FM2012 difficulty.

[ReggaeBwoy]

Just won the German league with Freiburg who were predicted to finish 17th. I didn't even do any transfers. It kinda ruined the game for me... I easily beat teams like Bayern Munich, Dortmund, Leverkusen...

Screenshots?

[Gorando]

Screenshots?

What kind of screenshots do you want?

[Keyzer Soze]

Napoli
Automatic
Too Easy, won the Seria A in 1st season with no effort whatsoever


My biggest objection would probably be the non-existent home ground effect. In previous versions of FM I found that it was much harder for me to win the away matches, and always had to change my tactics and make it more careful if I wanted to get something out of the match, especially if I managed a mediocre team. In FM 2012, I don't feel that effect exists. I feel like it doesn't matter whether you play home or away, whether you change your tactics, shouts etc. I don't know what determines the winner in FM 2012 the most, is it the player's attributes, the team's reputation or what? The factors that determine the winner of a football match should be counted in double digits, and it certainly doesn't feel so in this version.

I really dont understand why people that manage Napoli and won the Italian league complain about the game beeing too easy!
Do you actually stoped for a minute and look at your team? Mediocre Team?
Napoli is probably, at least in FM, one of the top 4 teams in Italy.

Cavani (one of the best strikers in the game)
Cannavaro (one of the best central defenders in the game)
Maggio (one of the best wingbacks in the game)
Lavezzi (one of the best strikers in the game)
Hamsik (one of the best playmakers)
Fernandez Federico (great defender)
De Santics (great gk)

And the list go on!

I know that the media prediction for Napoli is 8th, and i think because of that many people manage them because they think it's a mid table team. BUT IT'S NOT!
In FM, its a top team, so winning the Seria A it's not a overachivement.

[themadsheep2001]

I really dont understand why people that manage Napoli and won the Italian league complain about the game beeing too easy!
Do you actually stoped for a minute and look at your team? Mediocre Team?
Napoli is probably, at least in FM, one of the top 4 teams in Italy.

Cavani (one of the best strikers in the game)
Cannavaro (one of the best central defenders in the game)
Maggio (one of the best wingbacks in the game)
Lavezzi (one of the best strikers in the game)
Hamsik (one of the best playmakers)
Fernandez Federico (great defender)
De Santics (great gk)

And the list go on!

I know that the media prediction for Napoli is 8th, and i think because of that many people manage them because they think it's a mid table team. BUT IT'S NOT!
In FM, its a top team, so winning the Seria A it's not a overachivement.

Pretty much agreed. Lets not forget they finished 3rd last season. They are certainly not a midtable side. Much like real life, keep the front three of Lavezzi, Cavani and Hamsik firing and you will go far.

[Erimus1876]

I really dont understand why people that manage Napoli and won the Italian league complain about the game beeing too easy!
Do you actually stoped for a minute and look at your team? Mediocre Team?
Napoli is probably, at least in FM, one of the top 4 teams in Italy.

Cavani (one of the best strikers in the game)
Cannavaro (one of the best central defenders in the game)
Maggio (one of the best wingbacks in the game)
Lavezzi (one of the best strikers in the game)
Hamsik (one of the best playmakers)
Fernandez Federico (great defender)
De Santics (great gk)

And the list go on!

I know that the media prediction for Napoli is 8th, and i think because of that many people manage them because they think it's a mid table team. BUT IT'S NOT!
In FM, its a top team, so winning the Seria A it's not a overachivement.

Read beyond the name Napoli... like his 2nd paragraph for instance, or the bit that says "...won the Seria A in 1st season with no effort whatsoever"

The easiness he's complaining about isn't so much that its with Napoli, but that he's done very little, manager-wise, to achieve such success. Its the same story with the majority of complaints.

Even if you're Barcelona, you should have to have some input in what you achieve in this game. The fact that its easy to over achieve with very little effort in some saves is the very crux of this whole easiness debate. The team you manage comes secondary to that fact.

[pinuccio]

is available the final version of gpp patch that improve the difficulty.

http://community.sigames.com/showthr...Gameplay-Julia

[mightymanager]

Paul,

Not agrre with you soory : it's a real football simulation and I don't think that it's easy to manage a football team and win leagues.
So the difficulty of this game should be realistic.

[mightymanager]

Personally I agree, but there are plenty of people who have paid money for the game who might not agree.

As I said, we need to find a balance. Especially when updating a product people already paid for based on a demo in many cases.

Paul,

Not agrre with you soory : it's a real football simulation and I don't think that it's easy to manage a football team and win leagues.
So the difficulty of this game should be realistic.

[Keyzer Soze]

Read beyond the name Napoli... like his 2nd paragraph for instance, or the bit that says "...won the Seria A in 1st season with no effort whatsoever"

The easiness he's complaining about isn't so much that its with Napoli, but that he's done very little, manager-wise, to achieve such success. Its the same story with the majority of complaints.

Even if you're Barcelona, you should have to have some input in what you achieve in this game. The fact that its easy to over achieve with very little effort in some saves is the very crux of this whole easiness debate. The team you manage comes secondary to that fact.

IRL, when the spanish league starts you have 50% change to guess whos the winner... Barcelona or Real Madrid.
It's not a hard league if you play with Barcelona or Madrid, because there is a huse gap between those 2 teams and the rest.

I always manage in Portugal.

IRL, in Portugal, you have 3 teams that can changelle for the tittle (Porto, Benfica and Sporting). This 3 teams are many steps above all the others. Have much better players, have much more money.
So in FM, if i pick Benfica i can expect to win every league in a row. Some years i may win by 1 point, others years by 10 points.
But i wont be expecting a league where i lose 20 points, because IRL that doesn't happen.

[milnerpoint]

Read beyond the name Napoli... like his 2nd paragraph for instance, or the bit that says "...won the Seria A in 1st season with no effort whatsoever"

The easiness he's complaining about isn't so much that its with Napoli, but that he's done very little, manager-wise, to achieve such success. Its the same story with the majority of complaints.

Even if you're Barcelona, you should have to have some input in what you achieve in this game. The fact that its easy to over achieve with very little effort in some saves is the very crux of this whole easiness debate. The team you manage comes secondary to that fact.

I think his point was more people ARE using the name Napoli as a reason to why it is easy when they do well with that team, he is right, Napoli have a fantastic squad and could win the Italian league this year in real life.

Thats not to distract from the point of this thread btw!!

[KUBI]

Paul,

Not agrre with you soory : it's a real football simulation and I don't think that it's easy to manage a football team and win leagues.
So the difficulty of this game should be realistic.

But it is still a simulation. It should be a challenge but not a real one, as no club would hire you as manager in real football.

It's the same with any kind of simulation. You don't need to pass a test or study 4 years before you can start playing.

[Mitja]

Why would winning trophies with Barca, Inter, Utd...be easy? Barca really struggled 10, 15 years ago untill they changhed the policy, made La Masia to what it is now...the same thing is with Utd, Ajax, Porto.... How long it took Inter to win CL again? As long as they employed the right manager? Winning CL and leagues should be the ultimate joy in this game even with big clubs. Being a world champion with Huddersfield should be close to impossible if this is a simulation game.

The fact is that FM became very sophisticated and AI cannot cope with human players anymore. This game needs a major overhaul in all depertments. And it needs it for a long time now..

[lee_uk]

Why would winning trophies with Barca, Inter, Utd...be easy? Barca really struggled 10, 15 years ago untill they changhed the policy, made La Masia to what it is now...the same thing is with Utd, Ajax, Porto.... How long it took Inter to win CL again? As long as they employed the right manager? Winning CL and leagues should be the ultimate joy in this game even with big clubs. Being a world champion with Huddersfield should be close to impossible if this is a simulation game.

The fact is that FM became very sophisticated and AI cannot cope with human players anymore. This game needs a major overhaul in all depertments. And it needs it for a long time now..

completely agree mate.

