Why does the game refuse my team a win in a certain match?

On paper my team wrecks the other team, the other side beats me 4-0 i wasn't going to accept that so i reloaded something i have never ever done.

They beat me again 3-1 i tried completely different tactics.

3rd reload another 5-0 thrashing again completely different tactics.

4th reload another beating 3-0

5th reload i go 0-2 up at 20mins they then start scoring for fun again beating me 6-2.

What annoys me is they use the same TACTICS every match so is this game saying sorry your not allowed to win today no matter what you try?

Or am i doing something really wrong here? i'm beating teams that are alot better then me yet a team in the bottom half of the league beats me EVERY time with the same tactic?

It just sounds scripted to me.

Oh and yes i took my beating and lost the 3 pts but that isn't the point i'm trying to make.

The next match starts the moment your previous match ends.

Your save I'll bet is loaded right before your next match so a number of variables have already been locked in at that stage.

Changing tactics won't help as teams/players need 10+ matches to get to know them unless you already have them in match prep.

Other than that if you upload your save someone will win your match fairly quickly judging from past threads.

It's just one of those things, not saying you should but I would bet a lot of money that if you had uploaded the save before that game that several people would be able to win the match. If it was scripted it would not be different scores all the time. Could be that the way they play suits playing against your tactics and when you changing your team might not be used to it.

I used 2 tactics i had stored ;/

I didn't realise the next match starts as soon as the one ends.

Ah well just take my loss and move on

Appreciate the replies.

I have often reloaded when I have some particularly ludicrous event happen, like a red card at the start of the game or a thousand injuries, and they do seem to reoccur in consecutive reloads, although with some slight change in context... it does really seem like that when the game wants you to have a man sent off, you're going to have a man sent off. Or more often, if the game wants a midfielde of yours to get injured, one of them will get injured.

If your gonna quit and re-load, changing what you say before the match starts will have a bigger impact than changing tactics.

Like danny said, this is Morale Manager. Football tactics don't matter. Having the best players in the world doesn't matter. If your players have poor morale or complacency, you'll LOSE.

I have a problem where its always the same old teams, season after season, that give me problems!

Leicester & Brighton are the ones!

Im Liverpool. I can beat anyone else, them the pair ALWAYS beat me.

I have a problem where its always the same old teams, season after season, that give me problems!

Leicester & Brighton are the ones!

Im Liverpool. I can beat anyone else, them the pair ALWAYS beat me.

No shame in losing to Leicester

OP - What sort of team talks do you give? If i was a massive favorite and on a good run I would aggresively tell the players I "expect to win" and if they are still below par at half time i'd give them a roasting regardless of the score. However, I find that since the latest patch this only really works once i've proved myself, until then my players seem to just ignore me.

Also so Man Utd have lost to both Blackburn and Newcastle (comfortably) recently irl. Hard to swallow but certainly not unbelievable.

Could you upload your save?

try facing arsenal 3 times... and drawing all 3 as blackpool lol

i reloaded a game, got a complety differant score and no injury that i sustained in the first instance, so just luck.

The next match starts the moment your previous match ends.

Your save I'll bet is loaded right before your next match so a number of variables have already been locked in at that stage.

That doesn't even make any sense. I can understand certain things being calculated, but the actual game can't start until the fixture is actually being processed, segment by segment (as each tactic change/substitution is made during the game).

That doesn't even make any sense. I can understand certain things being calculated, but the actual game can't start until the fixture is actually being processed, segment by segment (as each tactic change/substitution is made during the game).

I think what he means the next match calculations start when you give your full time teamtalk for the previous one. Also before your next game press conferences and player interactions will go towards your players motivation and morale. Make enough mistakes in the build up to the match and it could be very difficult to win even against weaker opposition.

I think what he means the next match calculations start when you give your full time teamtalk for the previous one. Also before your next game press conferences and player interactions will go towards your players motivation and morale. Make enough mistakes in the build up to the match and it could be very difficult to win even against weaker opposition.

None of these have near that effect, no matter how often it is being theorized they would have, and the entire thing having long turned into a perpetual myth just because of it. Of course the build-up influences some odds, otherwise it wouldn't be in the game, either for yourself to take on or your assistant (who I let do a number of PKs myself). But as soon as the OP will upload his save it likely won't take long for someone to prove him wrong - in particular if he really was playing an inferior side to his. Has always been the case.

