Just One of MANY Reasons Why FM09 is Not Up to Scratch

Whatever i say, i still keep coming back to FM so i am happy to take the criticism that i get when i complain about it.

Deep down i suppose i just hope that someone from SI Towers is taking note and has it in them to see that i am not just making blind accussations, but that at least most of my criticism towards the game holds enough water to be considered for futur improvement.

Here i have collected stats from what is now the "Big 5" from each teams last 5 games in all competitions. I just happened to choose the last five games because what i had noticed had been going on for some time.

Note: I am early into season 2 with Man Utd, at one stage i was 34 games unbeaten in the EPL and deservedly so, suddenly and inexplicably we went from winning 13 and drawing 2 of our last 15 away games to losing 3 and drawing 1 of the next four scoring just a single goal.

This has largely been due to one reason, despite making a plethora of CCC's my players(including 4 World Class strikers) as well as every other player in the team have literally stopped scoring.

I looked into this a little further and discoverd the following...

Last 5 games in all competitions.

Chelsea - CCC's = 4 - Goals = 9

Arsenal - CCC's = 6 - Goals = 12

Liverpool - CCC's = 7 - Goals = 11

Man City - CCC's = 10 - Goals = 10

MAN UTD - CCC's = 24 - Goals = 12

This is not just a anomaly from just the last five games, but a continuence of the exact same thing that i have found in FM09 all along, it is just more blatant and pronounced when playing as Utd.

Despite quoting "Just one reason" in the topic title, i believe that what is happening is interlinks with many of th games other issues such as...

1. Away results being much more difficult to achieve despite performances.

2. Bad runs, which seems to coincide with away results in which even the most convincing of performances often leaves your team walking away without any points.

3. The ME, which despite reports of it being a truly magnificent specimen, is still quite literally in the dark ages as far as technology goes.

4. The game DOES NOT cheat, but because of so many remaining issues with the ME it can often appear as if it is doing just that.

Last but not least, i gave up my chance of Beta testing FM2010, why you might ask? have i finally decided to hang up my FM boots altogether? i very much doubt it, the actual reason for my decision is twofold.

1. I have been petitioning for certain improvements for nigh on 4 years now and despite backing from other FM'ers and insurances of major improvents from SI little if anything has really happened, so i had to ask myself, was taking part in Beta testing FM2010 likely to change anything? the quick, simple and obvious answer was NO!

2. We still have dozens(maybe hundreds?) of well documented issues that have also not been addressed for 4 years or so, if you want to play FM you simply have to roll with the punches and get on with it.

Can you pinpoint a root cause for the failure to take chances?

There is not a single reason you suggest that is not a curiosity of football IRL. Look at Utd's bad patch last year- losing twice after a good run. Look at Sunderland's performance away at Burnley the other week- good performance, bad result. Football is an unpredictable beast, impossible to quantify sometimes.

PS I dont see you complaining that going 34 games unbeaten is unrealistic.

1. Isnt this just like real life? If you take out the top 4 (using England as an example), how many teams get a result away from home? A statement like this needs backing up with figures before it can become valid.

2. Bad runs happen IRL too. And it can be hard to turn it around (Hull City, 12 points out of 78 available). Bad runs affect confidence, something you can change using team talks and the press, and some luck, to regain confidence from your players.

3. In the dark ages? Why? Is there another ME engine around that does better?

4. Again, you need to specify issues rather than just using a blanket statement such as this.

PS I dont see you complaining that going 34 games unbeaten is unrealistic.

That's often what it comes down to on here. People only seem to formulate theories for cheating AI or broken game mechanics when they are on the receiving end of poor form or lose from a fluke goal.

Not that I'm undermining the points the OP makes, FM09 is far from perfect, but from those CCC stats it doesn't look unusual to me, it looks pretty accurate. Many players in real life bugger up seemingly simple chances, that's the unpredictable nature of football, and most sport in general.

United didn't concede a goal for about 16 games running last season, all of a sudden they conceded 6 goals in 2 games against Liverpool and Fulham, not only that but they went on to look a bit shaky for the remainder of the EPL season with Macheda rescuing them on two occaisions.

Can I ask what tactics/formation you are using as 34 games unbeaten is quite something!

There is not a single reason you suggest that is not a curiosity of football IRL. Look at Utd's bad patch last year- losing twice after a good run. Look at Sunderland's performance away at Burnley the other week- good performance, bad result. Football is an unpredictable beast, impossible to quantify sometimes.

