really. If the opposition were playing a narrow formation with nobody on the flanks, then you need to play down the flanks because of the space they've exposed. Staying at mixed passing means there would have been more passes made through the middle, which they would have been able to pick up more.

and this is the problem. Your players follow tactics too closely and don't read the game on the pitch.

Take this situation. A defender has the ball and looks up - there are four players he can pass to - the wingers are each out on the touchlines unmarked - the central midfielders are each in the middle with several players nearby. Your manager hasn't given you specific instructions about where to pass.

FM: just as likely to pass to the middle as the flanks.

RL: pass to the man in space.

Tactics should be guidelines for the players, not rules.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tactics should be guidelines for the players, not rules.

Very accurate point which is not decipited in Football Manager. The players follow tactics too closely unless you give them high creative freedom or a free role; and that is disasterous in itself.

Another instance I have just seen is that I have my keeper set to give the ball to my left back so my team can keep possesion. A corner came in and my keeper collected the ball and rolled the ball straight towards my left-back when an opposition player was infront of him. Their player got the ball and scored. Now logically, the keeper would have saw that the option was unable and explored other routes but that did not happen.

Players at all levels have a large level of freedom and, while fulfilling their tactical roles, they play the game in there own way and style and that is not something we see in Football Manager.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very accurate point which is not decipited in Football Manager. The players follow tactics too closely unless you give them high creative freedom or a free role; and that is disasterous in itself.

Another instance I have just seen is that I have my keeper set to give the ball to my left back so my team can keep possesion. A corner came in and my keeper collected the ball and rolled the ball straight towards my left-back when an opposition player was infront of him. Their player got the ball and scored. Now logically, the keeper would have saw that the option was unable and explored other routes but that did not happen.

Players at all levels have a large level of freedom and, while fulfilling their tactical roles, they play the game in there own way and style and that is not something we see in Football Manager.

The part in bold hit the nail on the head, aswell as BromleyRaven's post! Unless players are told to do there own thing via the creative freedom slider, they will more or less follow your exact insructions even if common sense wouyld suggest to pass to a man in space.

EDIT:- Not outer space before anyone gets that one in!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the impression that parts of the game are getting "ahead" of others.

For example, every year we keep seeing improvments in the match engine that are trying to make things more realistic. Tactics have become more realistic and there for everything is becoming much more complex.

The trouble i see is that the rest of the game is yet to catch up with this complexity. The feedback you get from players, the press conferences, the team talks - all incredibly basic when compared to how complex the tactics and match engine have become.

We need much more feedback from players, staff and the press about what we are doing as a manager. If we play a formation or tactic that isn't working, the ass man needs to give us his opinion on how we can change things for the better.

If we are focusing on realism, how well would Alex Ferguson do without constant feedback from all his coaches, physios, anylists, board, players and even fans? Having all this information to hand is STANDARD for a real manager - Knowing how to use it is what makes a good manager.

Unfortuneately, as i am not a games programmer i have no idea how this can be implemented.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the biggest problems in the game are the awful press conferences and the team talks

if you dare suggest the 'wrong' player for 'world player of the year' the squad get ridiculously upset, I can understand if you were say Manchester United boss and failed to suggest your own Ronaldo for the award...but when managing in league2 do the players even care about the world player of the year!!

team talks are awful also, if you dare suggest to your team that you were 'pleased' or even worse 'thrilled' with their 3-0 first half display, they completely collapse in ridiculous fashion. There are far too many negative outcomes that standing there for 15mins in silence in the dressing room is the best option in some games!

I think both of these instances are were the player personalities should feature more, ie if you have a determined/professional squad they shouldn't need to be told to 'not let your performance drop' every game, whereas your lighthearted players probably do.

I also find (call me paranoid if you like!) that the game tends to drag your team back to its 'media prediction' position in the league as well, after a great run of form my team will sometimes put in a pathetic display against inferior opposition, no matter if i say 'warn against complacency' again I feel that if players are classed as 'model professional' etc by the game this shouldn't happen. I don't mean with regard the odd shock result (it'd be a boring game if these didn't happen) I mean completely random and unexpected collapses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with the OP- in fact the the SI CM/FM games have always suffered from this.

Basically "if it can happen, it will happen" - the game is devoid of subtlety and new features are always heralded with over-exaggerated effects.

Its as if SI feel that we have to be bashed over the head with the effects of any action.