A player's morale, by the way, is largely influenced by results first and foremost, not any talking - any effect on morale directly is small, unless you outright upset a player, which AI managers do too.

None of these have near that effect, no matter how often it is being theorized they would have, and the entire thing having long turned into a perpetual myth just because of it. Of course the build-up influences some odds, otherwise it wouldn't be in the game, either for yourself to take on or your assistant (who I let do a number of PKs myself). But as soon as the OP will upload his save it likely won't take long for someone to prove him wrong - in particular if he really was playing an inferior side to his. Has always been the case.

Hear what your saying and I maybe made it sound a bit black and white but if a user makes his team overconfident or nervous without using the right teamtalk they could quickly find themselves in bother in a match. It is ultimately putting all the little ingredients together that make the perfect pie imo.

Of course if the save was uploaded it would be beaten immediately. No match is unwinnable.

None of these have near that effect, no matter how often it is being theorized they would have, and the entire thing having long turned into a perpetual myth just because of it. Of course the build-up influences some odds, otherwise it wouldn't be in the game, either for yourself to take on or your assistant (who I let do a number of PKs myself). But as soon as the OP will upload his save it likely won't take long for someone to prove him wrong - in particular if he really was playing an inferior side to his. Has always been the case.

A player's morale, by the way, is largely influenced by results first and foremost, not any talking - any effect on morale directly is small, unless you outright upset a player, which AI managers do too.

Hey svenc

Just seen your edit after replying.

The reason I said that was i've seen individual players morale go up or down by one notch regularly through press conferences and through private chats. For example if I tell a player his form has dipped or he hasn't trained hard enough and he agrees with me he will often increase his morale and if he disagrees his morale will often decrease. These changes are small and are not guarenteed but definately happen. Also as another example if a player with poor morale is given an "I Have Faith" teamtalk his morale can go up a point. Am I wasting my time with this side of the game then?

Obviously when all is said and done you still need to get your tactics and team selection right but once you know your squad that should be the easy bit.

Am I wasting my time with this side of the game then?

No, but at the same time it isn't a requirement for getting results and a match cannot ever be lost or won in the pre-build of a match. That the game would be solely about keeping the player's morale up by a more hands-on manager approach and getting the best results possible in a team talk is a theory often brought up by someone who has a "tactic that has brought results in previous matches", thus never adapts to the match situation or opposition and jumps to the conclusion that it must be morale and team talks that made the difference first and foremost, not the full backs always bombing forward at all times which this time allowed the opposition to sneak back into the game, for instance. Morale has been further toned down, in particular now that both "Superb" and "abysmal" morales have been made much more difficult to achieve and sustain, which both had a comparably big effect on a player's performance - you will likely remember the many runs both good and bad from older FMs and FM 2012 before the patch. It's a much more level and less "emo" playing field out there, if you ask me.

Good points well made mate. I'm actually two games into a new season so might let my assman takes press conferences for the season to see how much difference it makes to my playing style. Also yes I remember those winning streaks because of superb morale but not as much as I remember the winless streaks because of players wanting to hang themselves, they always seem to stick in the memory for longer.

Well, next time just remember that the AI is (or was) being affected too. This and that it occasionally deliberately makes "mistakes" depending on the edited character traits of the AI manager. "Mistakes" that many FM players would rarely do, such as even storming out a press conference. I've seen Capello losing his cool at least twice already.

I think what he means the next match calculations start when you give your full time teamtalk for the previous one. Also before your next game press conferences and player interactions will go towards your players motivation and morale. Make enough mistakes in the build up to the match and it could be very difficult to win even against weaker opposition.

Indeed.

Svenc has made some good points and press conferences/player interaction etc don't have as big affect as they used to but they still make a small difference.

Make enough bad choices prior to kickoff and it can make a match much more difficult to win.

Tactics are key though as Svenc has pointed out, make good choices, react to whats happening on the pitch and you can overcome any prematch poor choices you've made. If the save was uploaded someone would win the match fairly quickly as has been proven in previous threads.

If your gonna quit and re-load, changing what you say before the match starts will have a bigger impact than changing tactics.

Yeah, that's true. Reloading might often turn around a result, but specific things still seem to happen (like injuries).

On paper my team wrecks the other team, the other side beats me 4-0 i wasn't going to accept that so i reloaded something i have never ever done.

They beat me again 3-1 i tried completely different tactics.

3rd reload another 5-0 thrashing again completely different tactics.