[milnerpoint]

Why would winning trophies with Barca, Inter, Utd...be easy? Barca really struggled 10, 15 years ago untill they changhed the policy, made La Masia to what it is now...the same thing is with Utd, Ajax, Porto.... How long it took Inter to win CL again? As long as they employed the right manager? Winning CL and leagues should be the ultimate joy in this game even with big clubs. Being a world champion with Huddersfield should be close to impossible if this is a simulation game.

The fact is that FM became very sophisticated and AI cannot cope with human players anymore. This game needs a major overhaul in all depertments. And it needs it for a long time now..

Yes but you have to understand, not everyone wants to play this game if it is as difficult as real life is. It would render most of the stories and challenges useless, it would make doing anything other than maybe win a couple of games a season impossible, we are not tactical guru's, if we were we wouldnt be wasting time discussing this game on here, we would be busy managing real life teams. You get no satisfaction from playing a game with no chance of success in any real form, at least not for me and i would imagine there are a lot of people who think the same. Hence why SI need to find a balance.

[Erimus1876]

Why would winning trophies with Barca, Inter, Utd...be easy? Barca really struggled 10, 15 years ago untill they changhed the policy, made La Masia to what it is now...the same thing is with Utd, Ajax, Porto.... How long it took Inter to win CL again? As long as they employed the right manager? Winning CL and leagues should be the ultimate joy in this game even with big clubs. Being a world champion with Huddersfield should be close to impossible if this is a simulation game.

The fact is that FM became very sophisticated and AI cannot cope with human players anymore. This game needs a major overhaul in all depertments. And it needs it for a long time now..

Agree with this. The old argument about being a good team means its expected for you to do extrememly well just doesn't cut it with me. For one you're theoretically pitting your managerial and tactical wits against the best managers in the game, having to man-manage world class players and their egos, and keep your board and their extreme demands under control. At lower levels, it should be easier. But people have it etched in their minds that being a big team = easy mode, being a little team = hard mode. In reality its the complete opposite. In saying that, its the game mechanics that are at fault, not the people who use that argument.

[lee_uk]

another good point Erimus...i dont see how a "balance" can be found really so which again brings me to the point of having some kind of moddable ini files etc so the user can dictate just how hard/easy the challenge should be.

[Mitja]

Yes but you have to understand, not everyone wants to play this game if it is as difficult as real life is. It would render most of the stories and challenges useless, it would make doing anything other than maybe win a couple of games a season impossible, we are not tactical guru's, if we were we wouldnt be wasting time discussing this game on here, we would be busy managing real life teams. You get no satisfaction from playing a game with no chance of success in any real form, at least not for me and i would imagine there are a lot of people who think the same. Hence why SI need to find a balance.

How can you find a balance between the game being challanging for gamers who want to have challange with Barca and those who want to take lower league clubs to world glory? It's an impossible mission. That sounds even worse idea than difficulty levels for me.

In perfect football simulation game you should start in lower leagues and improving your career by moving to bigger clubs. Or having an option to be Guardiola, Wenger, Steve Bruce...when you want to play top football save. This way you take over that manager's reputation.......here you go - difficulty levels.

[Erocco]

I am a casual player of FM, I never download super tactics, always closed transfer window when I start the game, never save and load before important games and games that I need to win, in other words I never cheat the game.

IMO the game starts somewhat with normal difficulty. For example let's say you pick a mediocre team in any league of 16, 18 or 20 teams that is expected to finish mid table IRL, in FM you'll finish between 4th and 8th place in my experience. Similar goes if you pick a team that is a league winner contender IRL, in FM you'll finish top 3 for sure with basically no real effort.

Now after 2nd season, 3rd season and on... the game becomes easy and by easy I mean the AI can't keep up. With a mediocre team you'll find yourself challenging the league already from 2nd season and with a good team you'll be playing in the CL final and winning everything domestic. SI needs to make the AI smarter so if you pick Seville for example you won't be winning La Liga year after year and making it to the CL semi-finals and finals year after year 2-3 seasons in the game. That is very unrealistic.

From my experiences 99% of the time the team you play with does better every new season than the previous season. I'll never find myself getting promoted one year and relegated the next season or even struggle to stay up. Unless the AI is re-looked at and made smarter we'll always have an easy game after the 2nd season. I also think the majority of the people (not me) that play FM, like the fact that they pick a team from 3rd division and are in the CL final 5-6 seasons later. Otherwise why spend 150hours without winning a major title.

I am a fun of realism and FM is not realistic. But it's the closest football management game to be realistic and that's why we choose to play it. If SI finds a way to improve the AI so we get challenged the same in season 1 and season 20 then we have a better game. Until then let's keep hoping...

[Chrrisy]

Finding this years version very enjoyable.

[x42bn6]

The "balance" issue is a weird argument... FM10 didn't have this problem, where it seemed like most users found a good level of difficulty. So of course it is possible to find a difficulty level that satisfies most of the users.

The "good team = easy" argument is annoying because if it is easy to play Real Madrid in-game, it should therefore be easy to manage Real Madrid in reality (realism), therefore Real Madrid should be able to hire Paul Ince and get similar results to Mourinho. Thankfully, it doesn't work that way - it is very hard to manage Real Madrid, which is why they need a Special One.

[fabioke]

The new difficulty level should be, automatic save after a game (or even better every ten minutes during a game), without changing this during your whole career. The referee blows his whistle and the game saves. I bet that these threads would become less populated. People often reload on crucial events (because the game is unfair in their eyes), and boast afterwards that the game is too easy.

Why not create a test, you create a game where everybody can vote their squad formation and tactics. Without buying players offcourse. And a neutral noble respected forum member(not me), does the test on a weekly or daily basis.

On a side note, I do need to admit that winning manager awards is too easy in this version.

@X42BN6: I never had any easier save then in FM 2010.

[x42bn6]

The new difficulty level should be, automatic save after a game (or even better every ten minutes during a game), without changing this during your whole career. The referee blows his whistle and the game saves. I bet that these threads would become less populated.

Given the fact that large games can take minutes to save... I bet it would be replaced with frustrated threads instead!

@X42BN6: I never had any easier save then in FM 2010.

Perhaps, but there were few, if any, difficulty complaints - it was challenging for most users, but not too challenging.

One data point isn't enough, sadly.

[Äktsjon Männ]

The new difficulty level should be, automatic save after a game (or even better every ten minutes during a game), without changing this during your whole career. The referee blows his whistle and the game saves. I bet that these threads would become less populated. People often reload on crucial events (because the game is unfair in their eyes), and boast afterwards that the game is too easy.

And why would anyone demand a harder game when they already need to reload in order to win games? Your argument makes zero sense.

[Thierry Henrhys]

400 people did vote in this thread, just about 30% saying the game is to easy. While there are 60'000 playing online every day and many more offline. We should really put that into relation. About 120 people here thinking the game is to easy. And you are demanding a patch or difficulty levels, while there is a large consensus that the game is still challenging enough, if you don't play it the easiest way.

nail >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> head

[alexyfoot]

Even SI acknowledged it is a problem so why do you keep spamming posts like this? This was quite an unreasonable statement considered the totally flawed logic, the fact that you support it does not say anything positive about you.

[KUBI]

It's still a fact, that the majority of the people don't think it is to easy to play. There seems to be some flaws that could make the game easier as it should be, but there is no general consensus that that game is to easy at all.

[x42bn6]

It's still a fact, that the majority of the people don't think it is to easy to play. There seems to be some flaws that could make the game easier as it should be, but there is no general consensus that that game is to easy at all.

But it is clear that there is a sizeable minority who think otherwise.

It's not one person's word against another's - it's about getting the perfect game - and as a result, any complaints outweigh any praise.

[KUBI]

But it is clear that there is a sizeable minority who think otherwise.

It's not one person's word against another's - it's about getting the perfect game - and as a result, any complaints outweigh any praise.