PS I dont see you complaining that going 34 games unbeaten is unrealistic.

Without being patronising you seem to be missing the point.

Which is NOT that football is a "funny old game" that often throws up unpredictable results and performances, but that FM itself does not reflect "real life" in any way shape or form to the point of being utterly absurd.

Look at the statistics i posted again, this is not a one off, i can literally go back to any five games at any time of any season and show you almost identical results.

Lets look at my Utd game compared to "real life" for example and i will show you that in FM i will completely dominate 99% of games home and away creating a plethora of chances and drawing/losing the odd game in the manner i explain above.

IRL Utd are often not even the better team on the day, but the difference being that of having players of enough quality throughout the squad that can win games for them when they have performed as a team well below their best.

If you cannot see the difference here then we are at an impass?

Have a look at this screenshot of a recent game away to Chelsea, i doubt that Utd have EVER finished a RL first half with such stats, let alone doing so against another "Big Four" side sat 3rd in the table and unbeaten up until this point?

You MUST look at the bigger picture and stop reacting to complaints about the game as if they hold no weight.

There is definately something not quite right with the away results.

people often act as if the complain has no weight because the information given hasn't warrented any other reaction.

as for your last image of the chelsea manutd game, i agree that the stats are woefully out of kilter.

there is another thing i hear from people here and that is that they have loads of shots but dont score any.(cant hit a barn door with a banjo) the oppo score all their shots on target

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/football/premier-league/2008-2009/man-united-liverpool-236908.html

if i understand these stats manutd had 17 shots and got 1 goal. liverpool 9 with 5 on and scored 4.

so although i agree that your picture shows a very strange half time result, it may not always be that out of the ordinary.

Everyone understands that this happens once in a while, even in real football, but when it starts happening more often than not, then something is not quite right.

Had you chosen to do the beta testing you'd have had a direct means of contacting and discussing your problems with Paul Collyer, who programmes the match engine.

people often act as if the complain has no weight because the information given hasn't warrented any other reaction.

as for your last image of the chelsea manutd game, i agree that the stats are woefully out of kilter.

there is another thing i hear from people here and that is that they have loads of shots but dont score any.(cant hit a barn door with a banjo) the oppo score all their shots on target

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/football/premier-league/2008-2009/man-united-liverpool-236908.html

if i understand these stats manutd had 17 shots and got 1 goal. liverpool 9 with 5 on and scored 4.

so although i agree that your picture shows a very strange half time result, it may not always be that out of the ordinary.

But you're taking his example out of context by treating it as a one off and comparing it to a freak result IRL. I've read most of Hammers' threads and I'm sure he could post dozens of screenshots similar to this one. While his problems are tactics related in a sense that he could avoid them by taking a different approach, I don't agree that it's his tactics that are actually flawed. In reality creating chances of your own and limiting those of the opposition is surely encouraged and I for one can't think of a tactical approach that could possibly result in such an imbalanced outcome so regularly IRL.

Everyone understands that this happens once in a while, even in real football, but when it starts happening more often than not, then something is not quite right.

Exactly, IRL its a shock result that may happen once or twice a season or as little as once or twice in a lifetime, in FM the same thing often happens week after week to the exact same side.

This is as obvious and blatant to me as the corner cheat, i'm sure that if many FM'ers were having 400 shots a game they would still claim that the ME was great and this was realistic.

Postal Postie - I'm sure you understand that i'm not one of those who suggests that just because i'm having 17 shots a game i should be scoring for fun despite having only 3 of those shots on target(which for argument sake is exactly how many on target Utd had against Liverpool)

What i am stating is a much more massive and blatant issue that the game itself reflects very sparingly on RL to such a point that it hugely detracts from the overall playability and realism.

There is not a single reason you suggest that is not a curiosity of football IRL. Look at Utd's bad patch last year- losing twice after a good run. Look at Sunderland's performance away at Burnley the other week- good performance, bad result. Football is an unpredictable beast, impossible to quantify sometimes.

PS I dont see you complaining that going 34 games unbeaten is unrealistic.

Then compare it to the Wolves game, we were awful yet scored 5 goals

My guess is that you've stumbled upon a tactic that the AI can't deal with (Chelsea having 1 shot on goal and 32% possession at home to you doesn't strike me as realistic), but that it's creating a large number of supposed Clear Cut Chances that aren't actually that easy to finish.