4th reload another beating 3-0

5th reload i go 0-2 up at 20mins they then start scoring for fun again beating me 6-2.

What annoys me is they use the same TACTICS every match so is this game saying sorry your not allowed to win today no matter what you try?

Or am i doing something really wrong here? i'm beating teams that are alot better then me yet a team in the bottom half of the league beats me EVERY time with the same tactic?

It just sounds scripted to me.

Oh and yes i took my beating and lost the 3 pts but that isn't the point i'm trying to make.

The bolded section is where you are going wrong. Sometimes you have to accept a result and move on, even when it seems like the game is out to get you. I had a game last night where I beat Man Utd 2-0 away from home, despite them dominating. Should I reload because I felt the game gave me an unfair victory? Hell no, and it works both ways.

You say the opposition played the same tactics every game, but how do you know this? Sure, they may have the same starting formation, but they could have made tactical changes 5 minutes in to counter what you were doing without changing their formation.

To all you re-loading moaners:

"You can't beat karma"

i reloaded blackpool v city a few times

4-1 loss

6-1 loss (bull)

2-1 loss

2-0 loss

The AI makes tactical changes while teh match is being played, depending on how the match is going the changes will be altered resulting in differences. Just because you see the same setup when the match begins does not mean the Ai plays exactly the same everytime you reload. "The AI cheats because I can't beat it" sentiment has been here since the first CM, no one as of yet has been able to prove the AI actually does cheat. Also, reloading the same match over and over again does not change the state of your players. Reloading and using the same tactic and player setup wouldn't magically result in a big win when you lost the last time.

As Everton, I beat Chelsea away 1-0, dominated, next week I played Wolves at home, needing a win to stay top, I was 4-0 down after twenty minutes.

That's FM for you.

To all you righteous jackasses:

"I payed 50 euros for this game and I play it whatever way I goddamn want."

If your gonna reload just because you lost... may I suggest.. use the data editor.. give all your players 20 on every stat.. if you still lose, reduce every other teams players in the game to 1 on every stat... if you still lose... I think paul mckenna, that bloke that does hypnosis can help to make you think you won! cool.

erm, i still lost regardless, just showing it is random.

reloading will turn around a result. eventually, but what is the point?

If your gonna reload just because you lost... may I suggest.. use the data editor.. give all your players 20 on every stat.. if you still lose, reduce every other teams players in the game to 1 on every stat... if you still lose... I think paul mckenna, that bloke that does hypnosis can help to make you think you won! cool.

If your gonna reload just because you lost... may I suggest.. use the data editor.. give all your players 20 on every stat.. if you still lose, reduce every other teams players in the game to 1 on every stat... if you still lose... I think paul mckenna, that bloke that does hypnosis can help to make you think you won! cool.

The idea a lot of people advocate; that team talks and morale both have little say on a result, have you ever played FM? When a tactic works, it works - it never stops working, so if you stick to one tactic in all matches team talks will have a major impact on the match. The "adjust to the opponent" brigade never seems to understand the frustration many players feel when it becomes abundantly clear that whatever happens on the pitch is entirely on the AI's premises: If they counter you must counter too, if they defend deep you must draw them out or otherwise beat that strategy, if they tackle your playmaker hard taking him out of the game you must change his role or position to accomodate that, if they have fast strikers you need to defend deep, big strong attackers must be met with big strong defenders etc etc etc. So where is MY influence on the game? Do I even play it - does it matter that I virtually sit on the bench watching? Where is my team on the pitch, do they need to show up? What's the point of the game?

When will the AI have to deal with the premises I set for the game? When will I be "first" and the AI attempt to deal with that?

The "adjust your tactic" rhetoric regarding the importance of team talks only work for people using the TC and shouts. It doesn't apply to the other half of SI's customers, who develops a tactic (or three) that works well and then concentrate on team building. Anyone doing so will find out that a failed half-time team talk could mean the difference between major victory and an awful beating.

Based on who belongs to the other half, I'd say that SI is attempting to kick those customers out. I'd prefer if they are honest about it rather than using the back door like now.

The idea a lot of people advocate; that team talks and morale both have little say on a result, have you ever played FM? When a tactic works, it works - it never stops working, so if you stick to one tactic in all matches team talks will have a major impact on the match. The "adjust to the opponent" brigade never seems to understand the frustration many players feel when it becomes abundantly clear that whatever happens on the pitch is entirely on the AI's premises: If they counter you must counter too, if they defend deep you must draw them out or otherwise beat that strategy, if they tackle your playmaker hard taking him out of the game you must change his role or position to accomodate that, if they have fast strikers you need to defend deep, big strong attackers must be met with big strong defenders etc etc etc. So where is MY influence on the game? Do I even play it - does it matter that I virtually sit on the bench watching? Where is my team on the pitch, do they need to show up? What's the point of the game?