No. If 60% are thinking the game is already next to perfect, this has to be taken into consideration when you make any kind of tweaks. There is no perfect game for everyone. If you make adjustments to make 30% more happier you always have to think about the 60%+ who are already happy.

[FM_player]

seems the right one for me

[x42bn6]

No. If 60% are thinking the game is already next to perfect, this has to be taken into consideration when you make any kind of tweaks. There is no perfect game for everyone. If you make adjustments to make 30% more happier you always have to think about the 60%+ who are already happy.

Nobody said they weren't going to be taken into consideration.

The perfect game makes 100% of customers happy. Therefore the objective is to make the remaining 30% happy while not impacting the other 60% (ideally making them happier).

That doesn't make the 60% "more right" than the 30%, nor the 10% sitting on the fence. The customer is always right - all 100% of them.

[wwfan]

That doesn't make the 60% "more right" than the 30%, nor the 10% sitting on the fence. The customer is always right - all 100% of them.

Whereas the first half of that is perfectly sensible, the second half is equally foolish. Customers contradict each other. The contradictions cannot be treated as equally right or all development and creativity stops. You simply cannot choose which direction to follow. The organisation has to trust itself and its vision above its customer feedback or its development will fracture beyond control.

[flauta kicma]

Is it known what is release date of new patch?

And, why this game is 12.0.1, 12.0.2, etc. - does it mean it is only minor changes and that big patch would be 12.1?

Thanks.

[tut]

is available the final version of gpp patch that improve the difficulty.

http://community.sigames.com/showthr...Gameplay-Julia

I have tried the patch and i think the job done by pinuccio is significant. The AI shows more fighting spirit and behave more adequately. Yesterday I played only 5 games - 2 wins, 2 lost and 1 draw /kidderminster/, but I enjoyed them. Awaiting SI patch, I will continue playing with Pinuccio improvements.

Thank you mate!

[hugo_rune]

Nobody said they weren't going to be taken into consideration.

The perfect game makes 100% of customers happy. Therefore the objective is to make the remaining 30% happy while not impacting the other 60% (ideally making them happier).

To me a game that makes 100% of customers happy is a game that's worth playing for half an hour, tops, because clearly it hasn't taken any risks in it's design decisions.

On the other hand the games really worth playing, on the other hand, are those which have genuine depth - they include features that not everyone likes, but are there because they combine to make the overall experience more immersive, more complicated, and to give players more options. Now, some people are going to let the features, whichever those might be, that they personally don't like or disagree with, ruin their experience. The majority of other people, on the other hand, will engage it and generally have a blast.

[x42bn6]

Whereas the first half of that is perfectly sensible, the second half is equally foolish. Customers contradict each other. The contradictions cannot be treated as equally right or all development and creativity stops. You simply cannot choose which direction to follow. The organisation has to trust itself and its vision above its customer feedback or its development will fracture beyond control.

Not true - an organisation cannot pick which side is "correct" because then it is assuming it knows what is best for customers.

If two sides want contradictory things, then the solution may be to offer both options, for example.

Nobody said each viewpoint has to be treated equally right.

But every customer is right. If their viewpoint doesn't correspond to what the software does, the software is confusing or misleading.

To me a game that makes 100% of customers happy is a game that's worth playing for half an hour, tops, because clearly it hasn't taken any risks in it's design decisions.

I'm not sure that 100% of customers would be happy if the game was playable for half an hour, tops.

[speedas]

We talk about stupid AI of FM but how about finances ? In previous FM, it was too easy to earn money (and maybe too hard in small clubs because unable to sell), what do you think about ?

[speedas]

I have tried the patch and i think the job done by pinuccio is significant. The AI shows more fighting spirit and behave more adequately. Yesterday I played only 5 games - 2 wins, 2 lost and 1 draw /kidderminster/, but I enjoyed them. Awaiting SI patch, I will continue playing with Pinuccio improvements.

Thank you mate!

Yeah good idea from pinuccio to modify tactical templates, I hope he will answer my questions in his thread about AI.

[wwfan]

Not true - an organisation cannot pick which side is "correct" because then it is assuming it knows what is best for customers.

Of course it can. Under Steve Jobs, Apple never asked its customers what they wanted and kept everything completely secret until the very last moment, choosing all its development paths without customer consultation. Didn't do them much harm. Every organisational project I've ever been involved with or heard about that chased customer-focused design has been a complete and utter failure. And given my job, that's an awful lot of organisations. I'd include FML in that category as well. In my opinion, SI listened too closely to the customer base, which resulted in the game losing its core focus and, ultimately and unfortunately, failing. Had SI stuck to its design guns, I think it would have been a real winner.

If two sides want contradictory things, then the solution may be to offer both options, for example. Nobody said each viewpoint has to be treated equally right.

You stated that all the customers were right. So, some are less right than others? Does that not make them more wrong? There has to be some form of central decision about what is and isn't a good opinion or you end up chasing your own tail. If everybody who posted on these forums was equally right and should be treated equally seriously, FM managers would have virtual wives, virtual houses and virtual kids, players would die, there would be a win button and the AI would never try to hold onto players the user wanted to buy. Others have never posted a positive word about FM in the time I've been on these forums. If these are the people stating that FM is not a good game, then should SI really be listening to them?

But every customer is right. If their viewpoint doesn't correspond to what the software does, the software is confusing or misleading.

Total nonsense. How can the software correspond to the varied opinions of circa 1 million people? Yes, some of the stuff might be better done or better documented, but to expect it to perfectly meet the demands of every customer that buys it is not just a pipe dream, but commercial and creative suicide.

I've no idea what management and marketing guru books you might be getting this from, but they aren't very good.

[Cilio]

When patch 12.0.5 is out,without corner bug?

[x42bn6]

Of course it can. Under Steve Jobs, Apple never asked its customers what they wanted and kept everything completely secret until the very last moment, choosing all its development paths without customer consultation. Didn't do them much harm. Every organisational project I've ever been involved with or heard about that chased customer-focused design has been a complete and utter failure. And given my job, that's an awful lot of organisations. I'd include FML in that category as well. In my opinion, SI listened too closely to the customer base, which resulted in the game losing its core focus and, ultimately and unfortunately, failing. Had SI stuck to its design guns, I think it would have been a real winner.

Apple are able to not listen to its consumer-base because they have a set of customers who will buy their products no matter what. In addition, they have a near-monopoly in most of their niches.

For video gaming, however, not even Rockstar and its GTA series can not listen to their users. Video gaming is an industry where it is difficult to have Apple's security.

The reality is that organisations have many constraints that mean that they cannot fulfill all of the customers' requests - one of these, of course, is money. It doesn't stop the customer from being correct, however.

You stated that all the customers were right. So, some are less right than others? Does that not make them more wrong?

What I meant in that statement was that two opposing customer viewpoints do not need equal weight, due to the fact that there is no such thing as a "model customer". Every customer plays the game differently. Developing a product should not (always) disproportionately favour the minority as this runs the risk of upsetting the majority.

For example, a minority of users would like to customise stadium names, but a majority are fine - therefore a stadium rename function should not be made mandatory or in-your-face.

Both sets of customers are therefore equally right, but as a whole, the impact should be relatively proportionate.

There has to be some form of central decision about what is and isn't a good opinion or you end up chasing your own tail. If everybody who posted on these forums was equally right and should be treated equally seriously, FM managers would have virtual wives, virtual houses and virtual kids, players would die, there would be a win button and the AI would never try to hold onto players the user wanted to buy. Others have never posted a positive word about FM in the time I've been on these forums. If these are the people stating that FM is not a good game, then should SI really be listening to them?

Yes. Contrary to popular belief, your viewpoint is just one of the many viewpoints a customer has, and therefore is not "the" right way to go.

There is clearly a market for more "arcade-like" functions - one day, SI might go down this route if it makes money.

If you think more "arcade" functions are wrong, then understand that someone who thinks they are "right" also thinks that your notion of a more "traditional" or "non-EA" approach is ridiculous.

