really annoyed......

[Cleon]

I've been reading parts of this with interest. I really don't understand all the analysis or rather how to react, I know my team miss a lot of tackles, but they rarely lose a defensive header or any interception. I usually do use successful tactic for all games because I'm not sure what to change. So help on that would be interested.

Anyway, an easier request. In terms of the shooting and goal stats could anyone kind of tell me are these numbers good or do things need changing.

They are as follows

Goals/shots: 79/465
On target/shots: 192/456

Thanks.

Read the this http://community.sigames.com/showthr...-Know-About-FM from post 44 down and you'll grab the basics of the analysis tab. The key is to click on the dots on the pitch and watch the clips back and learn why something was missed etc. Then once you understand how a tackle was missed you can look at correcting it but you can't do that until you understand why. I'll be happy to help you understand further if you use that thread

It's the best tool you have available to you to understand about how you play.

Whatever. The ME works in steps, it has the outcome predetermined until you make changes and then a new predetermined outcome is created. So it's mini predetermined outcomes. It's a roll if the dice and if the probability is in your favour that's the more chance of you rolling a six

So what does this mean? Well, you could do everything spot on and still lose, i.e. not land a six

Stop posting utter rubbish please. I've listened to you enough now and I'm going to start giving out infractions. By all means have an opinion but atleast provide evidence to back up such claims and do it in a constructive manner. We have no issue with people discussing genuine flaws and faults but people who make up stuff and post utter rubbish in a non constructive way are not appreciated.

[BiggusD]

The only long-term stat I care about in the game is conversion ratio. Mine is as follows:

Goals / Shots: 56 / 331 (1 goal in 5.9 shots)

Goals / Shots on Target: 56 / 134 (1 goal in 2.4 SOT)

If you are significantly higher than those stats, then you have identified your problem. You need to create a lot of chances before you score. Please have a check to see if this is the issue.

Shots 288, on goal 140, goals 60

I feel that's pretty good.

As for the OP - it clearly is a tactical issue, but without actually trying the tactic you're using there isn't much I can do to help you - I would say that you have few shots on target, though. There is some information that could be helpful - for instance when these matches came.. the fixture list. Top strikers not scoring even though they are in great form = overconfidence/complacency (the motivation gadget don't necessarily say that they are complacent). The fact that these losses are against inferior opposition (and you were likely favourites) points to this as a likely issue too.

And to all of you "you can't have a one-tactic-fits-all approach to this game"-guys: that's simply wrong. The conversion rate I wrote above is with one tactic used in every match. Just consider this for a moment: I sometimes go a goal down early and seem to struggle, then take over the match and grab an easy win in the end without changing anything. Would the same thing happen if I tweaked the tactic to accomodate stuff like playing conditions or opposition strengths? Impossible to know, isn't it? How do you know that the changes you make was what turned things around when changing nothing also change things around? I have said this before, but I'll do it again - the TC+Shout strategy is an illusion. It fools you into believing that you are doing sensible, realistic changes in real-life footballing terms when all it does is - like Classic "supertactics" - allowing you to find a set of tactical instructions that works well... universally well, not just in that particular situation. Otherwise what I do wouldn't be possible...

[Cougar2010]

well, I was doing something wrong, but just think logically, even when the best ass. manager available in the game, has the opinion to take pressure out of my players, when we face real at home or away and I use the "expect a win", dont you think, that something is wrong with this game? dont you think, that team talks have sooo much influences, that results like above can happen, if you use the right one, or results like in my starting post, if you listen to your ass manager or would go the way, the most players would have told you?

Tactics are only part of the game, getting your team into the right attitude to play is another. Having looked at your opening post I would have actually picked up a couple that I would have said were clearly team talks rather than tactics.

Reading the whole thread its fairly clear that you have a team that responds well to demanding teamtalks and also one that does well when they score the first goal. This is something you should have been able to identify as a manager without the need for this sort of thread.

Overall I think you have been putting too much focus on tactics without giving enough thought to other areas but given your recent improvement I hope you'll consider these more.

[heathxxx]

I refuse to accept that result.