However much work SI put in to the match engine and the AI, there's bound to be some way you can develop a tactic that exploits a weakness in it.

But then we've had this thread a million times before, haven't we?

1. I have been petitioning for certain improvements for nigh on 4 years now and despite backing from other FM'ers and insurances of major improvents from SI little if anything has really happened, so i had to ask myself, was taking part in Beta testing FM2010 likely to change anything? the quick, simple and obvious answer was NO!

It is hard from this not to conclude that you have missed an opportunity to address some of the issues that you have raised and perhaps find out how the development of the game works as well as some of the issues that arise during this period.

From the point of view of developing the ME further, I think pkms of games like that Chelsea one would be interesting to upload.

Not because you missed 3 CCC, but because your tactics obviously utterly dominated a team who presumably have a similar level of players to your own.

Whatever's going on with your tactics, the AI isn't dealing with it very well, so it'd be interesting to see why they're not and what can be done to help develop how they react to certain things.

All of your previous threads, to me, suggest the same thing - not that game punishes the human user, but that the AI is not able to cope with certain user tactics, to the point where it's totally dominated in terms of possession and shots on goal. That's what you've basically discovered time and time again.

First thing, post your tactic (or preferably even your save file) somewhere where people can get to it. I'm not doubting you or anything, but it's useful to see what you are actually doing.

Second thing, you really need to look beyond the shots/shots on target/ccc stats. Yes they are useful, but they don't tell the whole story. A tame shot into the keepers arms from 10 yards is a shot on target, where as a brilliant cross that just misses the strikers head but would have been a sitter if he had met it doesn't even register anywhere (basically, those stats are not a pure indicator of how close you came to scoring). You need to look at each of those chances (in the match engine) and see what type of chance it was and why you didn't score it.

Third thing, the reason this kind of thing happens only sporadically in real life is that when manager see it happening, they react to it. As far as I can tell, you aren't reacting, you appear to be sitting there complaining about it but carrying on doing the same thing.

It should be noted that, with your current profile at least, you've started dozens and dozens of similar threads in the general or tactics forum, but never once started one in the bugs forum.

If you have specific problems with the ME, and can identify and upload examples, I think you'd be surprised how they'd be taken on board.

(bigdunk - seriously, for the sake of saving yourself some time, have a scan through the threads I've linked to up there - we've done this a million times, and the same arguments have been ignored repeatedly)

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=88019

Regarding the Man City example given in the above thread, I'm sure I could see Micah Richards slipping due to the bad state of the pitch, before being able to chase the opposition striker!

It should be noted that, with your current profile at least, you've started dozens and dozens of similar threads in the general or tactics forum, but never once started one in the bugs forum.

If you have specific problems with the ME, and can identify and upload examples, I think you'd be surprised how they'd be taken on board.

(bigdunk - seriously, for the sake of saving yourself some time, have a scan through the threads I've linked to up there - we've done this a million times, and the same arguments have been ignored repeatedly)

Actually i have gone straight to the top with many issues including this one which yes, has been brought up under a similar guise again and again, in the faint hope that something would finally be done about it.

I have received reassurances from all levels that certain improvements were to be made, only to find that despite attempts being made to do so have proved completely futile.

Again i am sat writing here now thinking "why do i bother?" funnily enough it was a recent Holiday to Portugal that got me thinking about it all again. I was sat with dozen or so English blokes watching the Utd v City game and someone commented on FM. We got to talking and it turned out that 7 or 8 of us had been or were still playing FM. I was the only one still playing the game and the reasons i was given for everybody else giving up with it were those i have continued to bring to the attention of both FM'ers and SI.

I can get battered to death by fellow FM'ers on these forums, but its clear to me that this is largely because many posters are ardent followers of the game and will quite literally not have a bad word said about it.

Or others who have seen this sort of thing and actually done something tactical about it.

Again, I honestly just think you've found or designed a tactic that the AI can't cope with. Congratulations, you've outsmarted a bunch of if..then statements

I'm less worried about your missing CCCs than I am that Chelsea couldn't get a shot on target against you, at home.

Developing the AI so that it could deal with and react to all sorts of different (and sometimes extreme) tactical approaches - like say, a human user might do in FML or in a network game - is obviously something to aim for. But it's very, very difficult.