When will the AI have to deal with the premises I set for the game? When will I be "first" and the AI attempt to deal with that?

The "adjust your tactic" rhetoric regarding the importance of team talks only work for people using the TC and shouts. It doesn't apply to the other half of SI's customers, who develops a tactic (or three) that works well and then concentrate on team building. Anyone doing so will find out that a failed half-time team talk could mean the difference between major victory and an awful beating.

Based on who belongs to the other half, I'd say that SI is attempting to kick those customers out. I'd prefer if they are honest about it rather than using the back door like now.

It isnt one way. I set the premise with my sides, from FM10 onwards i have played the same frameworks, using the same 3 shapes (4-4-2, 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3) unless i am playing a unique formation save which i occaisonally do. For example if they have fast stikers i dont defend deep, i maintain my style of play because it is still good enough from the off to cut off their source. Very rarely do i have to be a reactionary manager, if anything the AI is reactionary to me (i'd arue not reactionary enough).

Things like big strong attackers, well what do you expect? Its the same in real life, we seen it often a enough when a powerful CF is up against a defender who cant handle him. Not sure why you'd expect to be different, be it you or the AI.

If they set your playmaker to be heavily marked, much like real life, you need the player to be good enough to escape the treatment, or a tactical adjustment. The fact that they have picked out your playmaker in the first place is them reacting to the threat, they are countering you

Football in real life does feature counter, and counter-counter, its fluid. Teams will make adjustments. Even Barcelona make small adjustments. It's the same in game.

Like danny said, this is Morale Manager. Football tactics don't matter. Having the best players in the world doesn't matter. If your players have poor morale or complacency, you'll LOSE.

Don't quite agree with that.

I'm on a long term game with Wrexham, currently sitting in midtable of League One. I'd changed my tactics at the start of the season from a direct game to a more possession based game and things started well, but drifted quite badly over a 5 game period. At the end of the 5 game period, I had drew 1 and lost 4 with a squad that was devoid of confidence AND motiviation. A team meeting didn't help, infact it made it much worse.

Next game was away to Swindon. I changed my tactics to a more defensive system (flat 4-4-2 as standard, rigid, defensive, no roaming, no creative freedom, more direct passing). I won the game 1-0 but it could have been 6 by half time.

The "adjust your tactic" rhetoric regarding the importance of team talks only work for people using the TC and shouts. It doesn't apply to the other half of SI's customers, who develops a tactic (or three) that works well and then concentrate on team building. Anyone doing so will find out that a failed half-time team talk could mean the difference between major victory and an awful beating.

I use 1 formation, 4-4-2, set up the way i like it, the only changes i make during a game are touchline shouts, i can honestly say i have never lost a match based on choosing the "wrong" team talk, they are just not that powerful, perhaps for 5 minutes at the start of a half my team might not look as fluid as it should, quick touchline shout and its fine.

People really really need to stop looking at each induvidual feature as being more important than the next, the whole picture is important, players, tactics, moral, team talks, game day instructions, they all count towards the win, loss or draw, to focus solely on one part, or to blame just one part is the failing of 90% of the complaints i read on here.

The "adjust your tactic" rhetoric regarding the importance of team talks only work for people using the TC and shouts. It doesn't apply to the other half of SI's customers, who develops a tactic (or three) that works well and then concentrate on team building. Anyone doing so will find out that a failed half-time team talk could mean the difference between major victory and an awful beating.

Exactly the kind of thing I was talking about. The flawed logic is assuming that there are universal tactics that would carry every game, in particular considering that all you are doing is influencing the odds in an environment in which randomness plays its part, rather than being in full controll all the time - and then jumping to the conclusion that it must have been the talks that were the number one deciding factor when the odd result wasn't due. They are, after all, the only thing you then change all game. But I think this has been adressed countless times before by wwfan and others I guess already. Regardless how many influence talks actually have on the outcome of a game - this certainly is amongst the worst possible ways of trying to find out as it is based on fundamentally flawed logic.