The reality is that SI will not want to reinvent the wheel and will have their own strategic goals and direction, and that "arcade" functions are probably not on that agenda unless it will make them lots of money. If that was the case, the ideal game would mask these features if they are not warranted, satisfying both "sets" of customers.

For example, one of the strategic goals of FM will clearly to be able to produce a "game" - therefore a "win" button is out of the picture as that would defeat this goal rather easily.

Therefore: Yes, everyone who wants things like a "buy a house" feature is correct - however, it would require a ton of effort and it is obvious that it would be difficult to do this without upsetting the rest of the userbase, so this will probably be a very low-priority goal. Nicking the entire FIFA Manager base, however, would give huge returns - high-risk, high-return.

Personally, I'm not a fan of these things, but then again, I'm not representative of all FM fans. I'm just a single data point.

Total nonsense. How can the software correspond to the varied opinions of circa 1 million people? Yes, some of the stuff might be better done or better documented, but to expect it to perfectly meet the demands of every customer that buys it is not just a pipe dream, but commercial and creative suicide.

It should be an aim. In reality, someone will complain. In reality, some demands are simply not feasible. But the more customers you make happy, the more money you make.

I've no idea what management and marketing guru books you might be getting this from, but they aren't very good.

My aim is to satisfy every customer, taking into account my limited resources and skills. My strategic goal is to grow my consumer-base, which is a further constraint, but I can only grow my consumer-base if I listen to those who are unhappy with my software or do not use my software for whatever reason.

Every customer is right, but it may not be in my power to satisfy them all. Nevertheless, if I had that power, I would use it to write a perfect piece of software.

I write software for users, and I take complaints seriously. It's not management, nor rocket science.

[KUBI]

Games are not like other software, they are more like books or music. If there are people who don't like it, the publishers won't ask the author to make major changes or a band to change their music style. It's similar with such a game, the developers have a product and a customer base in mind. They listen to customers when they are reporting flaws and bugs, but they don't leave their strategy just because some of the customers wish another game.

[Daffius]

Apple are able to not listen to its consumer-base because they have a set of customers who will buy their products no matter what. In addition, they have a near-monopoly in most of their niches.

Sounds pretty much like SI and FM series in computer gaming to me...


About the difficulty, I find it ok personally. TBH it should be fun and making it near impossible to achieve anything with a small team - as many suggest - albeit realistic would take out the fun part, for which I bought the game. There is challenge and there is frustration = different.

And to add to the arguement, lets not forget that the people on these forums are mainly the hardcore fans/players and not the casuals. Most people on here have played with several versions of the game and know the tactics, AI habit, moral in and out. As a result the fact that it is "only" difficult for 30% of these mainly hardcore gamers suggests to me (perhaps incorrectly) that it is not too difficult on a whole. I don't believe the casual 1m out there are as good as you guys in this game... But they are a bigger market.

You might argue that you are the bigger fans why not cater to YOUR interest rather than a casual gamer that plays 3-4hrs a week tops. Well, there are more of them and SI - like any other company - creates game for money. And also because you'll buy the game next year anyway, they might not... and you know you will, as it's still the best out there.

[alexyfoot]

Games are not like other software, they are more like books or music. If there are people who don't like it, the publishers won't ask the author to make major changes or a band to change their music style. It's similar with such a game, the developers have a product and a customer base in mind. They listen to customers when they are reporting flaws and bugs, but they don't leave their strategy just because some of the customers wish another game.

Would you please stop referring 31% of people playing the game (if we say the forum's opinion is close to all people buying the game) as "some people". Please convert 31% of all sales of the game (whatever that is, probably in the millions range) to an actual number and see if this is appropriately described as "some people". The fact that you like the game DOES NOT matter to me. I want I to enjoy the game not some other 60% of people who've bought it. The only way for that to happen is SI to issue some fixes. As far as I understand, they are taking the matter seriously, so I am sort of satisfied.

...so to the point, can you please stop spamming that we must all accept what is offered to us without any objections? We are not sheep, we have opinions and this thread is the place to express them.

Daffius, if something is not done to improve the hardness of the game, many people will not buy it next year, trust me.

[KUBI]

The poll says that 30% are thinking the game is to easy, it does not say that all of those 30% do not enjoy the game. This are two different things.

[Daffius]

...if we say the forum's opinion is close to all people buying the game...

That's the point, I don't think it is. This community hardly represents the casual playing majority.

As for sales figures, I guess only time will tell.
However I am not against making it better for the 31% of people. They bought the game and deserve to have fun as well. As long as it can be done without degrading the fun for the rest of the 69%, I'm all for it. Difficulty level? Some sort of 'optional' patch? etc...

[KUBI]

The only way for that to happen is SI to issue some fixes.

To fix some issues without any not wanted side effects. That's what makes tweaking difficult. To find the right balance for those who want more challenge and those who like the game play as it is.

[alexyfoot]

With the same logic you can say some of those 60% that have said it is OK can not like the game. Pointless argument I believe.

Daffius, I have seen similar arguments in my country's forum. Many other have reported the same about their countries. I believe it is close to the actual figure (there are plenty of newbies around here, it is not only hardcore gamers).

[KUBI]

What kind of stuff could be added to the editor in the future to add some kind of difficulty or easiness for those who want a different challenge?

Range of manager reputation for human managers? Like "starting reputation" and "max reputation" as figures and not just as past experience?
This would make long term saves more challenging, but you would never gain a top reputation within the game.

[grep]

What kind of stuff could be added to the editor in the future to add some kind of difficulty or easiness for those who want a different challenge?

3 difficulty settings.

Why should we have to fiddle with cryptic data when SI could set in the editor 3 or more pre-defined difficulty levels ?

[KUBI]

3 difficulty settings.

Why should we have to fiddle with cryptic data when SI could set in the editor 3 or more pre-defined difficulty levels ?

There are no plans for such kind of difficulty levels as part of the game, as stated by SI many, many times. Therefore this is complete unrealistic as it would expand the developing and testing time just for a editor feature.

[ReggaeBwoy]

People still talking about having "difficulty levels", what fools there is not going to be any end off... Is that too hard to understand?

[wwfan]

Apple are able to not listen to its consumer-base because they have a set of customers who will buy their products no matter what. In addition, they have a near-monopoly in most of their niches.

For video gaming, however, not even Rockstar and its GTA series can not listen to their users. Video gaming is an industry where it is difficult to have Apple's security.

Apple chose not to listen to their users as Jobs believed user opinion harmed the design process. He basically stated 'users don't know what they want until you show them'. Creativity and design are, by their very nature, the domain of a highly skilled minority. As soon as you dilute them by forcing them into a reactive rather than proactive position, you are undermining your own skillset and the trust in your long established people and processes.

The reality is that organisations have many constraints that mean that they cannot fulfill all of the customers' requests - one of these, of course, is money. It doesn't stop the customer from being correct, however.

Non sequitur. Whether the customer is right or wrong does not follow from organisations having constraints. Only the inability to fulfil their requests, whether they are right or wrong, does.

What I meant in that statement was that two opposing customer viewpoints do not need equal weight, due to the fact that there is no such thing as a "model customer". Every customer plays the game differently. Developing a product should not (always) disproportionately favour the minority as this runs the risk of upsetting the majority.

For example, a minority of users would like to customise stadium names, but a majority are fine - therefore a stadium rename function should not be made mandatory or in-your-face.

Both sets of customers are therefore equally right, but as a whole, the impact should be relatively proportionate.

So, now the only thing that matters is the numbers? Say, for example, one customer has a wonderful idea that SI creatives feel will massively improve the game. However, when it is raised, the vast majority of the forum disagree with the viewpoint and think that direction would be very harmful. Should SI invest resources in following that idea based on their own understanding of its creative merit, or should they blindly listen to customer numbers?

Yes. Contrary to popular belief, your viewpoint is just one of the many viewpoints a customer has, and therefore is not "the" right way to go.