RT, I don't even think it's a case of a tactic that the AI can't cope with. It's a flaw in his tactics which is meaning that he is getting loads of possession, but not converting it into genuine goal scoring chances. And his players are either shooting from distance or having to snatch at chances or taking chances under pressure which is bumping his shot counts up. It's not necessarily a bug, it's a case of taking a simulation, feeding flawed data in and getting flawed output out.

It's clear to me that there are plenty of fans (both of FM and football in general) who just do not understand the basics of football strategy (that's not aimed at the OP or anyone in particular, by the way, it's just a general comment). With FM getting more and more complicated, especially in terms of tactics, these people are getting found out. What SI need to concentrate on is either educating these people, or giving them the tools to bridge this knowledge gap. This is where I am hopeful that the new FM10 tactics creator will come into play. It should certainly prevent some of the more common mistakes, like big gaps in mentalities.

This is how the game keeps the competition competitive. You make loads of CCC and should walk your games because you have a good tactic, rather than winning every game 6-0. It makes you miss tons of chance to keep the scores looking realistic.

Its happened in every game, before there was a CCC stat, fanboys would always scream "its your tactics". Now they are proven wrong, especially the guy who somehow thinks hes making CCC that are hard to score from!

The one shot, one goal is another example of this as were super keepers in previous versions, its the only way to keep scores realistic.

CCC is quality of chance only - not quality of shot.

It's incredibly easy to screw up a clear cut chance.

Try lowering your tempo. You'll create fewer chances, but score more.

Btw, I was actually going to answer the above post until I saw it mentioned superkeepers.

This is how the game keeps the competition competitive. You make loads of CCC and should walk your games because you have a good tactic, rather than winning every game 6-0. It makes you miss tons of chance to keep the scores looking realistic.

Its happened in every game, before there was a CCC stat, fanboys would always scream "its your tactics". Now they are proven wrong, especially the guy who somehow thinks hes making CCC that are hard to score from!

The one shot, one goal is another example of this as were super keepers in previous versions, its the only way to keep scores realistic.

I've often won games by a clear margin (e.g. here, here, and a draw here), while being at a disadvantage in either shots, CCCs or both, but what I rarely do is be muscled off the ball possession wise, and my strikers and wingers tend to be good at converting chances.

For my three examles, 1 was a clear win (I was clinical Atletico wasn't) 2 was a game turned around in the second half, and 3 was a game I drew simply because my players know how to take chances when they come.

When I find myself in a game where I've dominated but not won, I can usually point to two reasons, 1) it is a cup game and I'm playing half my youth team, and the rest backup players, 2) I've gone a long time without significantly changing my match day squad. Lots of rotation is bad but some is neccessary for many reasons, nt least keeping your srtar players on their toes.

RT, I don't even think it's a case of a tactic that the AI can't cope with. It's a flaw in his tactics which is meaning that he is getting loads of possession, but not converting it into genuine goal scoring chances.

Well hang on, it can be both.

Unless something drastic has happened in his saved game, Chelsea will likely have a similar standard of players than his Man United team, yet managed 1 shot on goal and about a third of the possession. I'd say that's the AI failing to cope with his tactics properly.

Yes OP, you've been blathering on and on about how good you are with the game - if only it wasn't for the meddling cheating AI - since at least 2006, we get the idea.

RT, I don't even think it's a case of a tactic that the AI can't cope with. It's a flaw in his tactics which is meaning that he is getting loads of possession, but not converting it into genuine goal scoring chances. And his players are either shooting from distance or having to snatch at chances or taking chances under pressure which is bumping his shot counts up. It's not necessarily a bug, it's a case of taking a simulation, feeding flawed data in and getting flawed output out.

It's clear to me that there are plenty of fans (both of FM and football in general) who just do not understand the basics of football strategy (that's not aimed at the OP or anyone in particular, by the way, it's just a general comment). With FM getting more and more complicated, especially in terms of tactics, these people are getting found out. What SI need to concentrate on is either educating these people, or giving them the tools to bridge this knowledge gap. This is where I am hopeful that the new FM10 tactics creator will come into play. It should certainly prevent some of the more common mistakes, like big gaps in mentalities.

With all due respect i think your WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY out.