Its utterly ridiculous on either side of the coin- as for those who understand how it works (the key really being keeping your players happy, regardless of whether your responses make sense in real life) the game can be stupidly easy. The flip sidebeing for those who try and play FM in a realistic real life fashion finding (as I did initially in FM07-09) that it makes the game incredibly frustrating no matter how good your personel or tactics are.

FM has zilch to do with real life - its all about cracking FM, rather than being able to easily and logically apply real life decisions to your management style.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A real life manager does not have to wonder in which aspect of his managing he has mucked up on. He will know if his team talk has cost his team; if his centre back looks visibly upset at the pre-match comments.

I love this bit- it annoys me that SI STILL havent seen that us putting our criticism into context is essential. It works for players fines- where we can tell them why we are fining them.

So why we cant say to our players we are unhappy because of something specific, or even say "Im not happy that an unforced error led to a goal, but I have faith/will pull you off if you dont improve" etc etc.

With the amount of OGs and unforced errors in FM09- its crazy that we cant do this to any degree.

Still we should be used to this from SI- they introduce features that can have incredible effects on our players performance, yet really in terms of their complexity and sophistication they should have quite minor or subtle effects (or in the case of the player of the year stuff- none at all unless one of your players is up for the award).

I feel its a case of SI just not seeing the faults because they absolutely understand the "logic" of their own system- I remember once they said that they wrote FM for themselves, a shame they are still doing this and seemingly forgetting that paying customers are testing their game for them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree with the players in this game being ...

1. Too sensitive to team talks and/or most media comments.

2. Too easily unsettled by other clubs with a single praise.

3. Too easily become "friends" with other managers. My team captain who I have nurtured for the past 2 seasons and have praised a number of times (all to good effect) has not gotten me on his favourite staff members list, however Guardiola praised him once, and he suddenly listed him as favourite personnel!

4. Players who have recently signed a new contract (ie have 3-5 years remaining on their contracts), and become a teams target in the news + have an offer rejected by me, instantly become disgruntled at the club. This happened to a player of mine who instantly became unsettled, despite having signed a new contract the season before. My club is also listed as his favourite club and he is listed as "loyal".

It seems virtually impossible to build a nice happy squad with any club and most players tend to be poached. I agree it may be beneficial to realism where smaller clubs struggle to hold on to their key players, but on the other hand, its a tad over the top!

I just avoid Manager mind games now and never reply to any comments other than interviews/press conferences.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SI have a LOT of work to do on this game. There are plentiful of issues and problems constantly being brought up and with good reason too. This is without a doubt one of the biggest issues (aside the bugs) within FM09.

Agree- and it shows the true regard they have for their fanbase that these things wont get fixed in FM09.

SI/Sega know they have a cash cow and boy does it show.

In the style of Keith Burkenshaw- "there used to be a software developer who were a little bit different over there...."

Or in terms of player motivation in FM09- "SI: Complacent".

Harsh? I dont think so- as the pattern has been the same for a few releases now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The players follow tactics too closely unless you give them high creative freedom or a free role.

Interesting because I've found the total opposite - I get annoyed when my players aren't following the tactics I've given them close enough! FM09 more than any other versions I can remember seems to have implied a bigger sense of player decision making than any previous version.

Get really annoyed with my midfielder who keeps having 10 shots on goal from 40yards out every game when I'm telling him not too!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting because I've found the total opposite - I get annoyed when my players aren't following the tactics I've given them close enough! FM09 more than any other versions I can remember seems to have implied a bigger sense of player decision making than any previous version.

Get really annoyed with my midfielder who keeps having 10 shots on goal from 40yards out every game when I'm telling him not too!

That is interesting. I often feel like my midfielders aren't using their own brain when making decisions. I think shooting is something that relys on decisions more but passing seems really linear and my team often seem to make difficult long passes when a simple short pass is on

Link to post
Share on other sites

my team often seem to make difficult long passes when a simple short pass is on

Have to say that seems more tactic related than player decision making - I actually (again!) have the opposite, where my highly creative players seem to keep choosing the safe short pass rather than a defense splitting killer ball.

I guess the differing experiences might highlight that there isn't a problem? Or maybe it's highlighting that there really is, but we don't know what it is!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting because I've found the total opposite - I get annoyed when my players aren't following the tactics I've given them close enough! FM09 more than any other versions I can remember seems to have implied a bigger sense of player decision making than any previous version.