[mumble jumbo]

sometimes, Ive exactly the same feelings mate...
one example from an older villarreal save.
Ive won the first leg of the champions league semi finals against barca 2-1
coming away to camp nou, Ive never managed to even get one point from barca.
they are going in front, I am equalizing just before the half time.
then, they score 2 goals in the space of 3 minutes, I get my 2nd away goal in the 92nd minute and 49th second, 90+3 should have been played. normally, this should have been the result. but noooooooooot. kick off for barca, they get a corner, its the 96. minute and iniesta scoring a header from a corner, which ends my dreams of playing champions league finals with villarreal... these are moments, where I just wonder, how this could have happen....

Exactly. The only downside is that you can't win the Champions League with say a third division team right away lol You have to wait for probabilities to rise to make that a good (realistic) probability, and that would take absolute ages and all the players that you know are out of the game by then

[Coentrao]

If you get into the mindset that the game is scripted or rigged then you'll never correct what's wrong there can be some bugs or limitations but they go both ways.

[heathxxx]

Exactly. The only downside is that you can't win the Champions League with say a third division team right away lol You have to wait for probabilities to rise to make that a good (realistic) probability, and that would take absolute ages and all the players that you know are out of the game by then

I've enjoyed some excellent domestic cup runs with lower league teams, even winning a cup with teams occasionally, who are a league or two beneath the top flight.

As well as occasional luck, such as fortunate refereeing decisions at crucial points in matches, I've also paid attention to detail. For example, I spot a "nervous" opposition centre-back, I instruct my players to put him under more pressure and try to force mistakes. Before and during matches, I look for any signs of weakness in my opponents my team can exploit, whilst ensuring that each player in my team is playing to instructions that suit them well individually and as a whole.

The key thing here, is attention to detail. I've won, drawn and lost matches, because I've either spotted something tactically I can use to my advantage, or I haven't and paid the price for missing an opportunity.

Something important I'll also point out, that it's not always a case of "it's your tactics", but quite often a case of "it's your players". Just because a player might be considered "world class", doesn't mean they're a robot who gets 8+ match ratings every game. You have to ensure they're playing to instructions that suit their attributes well. That's how I manage to get "world class" performances out of "average" players.

[mumble jumbo]

Tactics are only part of the game, getting your team into the right attitude to play is another. Having looked at your opening post I would have actually picked up a couple that I would have said were clearly team talks rather than tactics.

Reading the whole thread its fairly clear that you have a team that responds well to demanding teamtalks and also one that does well when they score the first goal. This is something you should have been able to identify as a manager without the need for this sort of thread.

Overall I think you have been putting too much focus on tactics without giving enough thought to other areas but given your recent improvement I hope you'll consider these more.

Yes, your teamtalks counts as well. Every single altered action within the game gives you another roll of the dice and creates a new storyline, but it might not alter the win/loss in a game, unless these course of actions landed you a six

Teamtalks gives you another chance to sway some (or more) probability in your favour (depending on which ones you choose for this match) and another shot at rolling the dice

It can also cost you a match, like change the outcome of a certain win

Say you are the weaker team for example, teamtalks gives you a chance to sway more probability in your favour to grab a shock win. i.e. to land a six

[BiggusD]

Yes, your teamtalks counts as well. Every single altered action within the game gives you another roll of the dice and creates a new storyline, but it might not alter the win/loss in a game, unless these course of actions landed you a six

Teamtalks gives you another chance to sway some (or more) probability in your favour (depending on which ones you choose for this match) and another shot at rolling the dice

It can also cost you a match, like change the outcome of a certain win

Say you are the weaker team for example, teamtalks gives you a chance to sway more probability in your favour to grab a shock win. i.e. to land a six

You start to make sense. Yes FM is a computer game, so you are of course right about this. If the point you are making is that a streak of form (lost or won) will continue on its current path until something changes and that this counts for what happens in the matches too, than this is the truth obviously. It isn't a profound piece of higher knowledge, though. More like Captain Obvious.

[el_magico89]

I refuse to accept that result.

sry mate

[mumble jumbo]

You start to make sense. Yes FM is a computer game, so you are of course right about this. If the point you are making is that a streak of form (lost or won) will continue on its current path until something changes and that this counts for what happens in the matches too, than this is the truth obviously. It isn't a profound piece of higher knowledge, though. More like Captain Obvious.

