Jump to content

akkm

Members+
  • Posts

    1,386
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

akkm last won the day on December 4 2023

akkm had the most liked content!

Reputation

551 "Wax on, wax off"

Recent Profile Visitors

8,449 profile views
  1. Yeah for sure on real world numbers of through balls but like other measures I'm not sure how comparable SI's definition of through balls is to the real world ones. Re threaded passes this would encompass more than just through balls and that's just terminology but overall creative passing isn't up to scratch...FM is missing other creative passes than just through balls really
  2. Oh I absolutely meant to say he can't fix it...because he can't as overall it's a match engine issue. I said this (italics)... "Its a match engine issue this year sadly. Sure...there are a few still in there but movement, decision making, ability to operate in tight spaces and weighting of passes is off overall. Needs work in the match engine team" To which a user answered he didn’t have those problems Itego asked how did he fix it So that extended his reply beyond through balls as he asked how did he fix it referencing other elements but still, I get you, the crux of what he wanted was re through balls. I replied mostly on that below (italics)... "You can't. It's a match engine thing overall. Sure...certain levers can be tweaked to mitigate it to a small extent and give you some intermittent joy but the patterns will ultimately repeat as you've seen yourself. I saw you mention this year versus last and last year relied on a lot of passes through the air to alleviate that element of things for those balls you want to see but that was an unrealistic element of the simulation in itself. This year they addressed the balls through the air but, unfortunately, without addressing the creativity required elsewhere to balance it out. Worth checking @XaWto see what his tactics can do giving you a little uplift...his inputs are useful sometimes but I'd say manage your expectations on what it will deliver as overall it's a fault in the match engine simulation" On balls through the air last year I didn’t mean just through balls. Anyway, I alluded that the through balls issue can be mitigated with tactical tweaks…even my first response never said there was none. For sure I extended it early beyond through balls and you yourself extended it beyond merely through balls when you said “attacking central areas is certainly a thing in FM24” which is why I gave the lengthy reply beyond just that issue. I also know you’re trying to be helpful which I alluded to and said you had lots of helpful posts but unwittingly in this instance it’s feedback but ultimately not helpful to improve the simulation…for sure it can be helpful to itego. It reminds me in FM2019 lots of the feedback on the forums was the central play/through balls issue was movement related. An SI team member agreed on the forums then. I could see this wasn’t simply the case…movement did need enhancing but the issue was also pass decision related. I actually directly messaged the match engine team with an extensive post including time stamped match examples showing them this but so much feedback on movement on the forums seemed to influence their assessment and ultimately there was an element of misdiagnoses and it actually wasn’t fixed until fm21. To be fair to them I think they did attempt to improve passing but it lead to too many passes through the air from too deep…but that was another issue I had flagged to them years prior lol. Apologies if you feel I singled you out here but again it’s just I can see what feedback can make SI not fully aware of the extent of the issues and not draw the correct conclusions as a result. I know you think you have fixed the through balls element with your examples but you’ve actually just supported what I said…it can be mitigated for sure but your example isn’t the issue fixed at all. The issue is a match engine issue in terms of fundamental decision making and vision not being simulated/coded well enough. Players can be far more creative with through balls (and much more) than they already are and whilst we can see examples of through balls, situations arise which should engender/trigger them more especially with creative players/style to do it. There doesn't have to be glaring space to trigger these passes either but FM needs too much space at times. Essentially it’s too limited. And fyi…yes I have provided information on this to SI...by another means. Ultimately what you have posted is only a mitigant, not a solution/fix. There’s a bigger picture at play and I do think it comes down to view of football at times. I’m sure you’ve played a bunch of matches and tested out all sorts so I guess if you haven’t seen the stuff I allude to then you won’t at this stage. Sure, you may not see the extent of them and feel only small tweaks are required but that’s just not the case. There’s a reason why SI struggles to balance the engine each year and knock ons cause them too much strife and this is one of them. It's why we see patterns repeat too much at times in the match engine and with attempted development. There’s been too much of a default reliance on width over the years with proper creative play encompassing vision, passing and movement not up to scratch. I mean threaded passes, through balls, guiled passes, line breaking passes there…not just through balls but it needs quite a lot of enhancement to actually allow real progress to be made. Also, complementary movement as well. There’s a lot to be done to improve things and it’s about time we see this. So that’s why I jumped in on your feedback about this stuff and for sure an element is borne out of frustration for the lack of progress with the match engine