I've never used just the TC and shouts only, it's rather a mix of both sliders and these, and I cannot in any way relate what you are suggesting. I got AI players unnerved by going hard onto them myself, exploited slow paced full backs, got players like de Jong losing their cool and sent off, frustrated Barcelona's midfield interplay right at Camp Nou and so on and so on. All the while never having read any elaborate team talk guide, and getting reactions both good and bad (which the AI does too, and which they are an integral part of the entire setup). Naturally, trial&erroring until you hit onto something the AI can't handle that well (which is what the majority of plug&play one size fits all slider settings are and must be aiming for, consciously or otherwise) without adapting won't ever convince you otherwise. The AI DOES adapt, however, based on the TC settings and tactical sensibility it is given: chase the game when you're a goal behind, shut the shop when you're trying to hold onto a lead, be more expressive when playing weaker opposition at home, play it safe when facing stronger opposition away etc. And that is at the very least just as likely the deciding factor for a one-size-fits-it-all plug&play tactics finally getting caught out every once in a while as a "failed" team talk.

yes yes, real men enjoy losing, get over yourself.

But if you rig the game by making it that you will win, every time, the wins don't really mean anything, do they?

Exactly the kind of thing I was talking about. The flawed logic is assuming that there are universal tactics that would carry every game, in particular considering that all you are doing is influencing the odds in an environment in which randomness plays its part, rather than being in full controll all the time - and then jumping to the conclusion that it must have been the talks that were the number one deciding factor when the odd result wasn't due. They are, after all, the only thing you then change all game. But I think this has been adressed countless times before by wwfan and others I guess already. Regardless how many influence talks actually have on the outcome of a game - this certainly is amongst the worst possible ways of trying to find out as it is based on fundamentally flawed logic.

I've never used just the TC and shouts only, it's rather a mix of both sliders and these, and I cannot in any way relate what you are suggesting. I got AI players unnerved by going hard onto them myself, exploited slow paced full backs, got players like de Jong losing their cool and sent off, frustrated Barcelona's midfield interplay right at Camp Nou and so on and so on. All the while never having read any elaborate team talk guide, and getting reactions both good and bad (which the AI does too, and which they are an integral part of the entire setup). Naturally, trial&erroring until you hit onto something the AI can't handle that well (which is what the majority of plug&play one size fits all slider settings are and must be aiming for, consciously or otherwise) without adapting won't ever convince you otherwise. The AI DOES adapt, however, based on the TC settings and tactical sensibility it is given: chase the game when you're a goal behind, shut the shop when you're trying to hold onto a lead, be more expressive when playing weaker opposition at home, play it safe when facing stronger opposition away etc. And that is at the very least just as likely the deciding factor for a one-size-fits-it-all plug&play tactics finally getting caught out every once in a while as a "failed" team talk.

The flawed logic is that changing stuff in the TC or sliders will affect the game the way you hope it will, and then when things do change attribute it to a tactical genious rather than that you happened to create a combination of sliders that works. But when it doesn't work you attribute it to something else.

When I play a tactic that I know lets my team play good and efficient football, it is very unnerving to take the lead only to see the AI take a more attacking approach, which leads to them taking complete control of the match, then equalize, before going back to their normal style again - letting me dominate like I did at 0-0. What is the logic behind that? None, of course! The only thing the AI's tactical changes do is to swap from a tactic that doesn't work to one that maybe does, and if they succeed they change back to the one that didn't work again. Calling this realistic is flawed logic, and as a bonus prove that I am only allowed to do what the AI allows me to do... if they wanted to they could crush me, but they don't so I am okay.

The irony is that if I follow the logic of the game, for instance by defending deep when I am the underdog and attacking patiently and wide when I am the favourite - the AI works fine. This is clearly how SI wants the game to be played. However, if I attack freely against proposed superior teams I crush them, while the most efficient strategy against counter-attacking teams is to counter too. Thus the game rewards the player who finds a perfect balance between the two, yet the official sources here on the forum clearly despise those who do -i mplicating cheating or otherwise inferior gaming, while it is clear for all that the TC+Shout strategy is exactly the same, only that doing so requires one to find the correct balance of sliders through experimentation every game instead of settling for a good compromise.

There is no additional achievement from using shouts and mentality instructions with the TC compared to making one tactic and stick with it because the TC changes the sliders too, and since one little click in one team or player instruction could make a visible difference on the pitch, choosing a shout that adjusts several of these at once induces a high degree of randomness to the performance on the pitch. Even in Full Match mode it is impossible to be sure that clicking on one or more shouts is what made all the difference precisely because there are too many factors playing in. Playing with one tactic through the whole match or even every match, changing nothing, is the best way of coming to terms with how the ME works, as it removes some factors from that bulging pool of statistics.