Well, the reason I pointing it out is because lots of people out there think there is some set pattern to winning all the time. But this game makes sure that the majority of that is down to luck as well. 50% tactical etc and 50% down to random roll of the dice luck

[mumble jumbo]

Read the this http://community.sigames.com/showthr...-Know-About-FM from post 44 down and you'll grab the basics of the analysis tab. The key is to click on the dots on the pitch and watch the clips back and learn why something was missed etc. Then once you understand how a tackle was missed you can look at correcting it but you can't do that until you understand why. I'll be happy to help you understand further if you use that thread

It's the best tool you have available to you to understand about how you play.



Stop posting utter rubbish please. I've listened to you enough now and I'm going to start giving out infractions. By all means have an opinion but atleast provide evidence to back up such claims and do it in a constructive manner. We have no issue with people discussing genuine flaws and faults but people who make up stuff and post utter rubbish in a non constructive way are not appreciated.

Because if I wanted to make a Football Sim depthful I would make it work something like this. That's my evidence. Why are you getting mad? It's actually a great way to make a Sim.

[Cleon]

Because if I wanted to make a Football Sim depthful I would make it work something like this. That's my evidence. Why are you getting mad? It's actually a great way to make a Sim.

I'm not getting mad but up until the last few posts you was posting rubbish inaccurate statements. But in the last few posts you've actually made a little bit of sense and been contructive.

[wwfan]

I'm not getting mad but up until the last few posts you was posting rubbish inaccurate statements. But in the last few posts you've actually made a little bit of sense and been contructive.

The only things he's go right are the pre-calculated matches, which are required for the highlights to work, and that there is a random number mechanism. His theorising about '50% luck' and 'throwing a six' sits somewhere between hugely over simplistic, stupid, and completely wrong.

[Flohrinho]

Well, the reason I pointing it out is because lots of people out there think there is some set pattern to winning all the time. But this game makes sure that the majority of that is down to luck as well. 50% tactical etc and 50% down to random roll of the dice luck

This is definitively the case a large part of the game is down to luck but you can do things to tip the luck in your favor you can easily test this by saving before a game and then playing it like 10 times in a row without interfering in any way.

If the teams are fairly even matched I bet you will see at least 5 of the 10 games ending with a different result.

On the other hand if you play the 10 matches and start changing your tactic on the fly to respond to tactical changes of the AI you will probably be able to influence the majority of those games in your favor.

I had a long period of games where I dominated the match but couldn't win but since I changed to watching all matches over their full duration those games are reduced to a minimum of one or two games per season.

It's vital that you are able to react to changes in the oppositions game especially after one team scores and after half time your opponents will change things in how they play and this will often lead to those upsets.

[Cleon]

The only things he's go right are the pre-calculated matches, which are required for the highlights to work, and that there is a random number mechanism. His theorising about '50% luck' and 'throwing a six' sits somewhere between hugely over simplistic, stupid, and completely wrong.

Indeed..

[mumble jumbo]

I'm not getting mad but up until the last few posts you was posting rubbish inaccurate statements. But in the last few posts you've actually made a little bit of sense and been contructive.

Its like a game where we both have dices but your dice has more 6's because you've went a much better team, but I've picked much better tactics than you so I get another 6 on my dice, so the chance (or probability) of me snatching a win or a draw has greatly increased

[Barside]

Forget about the dice, it's an awful analogy to compare FM with role playing board games.

[Ackter]

Nah, the dice analogy does hold up - as long as you have a rather large number of hundred-sided dice.

[wwfan]

Its like a game where we both have dices but your dice has more 6's because you've went a much better team, but I've picked much better tactics than you so I get another 6 on my dice, so the chance (or probability) of me snatching a win or a draw has greatly increased

So, in general the best team wins, but they might not if the opposition's match tactics are better on the day? Bit like, let me think...it'll come to me.....ah, football!

[mumble jumbo]

So, in general the best team wins, but they might not if the opposition's match tactics are better on the day? Bit like, let me think...it'll come to me.....ah, football!