  3. No one is saying it doesn't happen at all or it's non existent...I'm not sure where you formed that impression from...perhaps you've seen a frustrated user indulge in hyperbole but clearly that's not the case so there’s no need try to prove something that doesn't need proving . I do think it’s great you’re trying to help here and it’s all very obvious things you’ve pointed out and I get more casual users mightn’t see those things so fair enough but unintentionally you’re clouding things a little for SI to draw proper conclusions here. I broadened my point to mention creativity earlier rather than simply through balls but you've fallen into the 'its your tactics' fallacy. It may come down to expectation or view of football but the issue I've talked about at length at times is 100% a match engine issue. I have said certain elements can be mitigated with some tactical tweaks/levers but overall it’s beyond contestation it’s a match engine issue with behaviours that aren’t being coded well. Also, you pointing out 3 through balls in a match and concluding everything is ok with through balls and central play is doing a disservice to the issue and isn’t helping to resolve it. This is how conspiracy theorists operate. Essentially someone forms an impression about something and then frames everything through that lens and sees/extracts what they want to see with an example of something, ignoring the majority of information to reinforce their impression of something (bias overrides rationality if you will). I'm not for one second saying you're a conspiracy theorist by the way . This is what you’re doing here by thinking it’s a tactical issue and something which can be resolved with tactical elements and seeing 3 through balls and saying…well there you go…but you’re missing the bigger picture overall and not observing patterns and making proper conclusions. I’ve tested the match engine thoroughly using many variant tactics and tweaks. One example is observing closely and experimenting by managing both teams in a match (watching in full match mode) revealed issues with quality play and creative passing & movement. With one team I moved all players to the wings bar 2 up front…so essentially the centre is free from impediments that would prevent good central play so it takes any perception of ‘its your tactics’ out of it. Some of the actual play that unfolds is just dreadful at times. I’ve done it with Liverpool and the way the team sets about to attack space trying to pass and move is legitimately bad too often. Sometimes the decision making and awareness of teams mates is shockingly bad. That’s not to say there isn’t any good play at all…there is absolutely good play for sure and good pass selection, through balls, good weighted passes at times and all that but overall you’ll see patterns that mean perceptions/opinions formed about the match engine can be somewhat illusory at times. The main patterns from an attacking perspective are: - The creative or even obvious pass isn't selected at times where it should be and supporting runs to provide options aren’t made. The final engine has been best of this year's iterations in terms of selecting pass when it’s on but it's still not good enough. The off the ball runs are not good enough either - The attempt at a creative pass is played to feet more than it should be where it should be played slightly ahead/ahead into the path of the player to run on to. This is quite glaring when space big and small is there - The angle of the pass can be off...it seems to favour more angled passes left or right rather than straighter passes vertically (along the ground) - Lots of moves break down where a protective mechanism seems to kick in to have the move break down…be it sloppy control, bad pass choice, awful awareness of others around them etc but a pattern emerges to see issues are there. This exercise shows that the match engine is not simulating fundamental footballing behaviours well enough to be on point… be it movement/pass selection at a basic level. If this is the case with an abundance of space then it’s even more compromised when normal tactics are employed. So elements of it are good but overall lots of examples of just bad play…far too many to be fair to suggest central play is good, let along adequate. That take would just be misguided. Overall, of course there are lots of good and even great things in the match engine but central creativity & the ability of players to operate in there is 100% an issue and often is an issue with the engine. If you don’t see that then that’s fine but it’s still an issue nonetheless and 100% is not tactical on the whole. I don’t mean to sound harsh and I’ve seen you make some good posts…just not here taking the bigger picture into account as we keep seeing this issue crop up in FMs match engine over the years and some people defend it and feedback that it’s ok but on the whole for the integrity of the simulation…it’s not ok. Can the engine produce some through balls…yes Can the engine produce enough good quality passing & movement, ability to operate in tight spaces and good creativity…nope. As @XaW said each to their own…and I agree 100%...it should be a case of each to their own and each can garner what they want out of the engine being able to play whatever style they want but unfortunately that’s just not the case. It’s misleading to suggest that it is and prevents the engine from being developed/enhanced as there are key pieces missing (not saying anyone is doing that intentionally) . These elements require improvement to make the simulation more versatile, more varied and most importantly…more realistic