What I don't understand is why some players would want to start with an inferior tactic then change it to a superior one game after game after game, when some of the measures made are probably all the same in most cases. If you start with a balanced 442 and change it to either a defensive/narrow or an attacking/wide one every match depending on how things go, why not just make those two variations and start with one of them? That is essentially what I have done!

But if you rig the game by making it that you will win, every time, the wins don't really mean anything, do they?

When I play a tactic that I know lets my team play good and efficient football, it is very unnerving to take the lead only to see the AI take a more attacking approach, which leads to them taking complete control of the match, then equalize, before going back to their normal style again - letting me dominate like I did at 0-0. What is the logic behind that? None, of course! The only thing the AI's tactical changes do is to swap from a tactic that doesn't work to one that maybe does, and if they succeed they change back to the one that didn't work again. Calling this realistic is flawed logic, and as a bonus prove that I am only allowed to do what the AI allows me to do... if they wanted to they could crush me, but they don't so I am okay.

Its hardly flawed.

The AI chooses to go more attacking then when they score then pull back to a more defensive option to protect a lead - You see that a lot in real life matches.

The irony is that if I follow the logic of the game, for instance by defending deep when I am the underdog and attacking patiently and wide when I am the favourite - the AI works fine. This is clearly how SI wants the game to be played. However, if I attack freely against proposed superior teams I crush them, while the most efficient strategy against counter-attacking teams is to counter too. Thus the game rewards the player who finds a perfect balance between the two, yet the official sources here on the forum clearly despise those who do -i mplicating cheating or otherwise inferior gaming, while it is clear for all that the TC+Shout strategy is exactly the same, only that doing so requires one to find the correct balance of sliders through experimentation every game instead of settling for a good compromise.

Well if you look at a real life match it follows a pattern of one team attacking & one defending, this can then change during the course of a match.

If you set up an attacking style against an AI team who are going to attack you will get an open game (at least until one team changes maybe as a result of a goal) with chances at both ends. This has been done in real life - Newcastle under Keegan for example.

Counter vs Counter will usually produce dull & disjointed football be it in FM or real life as both teams try to drag the opposition out of position.

I really don't see how FM differs to real life with these examples??

There is no additional achievement from using shouts and mentality instructions with the TC compared to making one tactic and stick with it because the TC changes the sliders too, and since one little click in one team or player instruction could make a visible difference on the pitch, choosing a shout that adjusts several of these at once induces a high degree of randomness to the performance on the pitch. Even in Full Match mode it is impossible to be sure that clicking on one or more shouts is what made all the difference precisely because there are too many factors playing in. Playing with one tactic through the whole match or even every match, changing nothing, is the best way of coming to terms with how the ME works, as it removes some factors from that bulging pool of statistics.

There is no point using a shout if you don't know what it does or why your using it.

You should be seeing a weak part of the opposition you want to exploit or a part of your tactic that isn't working and using shouts to improve your play.

What I don't understand is why some players would want to start with an inferior tactic then change it to a superior one game after game after game, when some of the measures made are probably all the same in most cases. If you start with a balanced 442 and change it to either a defensive/narrow or an attacking/wide one every match depending on how things go, why not just make those two variations and start with one of them? That is essentially what I have done!

I agree with your first part if a user is using the same shout at the start of every match just set it in the base tactic, its the same thing.

However varying between a defensive/narrow & attacking/wide style of the same formation by setting them in match prep is wasting a match prep space. This is what shouts are for whilst match prep is for significantly different formations/styles. eg in my match prep I have a 442, 4231 & 41221 formations.

The flawed logic is that changing stuff in the TC or sliders will affect the game the way you hope it will, and then when things do change attribute it to a tactical genious rather than that you happened to create a combination of sliders that works. But when it doesn't work you attribute it to something else.

Nothing to do with tactical genius, in particular as those are pretty basic tactical measures such as exploiting weak links in the opposition's line-up. Just arguing you are mistaken if you think all you are doing is reacting to the AI, as everything it can do you can do just as well. Conclusions that likely come from playing with plug&play tactics just as well and never really changing anything nor adopting to anything except doing different team talks.

