Defenders let the opponent get the ball

It happened a few times before, but the last time it happened I said enough.

Opponent goalkeeper starts the game with a free-kick from their area, the ball falls behind my two central defenders. The defenders are in a comfortable position, the opponent striker's way behind them. The ball enters my penalty area and all of a sudden my two central defenders slow down, the opponent striker gets past them, takes the ball and my defender fouls the guy and they win a penalty.

Is this a bug, my tactics, or the stupidity of the defenders?

Also sometimes it happens that my players don't attempt to get the ball in front of them, instead they run back.

Any ideas / suggestions?

the stupidity of the defenders

The limitations of the 3D engine

the stupidity of the defenders

Not this...its what el sid said. Noticed this problem with 10.1 and now 10.2 and not just with the central defenders, but throughout the pitch. However the main focus for the next patch is the CDs drifting issue...asked about this a couple of times and no one replied yet

Not this...its what el sid said. Noticed this problem with 10.1 and now 10.2 and not just with the central defenders, but throughout the pitch. However the main focus for the next patch is the CDs drifting issue...asked about this a couple of times and no one replied yet

What was your question?

What was your question?

http://www.community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=181424

And this one from 09: http://www.community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=122143

I think someone else started a thread with the same problem

http://www.community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=181424

And this one from 09: http://www.community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=122143

I think someone else started a thread with the same problem

You know the defending is being looked at for 10.3. You've been told.

You know the defending is being looked at for 10.3. You've been told.

yeah i know...so?? the thread was started way before SI even said that 10.3 was in the works...and obviously they wont be telling what changes are being made for 10.3 even before the game was released right? The OP asked a question, someone told it was because of the defenders, i said it was not. Maybe you need to tell this to the OP??

EDIT: SI said they are looking into the CDs drifting bug...no one said anything about what i had asked

yeah i know...so?? the thread was started way before SI even said that 10.3 was in the works...and obviously they wont be telling what changes are being made for 10.3 even before the game was released right? The OP asked a question, someone told it was because of the defenders, i said it was not. Maybe you need to tell this to the OP??

Your post was in January, after SI announced a 3 patch strategy stating one would be around end of Feb/March. It's also been mentioned that the defending is being looked at.

The limitations of the 3D engine

OP, this ^^^^

yeah i know...so?? the thread was started way before SI even said that 10.3 was in the works...and obviously they wont be telling what changes are being made for 10.3 even before the game was released right? The OP asked a question, someone told it was because of the defenders, i said it was not. Maybe you need to tell this to the OP??

EDIT: SI said they are looking into the CDs drifting bug...no one said anything about what i had asked

SI stated that the entire CCC and 1-on-1 situation was being looked at.

Your post was in January, after SI announced a 3 patch strategy stating one would be around end of Feb/March. It's also been mentioned that the defending is being looked at.

ok lets not start again but firstly, i had known that there was going to be a third patch since SI always release one with a data update (if you are referring to the thread started by Miles then just said that a third patch might be released and did not say what was being looked into), secondly i dont keep a diary so i dont know the exact date when SI announced that the CD drifting problem was being looked at and thirdly i think it was Oliver or Paul Collyer in the superkeepers thread who said that the CDs drifting issue was being worked upon and when i asked about this issue i got no reply (not that i was demanding one)

SI stated that the entire CCC and 1-on-1 situation was being looked at Now where did this come from??? Have i mentioned about CCCs either here or in the link that i have given?

SI stated that the entire CCC and 1-on-1 situation was being looked at. Now where did this come from??? Have i mentioned about CCCs either here or in the link that i have given?

That was what was being discussed in the thread you commented on, that prompted me to reply to you here.

And that is the pinicle of the whole defensive balls up anyway.

That was what was being discussed in the thread you commented on, that prompted me to reply to you here.

And that is the pinicle of the whole defensive balls up anyway.

Do you mean to say that 1v1 problem and this problem is the same (ie this problem causes 1v1 or vice versa?) I think i made it clear as to what i was trying to say there and have since then not commented since i already know that SI are working on it (and have already said so in this thread too) and saying anything more about it will be a waste of time. The OP asked about the defending problem not 1v1 (maybe we can start leap of faith 2 here?) Agreed that i have not read each and every post in this forum but from what i have read, SI have said that they are working on the CDs problem and not this (maybe they might have said it and i have not read abt it)

Do you mean to say that 1v1 problem and this problem is the same (ie this problem causes 1v1 or vice versa?) I think i made it clear as to what i was trying to say there and have since then not commented since i already know that SI are working on it (and have already said so in this thread too) and saying anything more about it will be a waste of time. The OP asked about the defending problem not 1v1 (maybe we can start leap of faith 2 here?) Agreed that i have not read each and every post in this forum but from what i have read, SI have said that they are working on the CDs problem and not this (maybe they might have said it and i have not read abt it)

Okay, we aren't understanding each other.