  4. You can't. It's a match engine thing overall. Sure...certain levers can be tweaked to mitigate it to a small extent and give you some intermittent joy but the patterns will ultimately repeat as you've seen yourself. I saw you mention this year versus last and last year relied on a lot of passes through the air to alleviate that element of things for those balls you want to see but that was an unrealistic element of the simulation in itself. This year they addressed the balls through the air but, unfortunately, without addressing the creativity required elsewhere to balance it out. Worth checking @XaWto see what his tactics can do giving you a little uplift...his inputs are useful sometimes but I'd say manage your expectations on what it will deliver as overall it's a fault in the match engine simulation
  5. And that's awesome you don't and can enjoy it as it plays out how you expect it 😊. But those issues are still there unfortunately 😔 I should explain I mean to extend it to overall creativity and threaded/guiled passes as well as through balls to be fair
  6. Its a match engine issue this year sadly. Sure...there are a few still in there but movement, decision making, ability to operate in tight spaces and weighting of passes is off overall. Needs work in the match engine team
  7. Well said. You're fundamentally correct about some of the fundamentals missing from the match engine simulation . It is a concern that SI isn't seeing it as well as it should on this and most years leans towards the more rudimentary way of playing (width/crossing/balls through the air) to produce goals/chances and seems content with that or at least happy enough to keep putting out (broadly speaking) the same fare year in year out. Of course certain elements have been attempted development wise (chaos factor/increased effects of pressing most notably in the last couple of years) so it's not to say nothing has happened but they seem to have displaced certain elements of creativity which were more prevalent in fm21 & fm22. This just shouldn't be the case however many years into the development of the match engine. I'm well aware of the how complex the code must be and to produce what it produces is already wildly impressive but the issue is the output is only as good as the inputs. Of course things have knock ons and can take time but there are too many knock ons which result in things going around in circles and something 'breaking' something else...then fixing that...resulting in breaking another thing ad infinitum. At this stage I've seen some really good stuff in some years but generally things are off so it seems SI CAN code certain fundamentally good behaviours at times but overall it seems there aren't enough good behaviours being input (ie width/crossing dependency has generally been too overpowered) which is indicative of views of football not seeing what's missing. Even the positional play this year...sure it's decent and different from before but so much more is needed. As @whatsupdocpointed out above elements that are still missing. To me these are basics that should have been 'inputs' from the conception of the match engine. Call it whatever you want (positional play) but it's really elementary elements of how to pass and move the ball around situationally. Players need to be dynamically aware of their team mates and opposition to offer themselves to move the ball around offering angles/positions to receive passes to break lines and build a move up and around the pitch. I've posted on this to SI years back that this stuff was needed to improve fundamentals to better simulate football passing and movement from a decision making point of view. This would wean the engine off it's dependency on width crossing and mean balancing would be far easier to achieve. Teach the AI better fundamentals and the output will be better. From there once passing and moving is on point the AI can be taught and learn better tactical and defensive elements to react to and cope better with well simulated offensive fundamentals. Unfortunately the stuck in the mud development seems to have become the norm with efforts to address core elements just not happening well and we are left with what we are left with currently
  8. Yeah that's the concern...those elements of creativity were there in FM21 and FM22 but are gone since. Yes FM22 had a massive thing with crosses being blocked...could have been a reaction to crossing issue you describe for FM21 but centrally and in the top third there was still some good creative passing and decision making. Since trying to introduce the chaos element/better pressing the creative elements have taken a big hit...can the engine not cope with that or is the view of football in SI just not able to see it. Are SI consciously taking out those creative elements or do they not see they're missing...not entirely sure which one it is. All I can say for sure is creative elements are sorely missing completely undermining the quality and legitimacy of the simulation as it limits the ways to play, build up, create and score. Play then gets funneled into a smaller number of more rudimentary ways to do that. It just means more repeated patterns then and a less enjoyable and less realistic experience