The reason that there are players who like to play the game more realistically, e.g. not trialing&erroring until they find slider settings the AI in general cannot cope with so well, is that they want to play in a realistic environment. That means that they don't want to power tweak the sliders and test them as long as they hit "instant win", or download "super tactics", if only to take a peek at what those super tactics are doing in principal, and taking that as a foundation to build their own, etc. That has nothing to do with working with an inferior "tactic", it is just that they would not like to stumble upon a setting that finds loopholes in the ME and AI respectively, prefering something more close to real tactical decision-making and man-mangement. Either for keeping the game a challenge or for keeping it a little closer to actual football management or both.

The only thing the AI's tactical changes do is to swap from a tactic that doesn't work to one that maybe does

Sorry, you lost me there. The AI is working on TC settings, which are essentially play-tested slider setups translated into "pre-sets" that make a team/player behave as it says on the tin. Going from a "control" strategy to an "attacking" one when being 0-1 behind is not the blind guesswork you make it out to be, it is a logical decision the AI makes. Neither of both strategies is inferior, nor is any other - they all have their time and place to be employed. I don't know if it is true, but a more sound theory on your observations would be this one: If the AI suddenly begins dominating possession after turning on it's "attacking" strategy when going behind it is likely that your tactic which you never adopt leaves space for it to exploit - which now it DOES exploit. Or that it previously just sat back a bit - which now it cannot afford being behind.

Nothing to do with tactical genius, in particular as those are pretty basic tactical measures such as exploiting weak links in the opposition's line-up. Just arguing you are mistaken if you think all you are doing is reacting to the AI, as everything it can do you can do just as well. Conclusions that likely come from playing with plug&play tactics just as well and never really changing anything nor adopting to anything except doing different team talks.

The reason that there are players who like to play the game more realistically, e.g. not trialing&erroring until they find slider settings the AI in general cannot cope with so well, is that they want to play in a realistic environment. That means that they don't want to power tweak the sliders and test them as long as they hit "instant win", or download "super tactics", if only to take a peek at what those super tactics are doing in principal, and taking that as a foundation to build their own, etc. That has nothing to do with working with an inferior "tactic", it is just that they would not like to stumble upon a setting that finds loopholes in the ME and AI respectively, prefering something more close to real tactical decision-making and man-mangement. Either for keeping the game a challenge or for keeping it a little closer to actual football management or both.

Sorry, you lost me there. The AI is working on TC settings, which are essentially play-tested slider setups translated into "pre-sets" that make a team/player behave as it says on the tin. Going from a "control" strategy to an "attacking" one when being 0-1 behind is not the blind guesswork you make it out to be, it is a logical decision the AI makes. Neither of both strategies is inferior, nor is any other - they all have their time and place to be employed. I don't know if it is true, but a more sound theory on your observations would be this one: If the AI suddenly begins dominating possession after turning on it's "attacking" strategy when going behind it is likely that your tactic which you never adopt leaves space for it to exploit - which now it DOES exploit. Or that it previously just sat back a bit - which now it cannot afford being behind.

I see you bought into the illusion then.

Because that is what it is; the idea that you actually adopt to the situation at hand when you make slider changes via shouts. What you actually do is finding a combination of slider positions that works then and there - it has nothing to do with realism. Either a tactic works or it doesn't (the scoreline doesn't come into the picture in itself, but what the AI does is highly influential of course) - so when you are overrun, countered upon or fail to break through an overcrowded defense this is the tactic failing and any tactical changes you do will be an attempt to find something that does work. The tools or methods with which you find that correct slider combination are irrelevant.

If that is true biggus, then why do you bother making tactics for people to use?

If that is true biggus, then why do you bother making tactics for people to use?

Because I think I have found a reasonable compromise; a tactic that works most of the time both defensively and scoring various kinds of goals. All of my tactics have all the sliders "ticked off" so shouts or philosophy changes won't work afaik.

(When I first signed up last year, I did it because I had built a tactic that worked with several different teams and according to my friend no-one had posted anything usable yet at that time)

If this is not what you meant I don't know what you mean...

If you take a closer look at TC options and shouts, you see they're not that practical. I mean, changing a strategy from, e.g. Balanced to Control changes A,B, and C slider. However, I only want to change A, so I use a shout to keep B and C. However, that shout, while keeping B and C, also changes D. So I need another TC option or shout to "fix" that and then we're going in circles. That's why using TC and shouts can be more difficult, i.e. gives a sense of realism.