Get really annoyed with my midfielder who keeps having 10 shots on goal from 40yards out every game when I'm telling him not too!

Creative freedom should be removed.

The amount a player follows your instructions should be down to his personality- you know like in real life?

If a player doesnt obey your instructions then you should have the option to tell him your not happy he isnt tracking back etc- obviously the reaction would be variable depending on the player.

Still I wouldnt hold my breath at SI actually introducing realistic features into FM.......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, team talks certainly need to have a sense of perspective. For instance (and im still mad about it) i just finished a match where i was 2-0 up at half time, cruising and could have been more. After i told the team i was pleased at half time that signalled a complete turnaround, and me losing 3-2.

Now i know very occasionaly this can happen, but everytime you use the wrong team talk is a bit ridiculous. FFS i was only trying to say i was pleased and to keep up the good work. It seems like the "none" team talk option is by far the best if your winning.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always found "none" to be the worst thing to say

Were you against a side you should have been winning 2-0 against? Was the game close? Were the players actually playing well, or were they making mistakes and you scraped though with a 2-0 lead?

Did you adjust any tactics to hold on to the lead? Did anyone get injured, was a certain member of the opposition team fired up after their halftime team talk and needed a bit of extra attention? etc. etc.

There are a lot of different things that contribute to losing a lead at halftime, blaming it all squarely on choosing the wrong team talk option is a bit far fetched imo.

FWIW I've gone a whole season choosing only "You can win this" before matches and "please" at halftime and had a very successful season.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Players brains in this game are that alike a 5-year old. They never make any sensible decisions. Its highly annoying. I feel although they follow my tactical instructions reasonably well (despite multiple brainless decision making from players) when doing a slight tweak it changes drastically and player make the most stupidest mistakes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW I've gone a whole season choosing only "You can win this" before matches and "please[d]" at halftime and had a very successful season.

Very interesting. I'm still at the 'say nothing' for 2-0 at half-time stage. So can you confirm, 2-0 up at half time and you always say 'pleased'. The motivation widget never says you have 'complacent' players in the second half? Opposition never stage a comeback?

Also, pre-match 'You can win this' - do you say this when at home and the odds are in your favour too?

Certainly did in earlier patches - I haven't risked changing my talks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you are up 2:0 in half time , there is no decent choice to say anything but "pleased".I really don't like any of the options there, since "pleased " never gave me any positive outcome in any FM/CM including this one.

It usually leads to players performing worse in second half. But other options are "angry" , "disappointing" , "thrilled" and "don't get complacent".Either of them is even worse then "pleased".

I would like to see something like "encourage" as an standard option in such situation, because 5 mentioned above really will only get team down in majority of cases.

Team that pretty much demolishes opposition in first half ends up playing very meak in second due to that, at least for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a great attacking midfielder (relatively great, of course) who's been a key player all season, scoring goals and everything.

Before the last league game, opposing manager said he would have to be stopped if they wanted to get anything. Result? His morale dropped to poor, he was the worst performer on the field and we lost 2-0 without ever standing a chance.

This is an overreaction to a media item, I believe. Such a devastating effect is quite irrealistic in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting. I'm still at the 'say nothing' for 2-0 at half-time stage. So can you confirm, 2-0 up at half time and you always say 'pleased'. The motivation widget never says you have 'complacent' players in the second half? Opposition never stage a comeback?

Also, pre-match 'You can win this' - do you say this when at home and the odds are in your favour too?

Certainly did in earlier patches - I haven't risked changing my talks.

I never check assistant advice so don't know about complacency etc. All I know is I never get overturned after being 2-0 up at HT.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I never check assistant advice so don't know about complacency etc. All I know is I never get overturned after being 2-0 up at HT.

I just used 'pleased' when 2-0 up and drew 2-2.

It all seems a bit to random and/or sensitive to me and that kind of reiterates my point in the first thread.

Though that is only one instance so it needs to be tested over an extensive period of time for any close analysis to be performed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if u ask me assisants Advice is a waste of time i always get ( most of our shots are from distance but the same can be said about the opposition) no matter wot tactics i use. my team always start dodgey (no matter what team talk) until i say at half-time " nothing less than a win" after half-time my team dramatically improve... EVERYTIME BAR NONE

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just used 'pleased' when 2-0 up and drew 2-2.