  9. Yeah I read before jose allude to changes in players' character over the years means they don't have the appetite to do certain things they used to. For sure modern players seeing others play more front foot football has affected jose's more recent teams as they get sick of playing the way jose wants them to and won't sustain the effort or concentration levels over time. Agree on thinking outside stats which is why I mentioned the eye test re modric...and the others as you mention and many many more as well. Re messi vs ronaldo...hard no there . Messi effectively switched off at club level after he left barca...plus his legs were really already gone and I feel he saved as much as he could of himself for one last hurrah at the world cup...which kinda worked out . One could argue ronaldo could shine in any side as a goalscorer...similar to how haaland could...but haaland is a donkey really lol. So I think a great goalscorer and a great player are 2 different things. Messi still did shine at psg just not as brightly as his peak....messi also shone at the world cup and the one they lost...where ronaldo didn't really shine at any world cup. Messi exhibited a much higher degree of quality than ronaldo ever did outside goalscoring measures...except perhaps heading/right foot . Also, messi could play up top, right wing, left wing, #10 and he could very easily have played in deeper positions than that...at his peak with fully functional legs he could have played in midfield and ran the show with consummate ease and been very creative. Ron was limited in terms of what he could do vs messi. In terms of different tactical systems though ron often needed more space to operate in than messi to shine. In premiership days under fergie English teams defending wasn't stellar (and at times stupidly high up the pitch lol) and plenty of ronaldo highlights were him running into big spaces. Similarly jose at madrid was happy to use him on the counter to score lots...as he needed the space to run into. Messi at barca invariably came up against deep lying defences which is harder yet messi did alright lol. Also, ronaldo effectively did little to contribute besides scoring and making runs into certain paths and had others (like benzema) do a lot of his work and was carried more so this was more restrictive to how a team could play where messi (until his legs went) was more involved in build up play meaning more variation in attacking play was achievable. At man utd 2nd effort ron scored but the team became too one dimensional and easily stopped because of ronaldo. Overall I do get your point though that a player wouldn't necessarily shine as bright in lesser teams surrounded by lesser players. Perhaps maradona and the real (brazilian) ronaldo shone bright no matter who they played with. The rest re FM I wholeheartedly agree with you on what changes are required and at this stage just should happen. My feeling is they've moved on to next year though on the match engine but fingers crossed they will employ the strategy as you've described above as is it's time to get things in a better state
  10. Some great posts @g1nh0 I actually think mourinho is a fraud but won't even get into that as ultimately you're correct in what you said earlier that any manager is only as good as the players they have. One thing that doesn't help mourinho or anyone trying to implement cagey park the bus tactics is the level of defenders has declined over the years so he wouldn't have the personnel to implement what he wants as well as they would have done in the past. Yeah modern football has changed with more running/pressing and all that but that's displaced quality to an extent. Anyway, there's always been hard work, intensity and pressing but fitness/nutrition of modern players enables it to be tapped into more. Also drop off in player quality can make elements of it more effective. On gegen, taking it back to its most prominent proponent...I'm a Liverpool fan and they've been garbage in many games this year yet still churn out results so it's not the system of klopps that's ultimately producing results more the quality of the players at his disposal and more particularly the forwards. His system actually produces crappy performances regularly...yeah sure they work tremendously hard, press ferociously and all that but the amount of average to bad performances that result in wins shows the players he has keep bailing him/the system out. Even in klopps peak liverpool years they didn't play well plenty of times. Then the down years are farcical...without the ferocious press liverpool churn out abysmal performances and you can see some elements of what they're being coached outside of gegen is poor...some of the basics of liverpools play is dreadful in those down years. Take Newcastle...under howe last year did very well but intensity this season hasn't been same level and performances and results haven't been as good. So gegen isn't what many perceive it to be in real world football. FM's implementation of the inefficiencies of gegen is not done well. They don't simulate effect of fatigue in games, over a season or knock ons for other seasons. The intensity required and the resultant knock ons just aren't done well yet in FM. The other key piece is proper creative and technical elements of football