There is clearly a market for more "arcade-like" functions - one day, SI might go down this route if it makes money.

If you think more "arcade" functions are wrong, then understand that someone who thinks they are "right" also thinks that your notion of a more "traditional" or "non-EA" approach is ridiculous.

The reality is that SI will not want to reinvent the wheel and will have their own strategic goals and direction, and that "arcade" functions are probably not on that agenda unless it will make them lots of money. If that was the case, the ideal game would mask these features if they are not warranted, satisfying both "sets" of customers.

We are not really talking about my notions of what FM should be. We are talking about how you manage the creative process. My core point is that although some users will provide excellent feedback, other user ideas sit in opposition or irrelevance to the strategic direction of the game and will dilute the creative process. SI cannot, indeed must not, listen to them. They have to be able to sift though the chaff to find the wheat and they need a process for doing so. You can semantically argue that all the feedback is 'right' because 'customers are always right', but it cannot be treated so, as it harms creativity.

Therefore: Yes, everyone who wants things like a "buy a house" feature is correct - however, it would require a ton of effort and it is obvious that it would be difficult to do this without upsetting the rest of the userbase, so this will probably be a very low-priority goal. Nicking the entire FIFA Manager base, however, would give huge returns - high-risk, high-return.

Personally, I'm not a fan of these things, but then again, I'm not representative of all FM fans. I'm just a single data point.

I'm struggling to follow your logic now. Everyone who wants something that will upset the vast majority and sits against the creative and strategic direction of the game is right? That simply means everything is right. If my feedback is that I want the game to simulate the team bus being driven to the game, then that is right and correct just because I, as a customer, said it? And it should be treated just as seriously as detailed and accurate feedback about ME bugs?

My aim is to satisfy every customer, taking into account my limited resources and skills. My strategic goal is to grow my consumer-base, which is a further constraint, but I can only grow my consumer-base if I listen to those who are unhappy with my software or do not use my software for whatever reason.

Every customer is right, but it may not be in my power to satisfy them all. Nevertheless, if I had that power, I would use it to write a perfect piece of software.

I write software for users, and I take complaints seriously. It's not management, nor rocket science.

It's a wonderful ideal. However...

You need to have a process that determines whether the customer has a legitimate unhappiness or is just a difficult customer. If you do not have this process, then you are simply at the beck and call of customers who aren't going to be satisfied no matter what you do. Following their lead then alienates your genuine customer base and loses you customers, because you are no longer improving the core elements of the customer experience, the things that made them use your product in the first place. Instead, you are sidetracked down the impossible journey of trying to make the serially unhappy happy. Secondly, how on earth do you get legitimate feedback from customers not using your product?

You need to be able to determine between legitimate feedback that facilitates the improvement of your product down the creative and strategic route you are happy with and feedback that is moaning for the sake of moaning or is so marginal and off-base that implementing it will harm your product. I am sure you have processes in place that identify the useful from the less than useful feedback. You might semantically argue that all of the feedback is 'right', but you will not be treating it thus, or your creativity will suffer and the product efficacy will dilute. You are right, it is not rocket science. However, it is management.

[Mike7077]

People still talking about having "difficulty levels", what fools there is not going to be any end off... Is that too hard to understand?

I'm sure it's a very simple concept to understand. But if it's something you feel would add to the game, there's nothing wrong with pushing your case. The fact SI are currently not to be moved on the subject doesn't mean it should just be dropped if people still want to discuss it.

Personally, I'm undecided on the issue.

[cheated]

I've come to the conclusion that the problem is simply that form is literally everything in this game, if you get a run going the game is ludicrously easy, I've had a couple of saves where my good form got locked in to the point that it seemed I could not lose, you get no injuries and everything goes your way, the most laughable single game I had was where I had a man sent off after 3 minutes only to dominate possession and win 4-0. The flip side is that if you get on to a bad run it's virtually impossible to turn it around because you'll experience endless 'super-goalies' and last minute winners/equalisers against you ( not to mention the ridiculous injury blizzards ). Either way it gets to the point that you don't feel like you have much influence over the game, certainly little things like tactics seem to have far less effect than form....

All this leads to deeply frustrating losing saves and unsatisfying winning ones.... A pretty toxic gameplay combination.

[Matej]

I remember the version when i was relegated. It was 8-9 years ago. Got promoted to first league and next year relegated. ANd i really tried all my best to stay in the league. But no, game was hard and i liked that. That cant happen today, even to a player who is playin FM for the first time. TOday, people are to lazy and want to be instant winners. I dont know why, i guess they dont have much time. Point is , game is much better if you really success with your own skill. If you have team for mid table and you was 6th, thats great! But today they all want to be winners in first few seasons without thinking too much. CLick click people.

I dont wanna give any advice to SI, they are wise and i think they will find solution in the future. 37% of people who voted definitely are not happy. Its time to make some options for harcore and casual gamers.

Btw, last few weeks i play 2 other games, they deserve 10 from 10, but i have 0 posts on their forums. I wanna write review for them on some review sites, but im to busy playin. I wish i can say same for FM.
FM dont have much bugs. FM runs great. FM is still best manager game. But i dont have that feelin like i had before. Before when i won something, i really had to give my best to do that. Today game is just about morale. Even that morale is too easy. I didnt read any tips etc, but i always say good to my players and they are happy in 90% with what i said to them.

I really dont know what kind of people play this game today. i just cant understand them. If you want easy games, go out and play football with kids who are 5 years old. make some crazy tackles. score 10 goals. But leave this football simulation to people who wanna challenge. Easy is only option for you, because you are lazy and this game deserve better then to be for kids under 10 years old. YOu have editor and cheat there if you wont, but this game will be harder in the future.

In FIFA12, if i wont to win the game on legendary level, i must play my A game all 90 min. But when i win im really happy with that. In this FM, i can click for the start of the game and go to make some coffee. Secund half i can talk on the phone and read newspapers. Are we talking about excitement, gameplay, fun? Or winning something we didnt deserve, so we dont care too much anymore?

[Äktsjon Männ]

I really dont know what kind of people play this game today. i just cant understand them. If you want easy games, go out and play football with kids who are 5 years old. make some crazy tackles. score 10 goals. But leave this football simulation to people who wanna challenge. Easy is only option for you, because you are lazy and this game deserve better then to be for kids under 10 years old. YOu have editor and cheat there if you wont, but this game will be harder in the future.

Why is it so insanely difficult for you to understand that the game is not easy for a lot of people? Some people struggle to win anything. Some get relegated. Many find it a good challenge. You want it to be more difficult, fine, doesn't warrant any of your patronising comments though.

[themadsheep2001]

Why is it so insanely difficult for you to understand that the game is not easy for a lot of people? Some people struggle to win anything. Some get relegated. Many find it a good challenge. You want it to be more difficult, fine, doesn't warrant any of your patronising comments though.

+1, ridiculous and unhelpful post.

Besides its not just about being harder, but getting the balance right. Becuase its not something being experienced by everyone

[stf1979]

I tried the pinuccio gpp patch and the game brings more challenge!!
Played 5 games: 3W 0D 2L with Nott Forest Lost 2-1 at Brighton and 1-0 at Southampton.
Also with this patch the gameplay its more realistic and with less goals! Before that i won games easily like 5-0 / 6-1 / 4-0.
Thank u very much!

[Svenc]

By the way, if SI/Sega would like to try to nick some of FIFA Man's fanbase, all they had to do was aquiring rights and releasing the game in German-speaking territories, in which EA/Bright Future have established a market that is a total monopoly. Not only by shutting out FM, but also rival German series that have existed before. There isn't much of an established player base beyond that area, in Italy the series has already been axed. The fact that even weeks after its release there isn't much press coverage on bigger international gaming portal such as IGN or Gamespot should give you an idea how many players there are to convince outside of Germany, Austria and Switzerland. You'd think that given their more "light-hearted" approach to management games and carrying the popular FIFA brand name on the box they would have established themselves in particular amongst people who think Football Manager has become too massive and difficult, but this never really happened. Not only a testament to the power of brand recognition (Football Manager is to management games what Coca Cola is for soft drinks), but also a testament to Football Manager's still pretty universal appeal amongst wannabe managers. The depth is there if you want it to (live scouting a hot prospect in South Africa? Sure.), but you can also just fire up a game and play a couple matches after a day of work and let the assistants handle the more elaborated details.