It all seems a bit too random and/or sensitive to me and that kind of reiterates my point in the first thread.

Though that is only one instance so it needs to be tested over an extensive period of time for any close analysis to be performed.

I'm impressed with SFraser's analysis in the Tactics forum thread 'A Closer Look at Motivation'. He shows that whilst it's not random, there are many complex variables to do with each player's personality and morale etc. It means that there can be no simplistic formulae for team-talks in FM just like there's can't be in real life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm impressed with SFraser's analysis in the Tactics forum thread 'A Closer Look at Motivation'. He shows that whilst it's not random, there are many complex variables to do with each player's personality and morale etc. It means that there can be no simplistic formulae for team-talks in FM just like there's can't be in real life.

If there are too many variables then what team talk you choose becomes a lottery. However 'realistic' this may be (which we could argue about for ages) it doesn't make for satisfying gameplay to feel that you might just as well not have even bothered to try to work out what the right team talk was. We do not need a complex manual of team talks - there is already too much of that in the game with TT&F.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm impressed with SFraser's analysis in the Tactics forum thread 'A Closer Look at Motivation'. He shows that whilst it's not random, there are many complex variables to do with each player's personality and morale etc. It means that there can be no simplistic formulae for team-talks in FM just like there's can't be in real life.

The problem with that is, we have no idea whether or not the players need to be motivated :D Yeah their morale is high, but that oesn't mean they won't get complacent. I go into evey match with no idea where my teams heads are at, are they overconfident, are they worried? I might tell the team that "we can win this", and they might already know that they can win this and all they needed was a little enouragement.

Until we have some semblance of knowledge reagrding our players mentality, going into matches, team talks will be a lottery.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You two are still clinging on to the erroneous idea that we're dealing with some kind of computer programme - these are real people dammit! ;)

Seriously, SI (I think PaulC) said in a post a while back that they are trying to give players more depth to their personalities to add realism. There's a paradigm shift going on here; you need to think more generically.

It does require a period of trial-and-error and attention to detail to get the right talk to each individual player in each individual circumstance. It's not a lottery - real life is like this. I teach at a university; currently I have about 200 students. Initially I don't know them so I take a blanket approach to rules and discipline. Gradually I get to know some of them better and develop a better understanding of what best motivates each one. Some I get to know well over along period of time, some fairly well and some not at all and they're gone after a term anyway. Heck, I've just realised how much I apply my FM skills to my life :eek:

Seriously, it's like that!

Link to post
Share on other sites

andy, I agree, in theory, but you're comparing human beings who can't help but show emotion to everything that happens on a minute by minute basis, not computer characters that "don't seem to be listening" when encouraged in one match and are "fired up" when encouraged in another match.

There's no consistency, yes that's natural, but it's a game and as such consistency is essential. Without facial expressions or characteristics we have no idea not only how they feel, but how they react, as a lot fo the time they "don't seem to be listening".

Link to post
Share on other sites

The team talks seem incredibly strong this year and I seem to have problems in the 2nd half every second game. For example, I can be France, cruising 4 or 5-0 up against San Marino and not manage to score at all in the 2nd half. You could say this is a tactical problem, that their manager will try to plug the gaps with his tactics at half time, the opp team will sit deeper and that you need to counter with something more patient to open them up, but realistically, who in their right mind would change their tactics in real life if they are sitting on such a handsome lead? I see it as either I'm getting screwed by my own ineptitude with team talks at half time or that the AI manager team talk is so strong that they play like a team with twice the ability than they possess.

That is the type situation that obviously concerns me the least, as I'm still going to win the game hansomly, but I feel if it's happening in this situation then it just highlights that there is something wrong with the balance somewhere. Against stronger opposition I regularly watch a 2 or 3 goal lead disappear after half time and find it extremely frustrating. It's not just lucky goals, the team I was dominating in the first half suddenly play like a team possessed and dominate me in the second half. I'm finding it extremely rare that I manage to dominate a game completely for 90 minutes this year, no matter the strength of the opposition.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In real life if a team's 3 or 4 goals up at half-time the manager would probably say "keep possession, don't take unnecessary risks, don't give the ball away!". In FM you have to achieve this by meddling with sliders and you can't be sure what they'll do. Such basic advice like "keeping possession is the most important" could be among the team talk options.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...