aren't well simulated in FM so gegen isn't exposed as well as it should be and in general more possession based tactics lack the tools to open up and create in more varied ways. It's the biggest part missing this year. One of big things is teams/players cannot operate well in the top third or in tighter spaces compared to the real world and then the weighting of passes is generally off both of which make things too restrictive and can make for repeated patterns and a banal experience. Also re gegen in the real world isn't as prevalent as people think. Sure, teams run and press more, high & low but that doesn't necessarily constitute gegen. Lots of teams combine it with other elements of possession football. City are ultimately a possession team but combine it with situational variations of pressing/counter pressing and tempo and that's how football is. Unfortunately that isn't possible in FM's match engine the way City do it with on the ball. Some may think it is or recommend tactical forums etc but that’s just not the case. This weak simulation of the on the ball passing and movement and it’s one of reasons FM engine is lacking. Again back to the real world Klopps Liverpool have played Real Madrid on 4 occasions and been beaten or knocked out each time. So the ultimate gegenpressing machine isn’t as efficient as people perceive it to be. There’s a better way of playing as city’s template has proven as well. For sure modern football has more speed, pressing, more elements of transitions but the basics of passing and movement and creativity are never going away. Take Modric…a small statured man listed as 5.8 and less than 11 stone and not what would be drawn up as the archetypal athlete but in an era where physical elements, pressing, power etc have increased Modric has had little difficulty in navigating that and has arguably been even more effective through the years. For one thing I checked on his whoscored stats and his dispossessed per game stats have decreased after he turned 30…so in current era where pressing etc has supposedly made it harder to keep the ball he’s actually found it easier to retain possession. So that means it’s not as hard as people perceive it…if the player is good enough they can do it. Sure, Modric is a top player but he shouldn’t be finding it easier in his 30s especially if things have supposedly got harder…that’s not how things work lol. All of this with Modric simply passes the eye test…his movement around the pitch identifying small pockets of space and angles to give team mates options to pass to and positioning of his body to receive it, retain it and move it around is something lacking in many modern day players…it’s simple but incredibly effective game intelligence. More players exhibiting these skills would mean press breaking would be more effective than it currently is. Another one is I’m watching City vs Chelsea match and FM isn’t simulating someone like Cole Palmer in terms of poise, movement and pass selection at all well meaning it’s almost pointless trying to set up certain ways to try and get quality creative and technical players to utilise their skillset which essentially means this year match engine is unbalanced and lacking in some basic fundamentals of football. It needs lots of work yet
  11. so what's your ultimate point in all your recent posts...that no one can conclude anything about any aspect of FM without producing watertight and rigorous test hypothesis and results for everyone to interrogate I saw this from you on another thread "You post your findings with a solid objective testable hypothesis and a conclusion from testing. You get questioned about the method and results and probably asked to provide the data and parameters so that the test can be repeated outside your set up - and it might not just be from me. You might even have to repeat or modify certain test items to verify its not just a fluke or artefact of something unaccounted for. If you can answer those questions sufficiently then we can talk about right and wrong" So can content providers and posts on tactics forums be dismissed for not doing above. Is it just things you don't agree with you need above for
  12. what teams in the real world are playing gegenpress for 90 minutes There are definitely more teams at lower levels playing good possession football...gateshead in non league under mike williamson was a great example. That is absolutely all relative and needs to be doable in fm as well as you can get enough good technical players with the right view of football who are well coached to do that at any level...relative to the opposition. It's when they start to play teams levels above that the possession football will become more difficult for the lower level team then