Let me just explain the bug that causes the OP's problem and be done with it.

When the ball lands, for example, between the defence and the GK, the ME calculates who is closest, and therefore who is the most likely to reach the ball. There's a fault in the calculation system that makes it choose a player that is not the closest one to the ball.

Okay, we aren't understanding each other.

Then help me understand. Because the problem in this thread and the other thread are very different. That one dealt with the user's frustration wrt 1v1 chances. This thread was about defenders not controlling the ball and instead run away, allowing the opponents to take control. Yet you say "And that is the pinicle of the whole defensive balls up anyway" (was unable to find the meaning of pinicle so me not understanding is not my fault)

When the ball lands, for example, between the defence and the GK, the ME calculates who is closest, and therefore who is the most likely to reach the ball. There's a fault in the calculation system that makes it choose a player that is not the closest one to the ball.

Wouldnt it simple to just say this at the beginning rather than point out to me that SI have said that they will be releasing a new patch (which i already know)

Then help me understand. Because the problem in this thread and the other thread are very different. That one dealt with the user's frustration wrt 1v1 chances. This thread was about defenders not controlling the ball and instead run away, allowing the opponents to take control. Yet you say "And that is the pinicle of the whole defensive balls up anyway" (was unable to find the meaning of pinicle so me not understanding is not my fault

Pinnacle = Cause/Result/Top of

Then help me understand. Because the problem in this thread and the other thread are very different. That one dealt with the user's frustration wrt 1v1 chances. This thread was about defenders not controlling the ball and instead run away, allowing the opponents to take control. Yet you say "And that is the pinicle of the whole defensive balls up anyway" (was unable to find the meaning of pinicle so me not understanding is not my fault)

I missed out a 'n', though is was pretty obvious what I meant. You've just gone down several notches in my view of you, the way you're picking up on spelling.

This is the meaning:

Pinnacle = Cause/Result/Top of

Hope that makes it clear for you.

Wouldnt it simple to just say this at the beginning rather than point out to me that SI have said that they will be releasing a new patch (which i already know)

I only just remembered it.

Pinnacle = Cause/Result/Top of

Once again i am given the info that i already know and i had not asked for. I know the meaning of pinnacle thank you...i was looking for the meaning of pinicle. Maybe its a new word cause i equated it to being "this problem causes (since Pinnacle = Cause/Result/Top of) 1v1 or vice versa??" and he said that i am not understanding him....

So assuming that it was a typo, how can a midfielder/striker/winger not closing down to collect a loose ball cause CDs to drift and strikers to miss 1v1s?

Maybe i am dragging this thread into another argument but when i made a logical reply to the OP's question, you tell me that SI have a 3 patch strategy (which i had known even before you told me) while vic says that 1v1 situation was being looked at (again which i had known before he told me)

You've just gone down several notches in my view of you, the way you're picking up on spelling.

I do not pick at spellings/grammar mistakes because my knowledge of English is passable at best...i assumed that it was pinnacle and asked you a question and you said that we dont understand each other so i thought maybe its a new word :confused:(i was being serious and not sarcastic here)

I do not pick at spellings/grammar mistakes because my knowledge of English is passable at best...i assumed that it was pinnacle and asked you a question and you said that we dont understand each other so i thought maybe its a new word :confused:(i was being serious and not sarcastic here)

Nah, it was just a typo.

Once again i am given the info that i already know and i had not asked for. I know the meaning of pinnacle thank you...i was looking for the meaning of pinicle. Maybe its a new word cause i equated it to being "this problem causes (since Pinnacle = Cause/Result/Top of) 1v1 or vice versa??" and he said that i am not understanding him....

You said you didn't know what it meant. Baker was helping you.

So assuming that it was a typo' date=' how can a midfielder/striker/winger not closing down to collect a loose ball cause CDs to drift and strikers to miss 1v1s?[/quote']

How many times do I have to tell you?! I've explained the OP's problem!

Maybe i am dragging this thread into another argument but when i made a logical reply to the OP's question' date=' you tell me that SI have a 3 patch strategy (which i had known even before you told me) while vic says that 1v1 situation was being looked at (again which i had known before he told me)[/quote']

Yes, you are. Why don't you stop?