No because the probability side always gives the weaker team a chance of a win. As soon as you click start those dices role but you can be unlucky even though your dice had more 6's, a higher probability of rolling a 6 because your dice had more 6's on it

What am I saying? Yes I meant. Sorry I never bothered to read your post properly

I use to say this stuff to people a few years back and they would always tell me I'm wrong

[wwfan]

No because the probability side always gives the weaker team a chance of a win. As soon as you click start those dices role but you can be unlucky even though your dice had more 6's, a higher probability of rolling a 6 because your dice had more 6's on it

You are talking total nonsense. Please stop it.

[themadsheep2001]

You are talking total nonsense. Please stop it.

he's just trolling to be honest.

[tomtuck01]

I wish people wouldn't feed the trolls.

On another point, the OPhas admitted he had made an error with team talks. Since then his results have improved, jobs a good un'.

[wwfan]

he's just trolling to be honest.

I think he genuinely believes his dice rolling theory. Although, as Ackter says, it would have some merit if we were talking about numerous multi-sided dice, which are thrown repeatedly for the virtual 90 minutes, the throwing sixes stuff is just ridiculous.

[Ackter]

You forgot to mention the other sets of multi-sided dice that both managers rolled before the match even started.

[mumble jumbo]

I'm simplifying things. How do you think it works then?

And yes, obviously everything gets taken into account.

@wwfan

The ME creates a storyline.

[Ackter]

I would like to point out that a few people here don't think it works, they know it works.

[shirajzl]

And to all of you "you can't have a one-tactic-fits-all approach to this game"-guys: that's simply wrong. The conversion rate I wrote above is with one tactic used in every match. Just consider this for a moment: I sometimes go a goal down early and seem to struggle, then take over the match and grab an easy win in the end without changing anything. Would the same thing happen if I tweaked the tactic to accomodate stuff like playing conditions or opposition strengths? Impossible to know, isn't it? How do you know that the changes you make was what turned things around when changing nothing also change things around? I have said this before, but I'll do it again - the TC+Shout strategy is an illusion. It fools you into believing that you are doing sensible, realistic changes in real-life footballing terms when all it does is - like Classic "supertactics" - allowing you to find a set of tactical instructions that works well... universally well, not just in that particular situation. Otherwise what I do wouldn't be possible...

I believe you build 2 tactics that you switch between if things go wrong, am I right? That's already one step ahead of the OP.
Also, it is still possible to win using only one tactic (I'm doing it in FM12, btw.), but it has to be a good one. This FM is far less apologetic to tactical errors than older FMs and CMs. So if you made an error in the tactic you're using all the time, of course you'll get frustrated from time to time.
As I said, SI have been working towards nullifying "super-tactics" so it's only natural you have to have a really good one if you still plan to play it that way.

[mumble jumbo]

I would like to point out that a few people here don't think it works, they know it works.

But there is an element of randomness in there as well. This game is purely based on probability and what alterations you make can increase/decrease the probability of a win or draw. You, the human, can never shift the probability 100% in your favour. It's all controlled by an odds mechanism. For example, If was a third division team against Man U and I had better tactics I've slighty increased my small chance of snatching a win or draw even though the likelyhood of that happening is still very slim. But, other factors can knock that back a bit, potentially preventing me from further increasing my probability, for example, if I don't pick the right teamtalks or if my opponent chooses a more effective combination best suited to his situation.

All the ME does is playout some predetermined storyline until you change something and then a new one is generated

[Ackter]

The first bit makes sense.

The second bit I'm assuming is down to mistranslation, because it's not possible to post the first bit and conclude the second without an incredibly wrong-turn somewhere.

[tomtuck01]

Also, it is still possible to win using only one tactic

Indeed it is, but how much success it would bring in the long term I'm not sure.

For example, in my career save I was appointed manager of Swansea City at the start of 2013/14 season after they had been promoted back to the Premier League. Their manager, John Carver, walked out to take over at Wolves.

I wanted to try and make Swansea play like they do in real life, and after reading a thread in the tactics forum about Barcelona by wwfan I managed to make a formation and tactical sytem/plan/whatever you want to call it that has worked all the way through the Premier League season thus far. And after sixteen games I am currently sixth in the table.

I don't change formation at all, and the only changes I make to the tactic come in-game by using the "shouts".