This is also the only area in all of Europe in which FIFA Manager is considered superior by the press - and it is being touted as the "FC Barcelona of manager sims" (German quote from goal.com) year in year out, often times the only reason for it being that there is a minority who has actually ever given Football Manager a shot. It is well documented that even some gaming journalists don't know about the game - the same people that are giving unanimous praise to the horrible live sim of FIFA Man 12 this year because they often don't know better. And despite it all, the German community is slowly growing each year because a lot of FIFA Manager players who actually give it a whirl rarely go back, because the core of a football management game, the match sim and how its portraying matches and player attributes, the transfer mechanics, the interactivity of the world including player interaction, input to feedback ratio and player/club/competition database are way more sound - I was coming from Total Club Manager too.

Total nonsense. How can the software correspond to the varied opinions of circa 1 million people? Yes, some of the stuff might be better done or better documented, but to expect it to perfectly meet the demands of every customer that buys it is not just a pipe dream, but commercial and creative suicide.

This. Assessing feedback is one thing - designing by community committee is another, and a horrible one.

[speedas]

Too easy or not, I think it's objective to say the AI is particularly stupid, and maybe more than expected .

Look at Pinuccio, maybe the first person to offer sliders for a FM, i'd never seen that before :

http://community.sigames.com/showthr...ulia?p=7347733

If the effects of tactic_templates file are confirmed, it could mean AI is unable to adapt individual instructions to its players attributes ! (It would also mean all our victories in FM since the beginning are even more worthless)

But it may be too ridiculous to be true, I do not see SI to develop a so basic AI making coaches attributes very useless.

[Erimus1876]

By the way, if SI/Sega would like to try to nick some of FIFA Man's fanbase, all they had to do was aquiring rights and releasing the game in German-speaking territories, in which EA/Bright Future have established a market that is a total monopoly. Not only by shutting out FM, but also rival German series that have existed before. There isn't much of an established player base beyond that area, in Italy the series has already been axed. The fact that even weeks after its release there isn't much press coverage on bigger international gaming portal such as IGN or Gamespot should give you an idea how many players there are to convince outside of Germany, Austria and Switzerland. You'd think that given their more "light-hearted" approach to management games and carrying the popular FIFA brand name on the box they would have established themselves in particular amongst people who think Football Manager has become too massive and difficult, but this never really happened. Not only a testament to the power of brand recognition (Football Manager is to management games what Coca Cola is for soft drinks), but also a testament to Football Manager's still pretty universal appeal amongst wannabe managers. The depth is there if you want it to (live scouting a hot prospect in South Africa? Sure.), but you can also just fire up a game and play a couple matches after a day of work and let the assistants handle the more elaborated details.

This is also the only area in all of Europe in which FIFA Manager is considered superior by the press - and it is being touted as the "FC Barcelona of manager sims" (German quote from goal.com) year in year out, often times the only reason for it being that there is a minority who has actually ever given Football Manager a shot. It is well documented that even some gaming journalists don't know about the game - the same people that are giving unanimous praise to the horrible live sim of FIFA Man 12 this year because they often don't know better. And despite it all, the German community is slowly growing each year because a lot of FIFA Manager players who actually give it a whirl rarely go back, because the core of a football management game, the match sim and how its portraying matches and player attributes, the transfer mechanics, the interactivity of the world including player interaction, input to feedback ratio and player/club/competition database are way more sound - I was coming from Total Club Manager too.



This. Assessing feedback is one thing - designing by community committee is another, and a horrible one.

+1

When people first load up Fifa Manager they see a shiny brand new Ferrari. It looks fantastic, its features look innovative and intuitive. Its interface is impressive and easy to control. Unfortunately when you start the engine you realise you've been had. Instead of that lovely purring Ferrari engine humming away, you hear a horrible cluncky 1979 second hand Vauxhaull Viva thats well past its MOT. And soon after that you realise that all those shiny new features and the very core of the game is a sham too.

When people first load up Football Manager they see a bland interface, no Ferrari logo (ie fifa licence), and on the whole a pretty basic design - especially the 3D which could be a big selling point to new players. They become instantly dissapointed because its not love at first sight, then they quickly go back to their pseudo-Ferrari without even giving Football Manager a spin round the race track. If they had, they'd soon find out where that Ferrari's engine really is!

I think word of mouth is the way FM will crack the German market. BF/EA keep churning out poor games imho, they look great at first, but are usually unistalled within a month, people will only take so much before ditching their games for other options. And as for the press considering FIFA Manager to be superior, all the press have been for the last 20 years are intellectual prostitutes the world over (and I use the word intellectual in its loosest sense).

[grep]

People still talking about having "difficulty levels", what fools there is not going to be any end off... Is that too hard to understand?

You seem not to understand.

I answered to the question " what do you think SI should do in order to.... " ?

and NOT to the question : " what do you believe SI will do " ?

I am not a mothertongue but I assume you too.

[Äktsjon Männ]

+1

When people first load up Fifa Manager they see a shiny brand new Ferrari. It looks fantastic, its features look innovative and intuitive. Its interface is impressive and easy to control. Unfortunately when you start the engine you realise you've been had. Instead of that lovely purring Ferrari engine humming away, you hear a horrible cluncky 1979 second hand Vauxhaull Viva thats well past its MOT. And soon after that you realise that all those shiny new features and the very core of the game is a sham too.

When people first load up Football Manager they see a bland interface, no Ferrari logo (ie fifa licence), and on the whole a pretty basic design - especially the 3D which could be a big selling point to new players. They become instantly dissapointed because its not love at first sight, then they quickly go back to their pseudo-Ferrari without even giving Football Manager a spin round the race track. If they had, they'd soon find out where that Ferrari's engine really is!

So Football Manager is, in fact, a Lotus Carlton

[KUBI]

I think word of mouth is the way FM will crack the German market. BF/EA keep churning out poor games imho, they look great at first, but are usually unistalled within a month, people will only take so much before ditching their games for other options. And as for the press considering FIFA Manager to be superior, all the press have been for the last 20 years are intellectual prostitutes the world over (and I use the word intellectual in its loosest sense).

Licensing becomes more and more the major problem. A big company can buy league and club licenses and blocking the market for other contenders. The FM/CM database was initially and still is a fans project, while other companies buy the information and copyrights. I don't know the amount of money SI/SEGA has to invest every year just in licenses, but my guess is that it does increase from year to year.

[Matej]

I never played fifa manager, but i remember total club manager. I was reading that fifa manager match engine is very bad. I wish that fifa manager is better, or some new manager game to make some good progress, because FM needs some kind of the competition. IN early 90s they had competition, but SI was just too good for them. In last 10 years they dont have competition at all, thats not good either.

But when we are talking about PES and FIFA(im old PES fan) ,FIFA is much better today. So realistic and so many modes to play, brilliant game.And AI is REALLY good this year. I cant belive that team from Canada can make such good football game. People from Europe didnt make great football game since Sensible Soccer and that was looong time ago. weird because its our number one sport. And one more thing, FIFA is brutally hard if you play on highest level plus Tactical Defending. I never played so hard to beat football game. And i love it.

Last few days i have mixed feelings about Football Manager and me. Maybe i really ask too much from the game. Not just me, but all hardcore gamers. Im playin this game for 19 years, no wonder its easy too me. Maybe i should stop playin for few years and then come back. Im just too good because i played too much. ANd AI is almost the same in last 10 years. If i stop playin, maybe AI will be better in few years. I know PaulC and SI team can make this game harder, they know much more then me. THey can make some mod for old veterans of this game, just for fun. Or at least mod friendly game.