  13. Isn't he saying he didn't buy it for 3 years then bought into SI's 'false' promises and marketing drive re fm24. So that's an example where a person did exercise willpower and not buy it for several years then bought it last year (not sure how he felt about it) and then was won over by what appears to be a rather cynical effort by SI to convince people they had changed their recent ways but in essence, didn't really all. I'm 100% in agreement with you on the not buying it is ultimate message of course. I do get your point and I'm all for personal responsibility, but fortunately or unfortunatetly that's not how the world works. Re the demo...for sure good it's there but how many are aware of it...how many actually download it and whilst it is admirable SI offer it in the first place I'm sure they have the stats of how many download the demo. Then can they track of those who downloaded it...how many bought the game/didn't buy the game. So if the numbers that didn't buy the game were low...do they see it as worthwhile as it translates to sales. Would they take the demo down if they found it many didn't buy after trying the demo. It may well work in their favour to offer the demo sales wise. Also isn't player/club development one of the complaints that crops up...a 6 month demo would be inconclusive on that. Its certainly worth a look though and I've done that myself in the past. The other thing of course the demo would have a specific match engine in it. One year I downloaded it...it wasn't the release engine when I downloaded it as the demo wasn't updated in time/synched with release engine. On top of this the match engine is subject to quite large changes in playing styles over the yearly cycle so if one bought it based on match engine in demo and it changes in the yearly cycle this undermines the demo in terms of match engine consistency on exposure to the demo...ie you're not getting what you were able to test initially on the demo. Either way 2 things (or more) can be true at one time...there can be a demo available to test for a user and SI could change their ways in their yearly cycle anyway. On top of that what was the need to go down the road of what could be deemed a cycnical marketing ploy this year...particularly reading miles blog with the holding hands up on fm23 stuff. I mean SI didn't roll out the marketing spiel this year to improve human rights, solve world hunger or end all wars did they. Thats not exactly the purpose of a marketing for a video game. It was a clear effort to assure people who had become cynical with SIs recent efforts that they acknowledged things weren't as good as they could have been before and intimating that things would improve from there but as many have pointed out that hasn't happened. So its absolutely understandable people will react as they have done this year. SI spiel/marketing is an effort to influence people's decisions and elements of this year's was to affect their willpower in terms of disarming them to buy a product they had grown cycnical of. Providing a demo shouldn't be a green light or excuse to embark on a cycle that has continued in recent years and say ah its ok SI...there's a demo...its not on you it's the customers that are to blame. Thats a tad cynical to say the least. Having a go at someone who bought the game but excusing SI for elements Miles himself acknowledged weren't as good as they could have been isn't particularly helpful as I'm sure you well know. Its akin (however loosely 🙂) to cynical efforts by the fossil fuel industries to put responsibility and helping with climate change back on individuals to take responsibility off them and knowing well its not realistic at individual level. Same as leveling it at individuals re buying FM and taking onus off SI to get their own ducks in a row and themselves in order. Like what happens then...same as with climate change...sure some individuals will act but won't be enough to effect change to climate with everything fossil fuel industry is doing anyway...so fossil fuel will continue to do as they do without changing their behaviour improve things. Similarly not enough customers will choose not to buy FM to effect change on SI policies and therefore SI will continue to do as they do without changing things to improve. The demo certainly isn't going to cause enough people to test it out and not buy to cause SI to change. I acknowledge buying a product to enjoy is a choice versus a need for energy but its more the context of cynically putting onus back on customer when it's not a realistic proposition for enough to act to change and make SI change as a result. Again 2 things can be true at one time...if everyone stopped buying the game that's a message SI will absolutely stand up and listen to and act on it. ..but also SI recent practices and this years cycnical efforts can be called out. Plus what is that saying about SI anyway...once they get the cash they're happy to continue down the path of a lesser offering and only if enough stop buying it they'll act...not a great reflection of them is it
  14. that's well said. Essentially too much of the core engine is based on english football wide/cross concepts of the past. It's not even modern football concepts more basic concepts of passing and moving and a different vision of the game than the wide/cross nonsense (but I get what you mean with that). I mean in terms of technical and vision attributes you see even at kids level and 5/7/11 aside at any level...FM match engine doesn't simulate these well meaning a fundamental way to create is very often absent or very very limited almost every year. When changes get made the core elements (wide/cross) become too prominent again. It's time for once and for all to teach the AI/simulate better fundamental decision making so the match engine can produce better football and break away from the stuck in mud progress with wide/cross being too much of a crutch to create chances and goals when other aspects are lacking. At this stage it's difficult to understand why it's not being done. It may well be the view of football isn't seeing it but it's about time things are done better. It's frustrating to keep having to endure repeated patterns over and over again
×
×
  • Create New...