First of all in FM its 90% tactic 10% players, whereas IRL its the other way around(approximate estimates of course and should include other attributes)

If you listen to RL Managers talking, many mention the game is often about individual battles, even though football is by and large a team game.

Its often said regarding outfield players that if they win their own individual battle(for instance, more than their share of 50-50 challenges, headers, interceptions, tackles, etc, etc) then the more of these individual battles a team wins the more likely they have of getting the desired result. In FM i can regelularly win each and every battle, yet be on the end of a negative result.

Another thing about FM that is largely wrong is its own interpretation of how the game should actually be played. For instance, for breaking down teams who park the bus it is well documented in FM that that requires you to play a slower tempo and use plenty of width. However IRL teams it is often quoted(by Managers and Ex Footballers) that a team who can manage to play the ball about using a quick tempo will be more likely to succeed and although width is a useful tool it is far from a neccesity as it is in FM.

If you look at how West Ham have struggled so far this season it is more than obvious why. Funnily enough it IS a tactical issue and it has been largely down to Zola playing in too negative fashion either from kick off or trying to SUS early in games we have looked and played competently enough to win. Basically, he has got us playing a style of football that encourages attacking play, but when played in such a negative fashion the whole philosophy falls apart. Thus we are underachieving and will do so until he makes the relevant changes. It is also because he has largely used C Cole as a lone striker when he is obviously a TM who will win flick ons and hold up the ball for other strikers rather than someone who can play up front by themselves.

Most team issues are due to a lack of quality of the players at hand, or Managers trying to get players to play in a position they are not comfortable with, or in such a way that detracts from that particular players game, again something that causes other teams to struggle.

I'm no tactical genious, whether we be talking FM or RL, but i can pick out where problems lie in RL, whereas in FM you end up forever wondering if your def line or your width is just 2 or 3 clicks off?

IRL a lot of how your team could/should play is down to training, this is where you can see what works and what does'nt as well as being able to see first hand what individual players are capable of, again with FM you have no such ability.

If more people would admit to such differences, instead of arguing we would not have such a split in our way of thinking about the game and may actually come up with ways of making this game work to suit us all.

Yes OP, you've been blathering on and on about how good you are with the game - if only it wasn't for the meddling cheating AI - since at least 2006, we get the idea.

He never said the game cheats? :confused:

I don't think they are delibrately trying to cheat players, I just think to make the game more realistic and have tampered with the match engine so you don't win 5 - 0 every game. They have "fixed it" so it is harder to win away from home (just like it is IRL) by making it so the away team are less likely to score and the home team are more likely to score, to try and make it more realistic, but I don't think they have quite got the balance right.

I don't think it is always the tactics to blame.

It was same with injuries before the patch, they "fixed it" so you would have about the same amount of injuries as IRL, but they got the balance completly wrong and made it about double, but people who didn't want to hear a negative word about the game said it must be the training that was to blame.

Hopefully 2010 will be more balanced instead of fixed to try and represent realism.

With all due respect i think your WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY out.

First of all in FM its 90% tactic 10% players, whereas IRL its the other way around(approximate estimates of course and should include other attributes)...

You've pretty much contradicted yourself there though. You've said in real life it's mostly down to players not tactics, but then given a real life example of bad tactics hamstringing good players. I think something similar is happening in your game. There's something wrong with your tactics which is affecting your performances and results. Obviously it's something a lot more subtle that your West Ham example, but I'm sure it's there. Like I've said already, post your tactic or save somewhere are let someone look at it.

Hammer, why don't you try another management game?

All of this misery you are putting yourself through surely isn't worth it?

Regards,

C.

You've pretty much contradicted yourself there though. You've said in real life it's mostly down to players not tactics, but then given a real life example of bad tactics hamstringing good players. I think something similar is happening in your game. There's something wrong with your tactics which is affecting your performances and results. Obviously it's something a lot more subtle that your West Ham example, but I'm sure it's there. Like I've said already, post your tactic or save somewhere are let someone look at it.

No contradiction mate, i merely pointed out that in some circumstances there are Managerial tactical errors at play, conceding the fact that yes it happens. I've seen Sir Alex make tactical errors also, but at least with Zola this can largely go down as his immaturity as a Manger in the top leagues.

You really think that by uploading the Chelsea game for example will show obvious vulnerabilities of the tactic?