[pinuccio]

+1

When people first load up Fifa Manager they see a shiny brand new Ferrari. It looks fantastic, its features look innovative and intuitive. Its interface is impressive and easy to control. Unfortunately when you start the engine you realise you've been had. Instead of that lovely purring Ferrari engine humming away, you hear a horrible cluncky 1979 second hand Vauxhaull Viva thats well past its MOT. And soon after that you realise that all those shiny new features and the very core of the game is a sham too.

When people first load up Football Manager they see a bland interface, no Ferrari logo (ie fifa licence), and on the whole a pretty basic design - especially the 3D which could be a big selling point to new players. They become instantly dissapointed because its not love at first sight, then they quickly go back to their pseudo-Ferrari without even giving Football Manager a spin round the race track. If they had, they'd soon find out where that Ferrari's engine really is!

I think word of mouth is the way FM will crack the German market. BF/EA keep churning out poor games imho, they look great at first, but are usually unistalled within a month, people will only take so much before ditching their games for other options. And as for the press considering FIFA Manager to be superior, all the press have been for the last 20 years are intellectual prostitutes the world over (and I use the word intellectual in its loosest sense).

I have been a official beta tester for the3dmatch fifamanager12.Fifamanager12 is very different from previous editions,and the difficulty has been increased and the AI​​ of the game has been a considerable increase.The only problem is the length of time.In fifamanager is not possible to have a real-life match.That's why I'm playing footballmanager. Most other reasonsare strictly confidential.

[milnerpoint]

Why is it so insanely difficult for you to understand that the game is not easy for a lot of people? Some people struggle to win anything. Some get relegated. Many find it a good challenge. You want it to be more difficult, fine, doesn't warrant any of your patronising comments though.

This +3, i have no idea why you must be lazy or stupid or anything if you find this game hard enough or too hard, its such a stupid argument to add to this decent discussion, but its been happening throughout the entire thread.

[Svenc]

I have been a official beta tester for the3dmatch fifamanager12.Fifamanager12 is very different from previous editions,and the difficulty has been increased and the AI​​ of the game has been a considerable increase.The only problem is the length of time.In fifamanager is not possible to have a real-life match.That's why I'm playing footballmanager. Most other reasonsare strictly confidential.

No, the problem with the match sims are more complicated than that. First, they're trying to simulate the same sports with at least two different sets of algorithms - 2d and text. Neither of the two is comparable, and neither of any is producing results and statistics that are comparable to AI team results. Whereas in Football Manager statistics carry a weight as every match is calculated the same way, so that you can make out who are the key threads of your opposition and which referee tends to prefer home teams, here it isn't. Second, the 3D calculation uses an engine that was never made for the special needs of a management game. As a result, whereas in Football Manager players aren't only modelled but represented by their attributes and preferred moves which can and should be taken into consideration when signing a player and setting tactics (players like Mark van Bommel are likely to miss a few matches due to their aggressivity and proneness to argue with officials, etc.), the 3D utilizing FIFA graphics in FIFA Manager once used to be a pure marketing gimmick and is still extremely limited.

Though improved from the early days when teams were always fielding a 4-4-2 regardless of any of your intput(!), making out player types and setting tactics is still a fantasy. For instance, it is not unlikely for a vastly inferior side from two league tiers below to dominate possession, and strikers from your reserve squad skinning your first team central defenders with bonafide Zidane tricks is not an oddity, but a frequent thing to happen. Worst of all, there are options and check boxes pretending to offer tactical depth, but as soon as you try to employ a more defensive style of play and tick those boxes (time wasting, cautios passing, etc.) you'll notice that teams are completely uncapable of holding the ball or onto a lead, that defenders aren't involved in build-up play in any kind of way and that you cannot order your team to play anything else but a direct attacking game. In short: Your options to tactically react and act are close to zero.

The praise the 3d is getting in parts of the German press really is that ridiculous, sorry for the off-topic rant, but it is that puzzling. At least the community appears to have picked up the message by now that though it might offer a couple of more entertaining moves upfront, in essence it is as rubbish as ever. And that is only the match calucation. FIFA Man has nice features, but the core mechanics simply cannot compete on the same levels. The match calculation is the most obvious one, but there are others as well.

[Matej]

Why is it so insanely difficult for you to understand that the game is not easy for a lot of people? Some people struggle to win anything. Some get relegated. Many find it a good challenge. You want it to be more difficult, fine, doesn't warrant any of your patronising comments though.

Ok, tell me one person who was relegated in this version. Please, if someone was relegated in FM12 write here in this topic. With last patch and no using of editor or some other programm.

[Erimus1876]

Ok, tell me one person who was relegated in this version. Please, if someone was relegated in FM12 write here in this topic.

I tried 6 times and failed.

I almost got relegated... but survived by 27 points.

or ?

[Matej]

Yes Erimus1876, but some people think we are weird. They think "why they dont want to be first in the league?" Of course we want to be the first, but on some realistic terms. If i have squad for 18-20th place, its unrealistic that im in top 5. That can happen maybe once in 20 seasons.

[alexyfoot]

Every team I start with ends up champion in 1-2 seasons. I can't comprehend how anyone can manage to relegate in this game.

And I remember clearly FM06 when it took me 5 seasons to win a promotion with Swansea, good old times - used to enjoy the challenge so much...

saying that reminds me of: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lk30S...eature=related

Lee Trundle FTW!

just realised he is actually missing from this video, such a shame, loved that DVD!

[Erimus1876]

My sadistic preference for relegation battles comes from supporting a club thats been in its fair share, and only won 1 trophy in 136 years. Sad I know

[scott MUFC]

my bury one seems right, sittign mid league 1

getting some oddites. liverpool unbeaten until january?

i am not finding it difficult per-se, but transfers as man utd are horrid, no one sells up, any offers are junk (or unaffordable with 20 mill budget and wage limits) so buidling the team i want is difficult.
but scoring with what i have no problem
beat liverpool 5-1 at OT chelsea 3-1 home and away, won some cup games 7-0, and vidic has scored 11 goals before january?

[phnompenhandy]

and vidic has scored 11 goals before january?

From corners. Read this thread to find out the reason.

[ReggaeBwoy]

BTW, just seen Someone as Ipswich who beat Real Madrid 8-1 how realistic? Funny though, if I had a result like that I would quit tbh

[ibroxhero]

I can't buy a win for my QPR side in first season, no transfer budgets allowed. Only currently 3 points above relegation zone with 3 games left. Helped by Sunderland not winning a game until the 25th of the season

[scott MUFC]

yea i know vidic scores loads from corners, thats why i bought delap, so i can score from throws as well

[Jari Rantanen\'s Shorts]

FWIW found the 1st season in BSS ridiculously easy, 2nd season I'm still outperforming expectations in the BSP, but it feels more of a challenge. Whether Droylsden should be challenging the top places in the BSP is another thing, but this season I'm actually trying to think about what to do rather than just name a team and watch them win

[Benoit2]

Can I ask what starting reputation you selected please?

Regardless of starting reputation, it still shouldnt really be happening, should it? Winning all six cups in two seasons probably wouldnt even be achieved by Mourinho or Ferguson.

[hugo_rune]

Ok, tell me one person who was relegated in this version. Please, if someone was relegated in FM12 write here in this topic. With last patch and no using of editor or some other programm.

I've been relegated from the top division of Norway to the second, after being promoted the season prior (so spending two years in the top). I was playing an LLM style game, so no exploits, but using what I consider solid tactics.

[sweep17]

I see no difference in it and 11... Both are insanely easy, at least in the lower leagues. My first game I started in the BSP... after one season of building and generally struggling, I won consecutive league titles in the BSP, then League Two.. both in dominant fashion. InLeague 1 now, and struggling, but that's expected as my payroll budget has not caught up with the competition yet.

