Right, to give this thread the background it requires i will first outline what i consider to be the main controls on finishing (this will become relevant later on, those of you who are familiar with my posying style will know this could go on...);

1 - Player ability - obviously a league 1 striker will score fewer than a premiership striker against opponents of the same ability.

For the purposes of this experiment i assume that the chances are being created for the striker, and as such, the most relevant stats should be, finishing, composure and decisions.

2 - Tempo - if i play a high tempo, i would expect chances to be rushed, if i play a low tempo, i would expect chances to be taken when the best opportunity presents itself - granted this is linked to decisions.

3 - Time wasting - some users suggest that this controls how long a player dwells on the ball as well as things like slow free kicks, hences, high time wasting should link to a low tempo, and provide more clinical finishing.

4 - Mentality - an attacking mentality should be focused on getting the ball forward - this should not create the best chances, just more of them. A more defensive mentality should wait for chances to appear, rather than forcing the game.

Right, that was just to outline my train of thought when comparing finishing rates in the following, and to point out the basic sort of tactics employed.

Llamas look away now

In a nutshell, the tactics involve low tempo, short passing, marginally above norm mentality, and mid-high time wasting.

Llamas can come in again

The point of this? I've seen several threads complaining that the AI "cracks" their tactics, and the less educated threads along the lines of "the AI cheats". Due to the fact i usually employ a 3 formation rotation i did not notice this greatly, but there were uncharecteristic slumps that i had no way of explaining. So i decided to investigate. Before an SI employee comes on here telling me i should just play the game, i would do except it's not much fun right now.

So, i started a league as chelsea (holidayed one season to remove the interferance of the african cup of nations - would mess up results spectacularly) and used only the one tactic.

Until Jan 30th - results were - played 23, won 23, scored 55, conceded 5.

Average Human Shots per game: 27

Average Human Shots on target p/g: 16.6

Average Human Goals p/g: 2.4

Average AI Shots p/g: 8.5

Average AI SOT p/g: 5.2

Average AI Goals p/g: 0.22

Average possesion was 62% in favour of the user.

Compare and contrast the above results with what happened between february and march (it all seemed to even out again in april after the league had closed up a bit).

Average Human Shots per game: 21 - 23% less than pre feb

Average Human Shots on target p/g: 11.8 - 29% less than pre-feb

Average Human Goals p/g: 0.85 - 65% less than pre-feb

Average AI Shots p/g: 7 - 18% less than pre-feb

Average AI SOT p/g: 3 - 43% less than pre-feb

Average AI Goals p/g: 0.6 - 172% more than pre-feb

Average possesion was again 62% in favour of the user.

So what can be deduced from these results?

Firstly, it must be said that the quality of chances was broadly similar throughtout the season (due to the fact the AI scored so infrequently it was easy to review each goal).
Secondly the pattern continued in cup competitions, however, due to the vastly fluctuating quality of teams faced, i chose to omit cup results.

So in essence, when the AI *cracked* my tactics, the following happened;

A) The user had vastly more possession than the AI.

B) The number of chances for both teams decreased.

C) The users finishing decreased markedly.

D) The AIs finishing incresed by 170%

E) The user still had SUBSTANTIALLY more SOTs than the AI, from positions of similar quality.

Now, points B and C are what i would WANT to see form the AI as it countered a succesful tactic. In principal, the AI should try and close games down and make them as tight as possible.
My main issues lie with the fact that despite finishing ability of the strikers remaining constant (and morale remaining high in the case of user and often low in case of AI) the % of chances converted was phenomenally increased for the AI.

Possible explanations:

1) - Complacency. It could be argued that having won so many games in a row the users players lost the desire to win. I pick ONLY players with high work rate and a determined personality to specifically avoid this.

2) - Weather. The reduction in chances created could be due to the poorer weather during feb-march, however this does not explain the changes in finishing.

I am all for the AI figuring out how to beat tactics - it's realistic above all - HOWEVER, just for once, i would like to be outplayed, rather than the finishing ability of agbonlahor, aliadiere et al suddenly rocket.

If anybody wants to retry this experiment i can upload my tactics (or maybe if anybody just wants a devastatingly effective tactic for 6 months lol).

Appologies if it seems that all my threads are monas, it's just that i would like to see the game progress, and i feel that constructive criticism is the only way to achieve this.

Again, a well done to those that read this.
All useful comments would be appreciated.