However, it's just an illusion of realism. It feels more realistic when you're pressing a shout button than stopping the game and moving a slider 3 notches, but in truth it's not that different.

I see you bought into the illusion then.

Because that is what it is; the idea that you actually adopt to the situation at hand when you make slider changes via shouts. What you actually do is finding a combination of slider positions that works then and there - it has nothing to do with realism. Either a tactic works or it doesn't (the scoreline doesn't come into the picture in itself, but what the AI does is highly influential of course) - so when you are overrun, countered upon or fail to break through an overcrowded defense this is the tactic failing and any tactical changes you do will be an attempt to find something that does work. The tools or methods with which you find that correct slider combination are irrelevant.

Well of course any shout or TC strategy is based upon altering sliders. Very roughly put: the more defensive a strategy, the lower mentality, closing-down, tempo, etc. The opposite applies for attacking strategies. Likewise, the shouts, which I don't use as I override too many sliders, do exactly what they say in their description: altering aggressiveness, passing risk and range, tempo, etc. wich is all being reflected both in the match action as well as the statistics that go along with it. I don't see how that is an illusion, unless you again are theorizing that what you get to see on the pitch isn't really all that closely related to what is actually being calculated. Which you frequently do. Of course the scoreline comes into the picture just as well, as evident by the changes in formation as well as subs the AI frequently makes in the very minute after conceding/scoring a goal, indicating that it then applies its backup tactics to either chase a game or close it for good.

But that is not what I meant. I've seen average sides scoring three goals a game and finishing runner-up and close with some of the community's p&p "tactics". Mario Gomez scoring 50 goals+. And recently Betis Sevilla chasing Barcelona and Real Madrid. Despite SI having taken out even more elaborate micromanagement of players such as the forward arrows of old, which made it even easier to simply overload the AI with a tactics that never once needs be changed, this is apparently still possible, albeit more difficult. One of the reasons is that the AI has found more robust tactical plans in the Creator settings, reportedly. One of those, namely a more aggressive one, looks the culprit for your side suddenly struggling to further dominate when being one up and the opposition is trying to get back into the game by closing down more aggressively, tackling harder, pushing further up the pitch and doing their all to get the ball in your final third of the pitch. Anyway, this added difficulty to get never changing settings working all the time regardless of context and opposition, to me, is the source of frustration for p&p players. In particular as the odd "blip" in results now ought to come more frequently, as the sky-high morale boost across all squad that came along with a run of results previously is no more, making it more difficult to keep runs going all the while never adapting even with "tactics" aka slider settings that on paper are "superior" to the AI and/or exploiting its weaknesses.

Well since this thread i did a bunch of games where basically the game REFUSED to let me win i experimeneted with each game quite a bit using different tactics out of my 3 saved formations i've just come to the conclusion that if the game doesn't want you to win you won't the games i tried the CPU dominated no matter what the hell i tried i must have tried each of these type of matches around 20 times each adjusting sliders as much as possible.

I'm sure a lot of people will know what i'm saying when you go into a game and the CPU completely dominates the game no matter what you try.

If i took the lead it was a certain the CPU would score and eventually go on to win the match.

Other things such as injuries is a major topic i know but if the CPU decided you would get an injured player you WOULD it might not be the same player but you will get an injury.

Maybe i'm wrong in all this but at this point i feel pretty demoralised and need a break from this game for sure over the past 2 weeks i've put over 92 hours into this game, maybe that's just too much and the niggles with the game have turned into big things.

Yep i'm rambling on and tbh my experience with the game is nowhere the level that some people have on here, this is just my experience with the game over the past couple of weeks

As i have been writing this i've been in one of these matches i speak of and re done it 10 times i've took the lead a number of times and each the game CPU finds that goal to draw the game i've tried 5 at the back to try and preserve this lead with 3 DM's and nothing works.

Like danny said, this is Morale Manager. Football tactics don't matter. Having the best players in the world doesn't matter. If your players have poor morale or complacency, you'll LOSE.

EXACTLY. If you have constant good morale then you're FAR mroe likely to succeed. I've just had a team meeting with my plymouth squad coz they're playing **** and we're clinging on to the Prem title. I've passionately encouraged them by saying 'we can still do this' and my ****ing captain reacts badly as do most of them. What? How can ANYONE be demotivated by encouragement? I guess this means everything we've worked for this season is out the ****ing window.

moral manager means junk.

i got my team on high morale... they still lose/draw with teams with low morale.

it is ALWAYS low morale teams as well.