I could post a tactic in which i win every game 10-0 and there will still be people here hellbent on proving that its the tactics fault i only won 9-0 in a certain game.

Hammer, why don't you try another management game?

All of this misery you are putting yourself through surely isn't worth it?

Regards,

C.

I'm addicted mate, truth is i despise smoking but apart from a 3 year stint of going cold turkey i have smoked for 20 years.

Like it or not, this is still the best Management game on the market and until that changes, i'm sure i'll be playing FM2010 and yes i'm well aware of how sad that sounds.

As FM has progressed through the years it has become more and more tactic-based to the point where I can't finish a season unless I'm using someone else's tactics, downloaded from here.

I justify this to myself by saying the person whose tactic I've downloaded is my 'Pseudo-assistant Manager'

Hammer, have you ever used one of the highly-rated tactics from here (or anywhere else, for that matter) to see if you experience the same problems? I know I certainly get extremely frustrated when designing my own tactics because I see so much nonsense in the ME, but once I download, say,

, I find these anomalies happen much less frequently.

I mentioned this in another thread (Does the game cheat?), but my opinion is that, perhaps, FM goes about communicating flaws and/or weaknesses in your tactics in a completely absurd manner leading to confusion, frustration and occasional cries of "This game cheats!" (although I'm aware you don't accuse it of cheating) when in fact it's just, to a certain degree, poorly programmed.

I have read (and enjoyed) your threads before mate and you do at least offer plenty of evidence to back up, what are to some people, your strong views on FM and particularly the ME, not to mention the fact you do make a compelling argument. Sadly, loads of people who reply to said threads have nothing to offer whatsoever and more often than not miss the point completely.

Aja

Last but not least, i gave up my chance of Beta testing FM2010, why you might ask? have i finally decided to hang up my FM boots altogether? i very much doubt it, the actual reason for my decision is twofold.

1. I have been petitioning for certain improvements for nigh on 4 years now and despite backing from other FM'ers and insurances of major improvents from SI little if anything has really happened, so i had to ask myself, was taking part in Beta testing FM2010 likely to change anything? the quick, simple and obvious answer was NO!

2. We still have dozens(maybe hundreds?) of well documented issues that have also not been addressed for 4 years or so, if you want to play FM you simply have to roll with the punches and get on with it.

1 - As far as I know you never had a chance to beta test FM2010 as it was not available to the public this year.

2 - Its just a game, and a lot better than the so called competition out there, so just enjoy it and stop trying to pick fault, I guarantee you will enjoy the experience a lot more.

As FM has progressed through the years it has become more and more tactic-based to the point where I can't finish a season unless I'm using someone else's tactics, downloaded from here.

I justify this to myself by saying the person whose tactic I've downloaded is my 'Pseudo-assistant Manager'

Hammer, have you ever used one of the highly-rated tactics from here (or anywhere else, for that matter) to see if you experience the same problems? I know I certainly get extremely frustrated when designing my own tactics because I see so much nonsense in the ME, but once I download, say,

SeXyFoOtBaLl

, I find these anomalies happen much less frequently.

I mentioned this in another thread (Does the game cheat?), but my opinion is that, perhaps, FM goes about communicating flaws and/or weaknesses in your tactics in a completely absurd manner leading to confusion, frustration and occasional cries of "This game cheats!" (although I'm aware you don't accuse it of cheating) when in fact it's just, to a certain degree, poorly programmed.

I have read (and enjoyed) your threads before mate and you do at least offer plenty of evidence to back up, what are to some people, your strong views on FM and particularly the ME, not to mention the fact you do make a compelling argument. Sadly, loads of people who reply to said threads have nothing to offer whatsoever and more often than not miss the point completely.

Aja

Hi mate, i ALWAYS try to make my own tactics when i buy the newest version of FM, but i inevitably end up d/loading other peoples tactics, because my own, which i believe are designed around the world of football tend to end up absolutely useless.

I have posted tactics in which i have deliberately messed up defensive instructions which in the real world would see my team conceding regularly in certain situations, yet watching the ME i do concede more goals, but not in the fashion that is expected.

Because of this, i am left tearing my hair out as do many FM'ers, because there is absolutely NO way of working out what is wrong with your tactic by watching matches, whilst in RL it would be obvious.

I have tried every kind of tactic imaginable, including many tactical sets, using them as best i could in the manner they were described, yet i have always seen the same kind of results and statistics as i've posted before and again above.