But, this is only after a very limited number of games.

[mumble jumbo]

The first bit makes sense.

The second bit I'm assuming is down to mistranslation, because it's not possible to post the first bit and conclude the second without an incredibly wrong-turn somewhere.

The second bit is the ME generated film from the scoreline, which was resolved long ago through number crunching, and is built to look something like real football and to entertain us

[Cougar2010]

The second bit is the ME generated film from the scoreline, which was resolved long ago through number crunching, and is built to look something like real football and to entertain us

You need to get it out of your head that the ME creates a storyline. It does not take all the inputs and work out team B is going to win 2-1 and then create highlights to fit that.

It calculates every pass, every tackle, every shot and then shows what is worthy of a highlight.

Yes there is randomness but its not as simple as just the overall scoreline.

[Ackter]

Nope, that's not how it works.

When you start the match, the match engine plays the entire first half, generating highlights as it goes (takes a couple of seconds). You then watch these highlights.

If you make any tactical changes before half time, the match engine plays out the rest of the half again, discarding what was left of the original half and replacing it with the new match based on your changes. You then watch the new highlights it has generated.

At half time, it then plays out the rest of the match, generating the highlights as it goes. Again, any changes you make will cause the match engine to regenerate the rest of the match.

At no point does it go "this match should end 1-0, lets make up some highlights to show people"*. It's the other way around "Here's some highlights we've generated after calculating all of the information fed into the match engine. Oh look, it's ended 1-0".

*though the managers and players do think "well this should end 1-0 to us" and that makes up a part of the information fed into the engine. This information is then changed as the match develops.

[mumble jumbo]

You need to get it out of your head that the ME creates a storyline. It does not take all the inputs and work out team B is going to win 2-1 and then create highlights to fit that.

It calculates every pass, every tackle, every shot and then shows what is worthy of a highlight.

Yes there is randomness but its not as simple as just the overall scoreline.

I know. You don't quite get what I mean. The score was resolved long before you got to see it. The score is always resolved before we get to see it. All you're doing is flicking the page of a book. You open a new chapter evertime you change something. For example, it's the start of the game and it has caluculated that you will go down a man in the 45th minute, but you can change the outcome by doing something different at the start causing it to open (re-calculate) a new chapter

[Ackter]

this thread is getting boring now. dont bother feeding the trollers....

Unfortunately you have to try an educate where possible, otherwise people have a tendency to believe what's been spouted by people who think they know a lot more than they do.

[ri916]

Unfortunately you have to try an educate where possible, otherwise people have a tendency to believe what's been spouted by people who think they know a lot more than they do.

yeah i guess so........

[wwfan]

I know. You don't quite get what I mean. The score was resolved long before you got to see it. The score is always resolved before we get to see it. All you're doing is flicking the page of a book. You open a new chapter evertime you change something. For example, it's the start of the game and it has caluculated that you will go down a man in the 45th minute, but you can change the outcome by doing something different at the start causing it to open (re-calculate) a new chapter

If you want this analogy to hold, you'd be writing half the book, although you wouldn't know exactly what you'd written until you read it. You'd have an idea of the plot and the outcome, and would have sketched out how to get there. However, your co-other would be working on a different plot and outcome. As you were reading the book, you'd either see that your storyline was dominant, and let things be, or realise that your co-author's was, resulting in you trying to change things to better suit your plot. Even if the plot was unfolding as you imagined, there is always the possibility your co-author can change things around without you expecting it.

[wwfan]

The second bit is the ME generated film from the scoreline, which was resolved long ago through number crunching, and is built to look something like real football and to entertain us

And you have this bit 100% the wrong way round. The score is generated through the ME, not the other way around.

[el_magico89]

this is, how this season came to an end...