It should not have been that easy though to move up two divisions that quickly.... I managed to do the same thing last year.

This does actually happen in football when a team wins a league they can go on a roll particularly in the lower leagues were most clubs are a similar size with similar resources. Crawley Town won the conference last year and are currently in the automatic promotion places in League 2. I think Yeovil, Cheltenham, Hereford also went from conference to League 2 fairly quickly.

[PaulC]

Too easy or not, I think it's objective to say the AI is particularly stupid, and maybe more than expected .

Look at Pinuccio, maybe the first person to offer sliders for a FM, i'd never seen that before :

http://community.sigames.com/showthr...ulia?p=7347733

If the effects of tactic_templates file are confirmed, it could mean AI is unable to adapt individual instructions to its players attributes ! (It would also mean all our victories in FM since the beginning are even more worthless)

But it may be too ridiculous to be true, I do not see SI to develop a so basic AI making coaches attributes very useless.

I'd just like to put this particular issue to bed. The download that changes the tactics_templates file has zero effect. It will not change anything whatsoever in terms of the AI or ME. To quote the coder who clarified this in another thread "that file is nothing to do with the match engine. It is used by the UI in classic tactics mode to create the old style player roles, i.e. some basic defaults for each type of position. If you convert a tactic to classic and then go to player instructions in the top right hand corner is a "Set To" menu you will see that is built based on the tactical_templates.xml"

Cheers,
Paul

[CareyB]

imo it's the veterans of Championship/Football manager that have made the series what it is and if they don't revamp the AI to make it more challenging for us then this will be the last version I buy.

[pinuccio]

I'd just like to put this particular issue to bed. The download that changes the tactics_templates file has zero effect. It will not change anything whatsoever in terms of the AI or ME. To quote the coder who clarified this in another thread "that file is nothing to do with the match engine. It is used by the UI in classic tactics mode to create the old style player roles, i.e. some basic defaults for each type of position. If you convert a tactic to classic and then go to player instructions in the top right hand corner is a "Set To" menu you will see that is built based on the tactical_templates.xml"

Cheers,
Paul

Have you tried? I know you've tried,and you see the differences. If you change the value of race attacking,we immediately see that by entering a value of 3 instead of 1,run forward and become dangerous.So the file in some way interacts with the tactics.Do not play with AI, but with the tactic .If the original file and then use this new template, the changes are obviouseven to the blind.

It is probablya political speech,SIGAMdoes not want to be modified with an external file and want to solve the3dmatch with an official update.

In fact, I wonder,if the file does nothing,because closing the conversation? So,if itdoes nothing, saysPaulC, causes no damage.

However, it isavailable in myweb page andsitewww.soccermanageritalia.com.

Greetings.

[PaulC]

People can choose to believe me if they want, obviously.

:-)

[lee_uk]

lol...im finding this whole template thing rather amusing
Pinuccio is like a dog with a bone....wont let it drop

[alexyfoot]

oh dear god. some people just don't give up...

[Miek]

So where do we stand on the patch fixing the difficulty? I don't have the time to read trough all of these posts so if someone could just give me the latest updates? Thx.

[lee_uk]

i think the next patch,whenever that may be ,will sort out the morale issue and exploited corners bug....as well as probably a million other things as always

[pinuccio]

People can choose to believe me if they want, obviously.

:-)

No Paul,I do not want the war of the devil.

I also do not earn anything.

I believe in what SIGAMe told you to say.

But we also believe what we see in the3dmatch, and are not the only one,there is also a team of beta testers who has seen the differences.

That's it.

For me the issue is closed.

Best Friends.hello

[hugo_rune]

Anyway... any news on when the patch is coming out? I'm personally quite looking forward to the balance changes, incremental as they are.

[PaulC]

The next update has no release date set as yet but it should be weeks rather than months. In terms of this thread the main changes should be:

1) Better share of set piece goals between AI and human teams due to better AI routines and it being harder to get a header on target under duress

2) More effect of manager reputation vs player reputation in terms of team talk reaction and match motivation.

3) Some small tweaks to the ME to balance things out a bit better for all teams

4) A more balanced morale system where the high and lower ends have shorter "shelf life" for players, and it being harder to "top up" morale using tricks like team talks and team meetings. Hopefully the game will become a tad less streaky form wise.....

[Äktsjon Männ]

1) Better share of set piece goals between AI and human teams due to better AI routines and it being harder to get a header on target under duress

Uh.. that worries me alot. It's the delivery that's too accurate, not the headers! I wish it wouldn't go back to the way 2010 was when only headers on target were those that were 100% uncontested. There's already too few headed goals from open play!

[pinuccio]

The next update has no release date set as yet but it should be weeks rather than months. In terms of this thread the main changes should be:

1) Better share of set piece goals between AI and human teams due to better AI routines and it being harder to get a header on target under duress

2) More effect of manager reputation vs player reputation in terms of team talk reaction and match motivation.

3) Some small tweaks to the ME to balance things out a bit better for all teams

4) A more balanced morale system where the high and lower ends have shorter "shelf life" for players, and it being harder to "top up" morale using tricks like team talks and team meetings. Hopefully the game will become a tad less streaky form wise.....

Good sound.We hope not to wait long time.

I would like to focus also on the tactics of play that uses the CPU, those in the root folder of the game,tac files,I have open this files with a particular program,and I noticed that they are all regulated on standards philosophy .It would be interesting to give the CPU the ability to use multiple modules tactical offensive and defensive.This is because the human user, can setup the offensive game of his tactics,instead, the CPU uses modules with standard tactical philosophy.

[themadsheep2001]

The next update has no release date set as yet but it should be weeks rather than months. In terms of this thread the main changes should be:

1) Better share of set piece goals between AI and human teams due to better AI routines and it being harder to get a header on target under duress

2) More effect of manager reputation vs player reputation in terms of team talk reaction and match motivation.

3) Some small tweaks to the ME to balance things out a bit better for all teams

4) A more balanced morale system where the high and lower ends have shorter "shelf life" for players, and it being harder to "top up" morale using tricks like team talks and team meetings. Hopefully the game will become a tad less streaky form wise.....

Quick question, is this being released on its own, or is it part of a bigger update?

[grep]

Number 4 will fix a " cheat " when individual chats with players always led to 1 or even 2 morale step increase if the right statement was told.

Good news


What do you mean Paul for " better " balance in point #3 instead ?

Thx

[PaulC]

Uh.. that worries me alot. It's the delivery that's too accurate, not the headers! I wish it wouldn't go back to the way 2010 was when only headers on target were those that were 100% uncontested. There's already too few headed goals from open play!

The % of headers on target is too high in 11.3/12.0. We will slightly reduce delivery but its an over simplistic solution to rely on that.

In beta with these changes there are ok numbers of goals from set pieces.

[PaulC]

Good sound.We hope not to wait long time.

I would like to focus also on the tactics of play that uses the CPU, those in the root folder of the game,tac files,I have open this files with a particular program,and I noticed that they are all regulated on standards philosophy .It would be interesting to give the CPU the ability to use multiple modules tactical offensive and defensive.This is because the human user, can setup the offensive game of his tactics,instead, the CPU uses modules with standard tactical philosophy.

The tactics creator steps are done in code, so messing around with .tac files is unlikely to have any effect either.

[PaulC]

Number 4 will fix a " cheat " when individual chats with players always led to 1 or even 2 morale step increase if the right statement was told.

Good news


What do you mean Paul for " better " balance in point #3 instead ?

Thx

On point 4 - it is currently too easy to top up morale. Lets say a player is on 15/20, playing for Man U. Why should a routine win at home to Wigan or a "Well done" in a team talk take morale above that? A win at Emirates or Eastlands maybe.....that's an example of the kind of change I've been looking to make in 12.1.

Re point 3 - I just mean I have fixed a handful of issues that improve the balance of the game. Nothing severe - mainly isolated issues that dont knock on too much across the ME.