At the end of the day we are not privvy to just how much information AI Managers have and cannot see from what is viewed in the ME just what mistakes we are making, or even if its tactical or just a simple lack of player performance on the day?

I actually think i'd make a better RL Manager than a FM Manager, simply because i would be able to instruct my players in a way i understand and know if or not it was my own tactical shortcomings that were at fault.

From what i hear of the new tactical system in place in FM2010 i have both good and bad visions of how it will be implemented. Good being that as in RL, Managers follow a quite rigid rule of how players are set up and instructions implemented, which would seem to put the emphasis on the quality of players rather than the tactic, but on a bad note, it will be highly conceivable that by following a few easily worked out procedures it will also be easy to work out how and why to initiate changes.

I suppose we'll find out soon enough?

2 - Its just a game, and a lot better than the so called competition out there, so just enjoy it and stop trying to pick fault, I guarantee you will enjoy the experience a lot more.

TheGulls - I'm sure one of the reasons FM is so much better than the competition is because of these forums where we are actually encouraged to openly discuss issues we have with the game. SI do read these sort of threads and take on board the content within. Not all ideas are implemented, nor are all problems immediately addressed but without this sort of discussion I would argue that FM would be nowhere near the game that it is today.

Saying that we should just accept it the way it is, and attempting to discourage mature debate is actually counter-productive in the long run, imvho.

No contradiction mate, i merely pointed out that in some circumstances there are Managerial tactical errors at play, conceding the fact that yes it happens. I've seen Sir Alex make tactical errors also, but at least with Zola this can largely go down as his immaturity as a Manger in the top leagues.

You really think that by uploading the Chelsea game for example will show obvious vulnerabilities of the tactic?

I could post a tactic in which i win every game 10-0 and there will still be people here hellbent on proving that its the tactics fault i only won 9-0 in a certain game.

I think the opposite may well be true. If I were testing FM's latest ME or working for SI I'd want to see what exactly it is re tactics you are doing in 09 to pulverise a top 4 side away from home like that, plus the other pkms to see how you are consistently generating as many CCCs as you seem to be as it is superior to the comparable quality AI sides.

If it's a fundamental issue (e.g. the winger byline goal) I'd want to fix it.

If it's a footballing concept that the AI can't deal with or adjust to (e.g. 3 vs 2 in the middle of the park) I'd want to fix it.

Either way in an ideal match engine it wouldn't be possible to do what you did to Chelsea and, again hypothetically speaking, personally I'd be more concerned with that than trying to upstage you or jumping in here shouting 'AHA! I told you your tactic sucked despite what the match stats indicate'.

1 - As far as I know you never had a chance to beta test FM2010 as it was not available to the public this year.

2 - Its just a game, and a lot better than the so called competition out there, so just enjoy it and stop trying to pick fault, I guarantee you will enjoy the experience a lot more.

1. Yes it was and i was given the opportunity to do so(i have the e-mail)

2. It is just a game, but we have forums in place to point out issues with the game and some of these despite promises to the contrary have not been addressed in many a year.

For all its simplicity i actually felt more like a football manager in CM01/02 than in the last 4 or 5 versions of FM.

I love FM09 just as much as all the others, I dont understand why people bash 09 so much, In my opinion its just as good if not better than 07 and 08.

For all its simplicity i actually felt more like a football manager in CM01/02 than in the last 4 or 5 versions of FM.

My problem is similar. Although I started with CM4 and only really dabbled a bit with that, it was FM05 that got me really hooked.

I have a footballing philosophy, a style that I like the game to be played and it was fairy easy to implement in 05's game, not to mention a joy to watch once the team gelled.

It's fair to say that seeing as this style is based on 'real football' (and works in the real world), then it should also work in "The most realistic football management simulator".

It did on FM05, still on FM06, FM07 with a little tweaking and re-thinking, started to get difficult on FM08 and is impossible on FM09. The tactics have got more and more difficult because the system of implementation is getting more and more confusing and totally lacking in communication to the player (in so far as being able to tell WHERE you are going wrong).

I now haven't a clue about tactics, nor how to build them successfully despite an expanded and in-depth explanation in the new manual.

The whole thing is so ridiculously vague. It's a case of 'altering slider X will have Y effect on slider Z'

But we've no idea what slider X or Z do, nor what the effect of 'Y' is. Watching the match makes no difference because, as I've said before, flaws can be (and are) displayed in the most nonsensical way.