If you already have the information, don't ask questions about it, and certainly don't complain when I answer you.

OK...i dont want to get an infraction just because you are either not understanding what i am saying (and i dont think i have made a typo) or carried the argument from that previous thread to here. So i will definitely take your sage advice and stop after this post (because for anyone else looking..it might seem that i am fighting just for the kicks when there is no real problem)

.

You said you didn't know what it meant. Baker was helping you.

I said i dont know what pinicle meant and after you said you dont understand me i actually thought it was a word...i do know what pinnacle means...even so..thank you baker for trying to help me out

How many times do I have to tell you?! I've explained the OP's problem!

The OP got the answer as early as the second reply by el cid so maybe thats the reason he has not posted again here. As baker might tell you, i love sequences so let me paste it to you here:

vic: You know the defending is being looked at for 10.3. You've been told.

tingting: SI said they are looking into the CDs drifting bug...no one said anything about what i had asked

vic: SI stated that the entire CCC and 1-on-1 situation was being looked at (when you can clearly read from the links that i have given that there was no mention of 1v1)

tingting: SI stated that the entire CCC and 1-on-1 situation was being looked at Now where did this come from??? Have i mentioned about CCCs either here or in the link that i have given?

vic: That was what was being discussed in the thread you commented on, that prompted me to reply to you here. And that is the pinicle of the whole defensive balls up anyway. (that being 1v1 which means 1v1 being the cause (since Pinnacle = Cause/Result/Top of ) of the defensive problem (which here is players not closing down loose balls)

tingting: Do you mean to say that 1v1 problem and this problem is the same (ie this problem causes 1v1 or vice versa?) (notice i used cause which means i assumed pinicle to be pinnacle)

vic: Okay, we aren't understanding each other.

Did you understand now what is the problem?? I am speaking about players not closing down loose balls, you are speaking about 1v1 and then saying that players not closing down loose balls cause 1v1s

Yes, you are. Why don't you stop?

If you already have the information, don't ask questions about it, and certainly don't complain when I answer you.

I asked whether SI are going to fix this issue in the third patch and you and baker say that there is a third patch where in the CDs drifting and 1v1 situation is being fixed. I am not going to ask what is being fixed in 10.3 unless i know 10.3 is being released right???

Firstly, i did not ask questions about which i have info...secondly i did not ask you specifically (i know you were trying to help when you asked what question) and thirdly i ended the conversation by pointing out you need to tell the OP that SI are looking at defending when i already know it and yet you came back once again saying that SI are looking at 1v1s

As i said...i will take your advice...i have more important things to do than try to explain you where i conversation is going...

Dont worry tingting head and brick wall spring to mind. As i have said elsewhere Vic and Simon gang up together. Simon TRIES to outsmart you but when he fails he cleverly takes a back seat and lets Vic drag arguments on and on and on.

ting ting - I guess the cut and thrust of it is unless your testing the patch, then you wont know what is going to be fixed. The most any of us ever get maybe is a "we're looking at it". In actual fact, from my time testing 09, I can tell you that SI will be looking at many other things that they haven't said "we're looking at it" to.

The only way we'll find out is through the release notes that go with the patch

Dont worry tingting head and brick wall spring to mind. As i have said elsewhere Vic and Simon gang up together. Simon TRIES to outsmart you but when he fails he cleverly takes a back seat and lets Vic drag arguments on and on and on.

Well that was immediately disproven

Dont worry tingting head and brick wall spring to mind. As i have said elsewhere Vic and Simon gang up together. Simon TRIES to outsmart you but when he fails he cleverly takes a back seat and lets Vic drag arguments on and on and on.

How many times am I going to have to tell you to grow up before you get the message?

It happened a few times before, but the last time it happened I said enough.

Opponent goalkeeper starts the game with a free-kick from their area, the ball falls behind my two central defenders. The defenders are in a comfortable position, the opponent striker's way behind them. The ball enters my penalty area and all of a sudden my two central defenders slow down, the opponent striker gets past them, takes the ball and my defender fouls the guy and they win a penalty.

Is this a bug, my tactics, or the stupidity of the defenders?

Also sometimes it happens that my players don't attempt to get the ball in front of them, instead they run back.

Any ideas / suggestions?

Only once something similar to me........... a cross came into box landing just outside six yard box there was 2 defenders there and keeper behind:thup:

opposition striker running from the d................all my players stopped and let the striker get it and lash it in:rolleyes:

I was not amused..........but nothing like since...so not a major bug if it is one