I think the opposite may well be true. If I were testing FM's latest ME or working for SI I'd want to see what exactly it is re tactics you are doing in 09 to pulverise a top 4 side away from home like that, plus the other pkms to see how you are consistently generating as many CCCs as you seem to be as it is superior to the comparable quality AI sides.

If it's a fundamental issue (e.g. the winger byline goal) I'd want to fix it.

If it's a footballing concept that the AI can't deal with or adjust to (e.g. 3 vs 2 in the middle of the park) I'd want to fix it.

Either way in an ideal match engine it wouldn't be possible to do what you did to Chelsea and, again hypothetically speaking, personally I'd be more concerned with that than trying to upstage you or jumping in here shouting 'AHA! I told you your tactic sucked despite what the match stats indicate'.

Seconded - I think it'd give us an insight in to where the AI was going wrong against your tactics.

With all due respect i think your WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY out.

First of all in FM its 90% tactic 10% players, whereas IRL its the other way around(approximate estimates of course and should include other attributes)

If you listen to RL Managers talking, many mention the game is often about individual battles, even though football is by and large a team game.

Its often said regarding outfield players that if they win their own individual battle(for instance, more than their share of 50-50 challenges, headers, interceptions, tackles, etc, etc) then the more of these individual battles a team wins the more likely they have of getting the desired result. In FM i can regelularly win each and every battle, yet be on the end of a negative result.

Another thing about FM that is largely wrong is its own interpretation of how the game should actually be played. For instance, for breaking down teams who park the bus it is well documented in FM that that requires you to play a slower tempo and use plenty of width. However IRL teams it is often quoted(by Managers and Ex Footballers) that a team who can manage to play the ball about using a quick tempo will be more likely to succeed and although width is a useful tool it is far from a neccesity as it is in FM.

If you look at how West Ham have struggled so far this season it is more than obvious why. Funnily enough it IS a tactical issue and it has been largely down to Zola playing in too negative fashion either from kick off or trying to SUS early in games we have looked and played competently enough to win. Basically, he has got us playing a style of football that encourages attacking play, but when played in such a negative fashion the whole philosophy falls apart. Thus we are underachieving and will do so until he makes the relevant changes. It is also because he has largely used C Cole as a lone striker when he is obviously a TM who will win flick ons and hold up the ball for other strikers rather than someone who can play up front by themselves.

Most team issues are due to a lack of quality of the players at hand, or Managers trying to get players to play in a position they are not comfortable with, or in such a way that detracts from that particular players game, again something that causes other teams to struggle.

I'm no tactical genious, whether we be talking FM or RL, but i can pick out where problems lie in RL, whereas in FM you end up forever wondering if your def line or your width is just 2 or 3 clicks off?

IRL a lot of how your team could/should play is down to training, this is where you can see what works and what does'nt as well as being able to see first hand what individual players are capable of, again with FM you have no such ability.

If more people would admit to such differences, instead of arguing we would not have such a split in our way of thinking about the game and may actually come up with ways of making this game work to suit us all.

Actualy thats what I think the future of tactics in FM should be about.

In FM10 we will see player roles come into play but we still pick those roles. We can have Gerrard playing as a right winger and because of his attributes he will be quite good. Yet he (when he does play AMR) is more of a wide midfielder Lennon on the other hand IS a right winger.

You see, I feel that players should come with player roles instead of positions with his ability in these positions defining how well he plays.

So instead of a generic ST we would have Van Nistleroy has a striker, Rooney as a deep lying Forward, Owen as a poacher and Fast striker, Heskey as a TM and Torres as a complete Forward and fast striker.

Your main tactical decisions should then be on how to utulise these players and global team settings. Can C Cole play up front by himself? Yes if he has an AM in close support. Should the the ball be played long and should it be to his feet or head?

Should we keep playing Gerrard on the right- where he cuts inside, plays through balls and his long diagonal crosses or should we have Lennon who will try and beat the FB and cross from the byline.

Individual players need more personality on the pitch dictated by specialised roles/physicality/temperament.

This kind of change, I feel, will take is more into the realm of reality and with the ME changed to reflect this it will mean the end of tactics that the ME cannot cope with Chelsea vs Man utd being a lot closer affair.