Uploaded with ImageShack.us



Uploaded with ImageShack.us



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

all in all, the key change was definately using another team talk strategy, which is only "I expect a win" (aggressively) pregames and at ht, when Im not leading and the usual individual talks. at the beginning, I sometimes got 3,4 negative reactions, but now, after playing 10-15 games with this strategy, my players got used to it and dont even response negatively, when I do this against barca or real away

the only problem Im having currently is, that Im absolutely getting dominated in away games against the top two and valencia, sevilla in terms of possession, shots on target and chances. even thoug 3-1 was my worst result in this season, it still annoys me. I just had the theory, that it might be because, since I am asking my keeper to pass the ball to my cb or lb in order to build up the game slowly from behind with short passings, I think in these kind of big away games, the opposition is often closing down you very early and this leads to very missleading passes which end up in dangerous counter attacks. so gonna look, how it develops, when I change the passing setting of my goalkeeper from passing to defender to long kick. this could have bad influence on my possession rate, but at least I am not giving away so many dangerous counter attacking chances, when I lose the ball in the build up play.

[mumble jumbo]

You clearly have absolutely no idea about how the ME works, you are not being helpful to anyone posting this kind of stuff.

I'm not saying that's exactly how it works. This game is essentially a roleplaying game. Your goal is to change the script in your favour and this is done via probability, which you can never sway 100% in your favour, and what you do in the game makes your probability fluctuate.

I.e. Like on a Monopoly board where you land on a bad square, in this game you don't want to land on a bad script, a storyline where you lose

Another example, exclude everything else, both teams are of similar quality but you have better tactics, that gives you less chance of landing on a bad square but your opponent has more of a chance of landing on a bad square because he has much crapper tactics than you. So the chance of you landing on a win, a story of success, is much greater

Your dice has i.e more 6's on it because you chose much stronger tactics

But this dice (just say a dice) can never have a 6 on all sides

[Barside]

This might be a case of English not being your native language but expect for stating the obvious that all things being equal the team with the best tactic usually wins I am really struggling to understand the point you're trying to get across.

[mumble jumbo]

This might be a case of English not being your native language but expect for stating the obvious that all things being equal the team with the best tactic usually wins I am really struggling to understand the point you're trying to get across.

That there is no set path that will guarantee a win for every match. Also, that all those other variables that are beyond your control (disciplining, player happiness, the decision to praise, etc) can have a huge impact on your probability of success, notch it back a tad.

What I'm saying is that those things can go against you. There's an element of randomness in there

What I'm saying is that you can be the better team and have better tactics but still lose (or draw)

It's not always your fault

Also, you can't control everything within the game, i.e. you don't get to say when an injury happens, which can reduce the probability of winning a match, and not because you don't have good enough backup

[BiggusD]

That there is no set path that will guarantee a win for every match. Also, that all those other variables that are beyond your control (disciplining, player happiness, the decision to praise, etc) can have a huge impact on your probability of success, notch it back a tad.

What I'm saying is that those things can go against you. There's an element of randomness in there

What I'm saying is that you can be the better team and have better tactics but still lose (or draw)

It's not always your fault

Also, you can't control everything within the game, i.e. you don't get to say when an injury happens, which can reduce the probability of winning a match, and not because you don't have good enough backup

There are no guarantees no. You can be unlucky and just lose. However, once you were unlucky and lost a game you should have won, you can be unlucky again the next match too - and then you have a pattern! While it is helpful to point out that it is counterproductive to take all the credit when you win and all the blame when you lose, it is not helpful to suggest that each match lives a life entirely on its own because you are either on a winning streak or a losing streak and the whole game is based on prolonging one and stopping the other short using various means at your disposal. If you are suggesting that being unlucky thirteen games in a row is not something that is your fault, you are simply wrong - that luck percentage you're talking about disappears once there is a recognizable pattern to both performances and results.

[vilks]

mumble jumbo, I was on a winning run recently but annoyingly I only rolled a 1 in my last game whilst my opponent rolled a 3. I had rolled a 5 in my tactics and they had rolled a 4, but obviously due to the aforementioned roll of 1, I ended up losing the match.

Do you know where I can find a +1 sword to balance this out? Also, do you know which AD&D edition FM uses?

[mumble jumbo]

@vilks

You just another one of those types that thinks your computer has a human brain attached to it? This aint 2001: A Space Odyssey

[Barside]

I think you've left your sense of humour somewhere, check the back of the sofa.

[mumble jumbo]

I was being sarcastc, a lot of people go "Look at my powerful computer! Computers these days must be really smart!", when in fact they are still really really primitive, extremely primitive, no more smarter than a pocket calculator

I do apologize if he's not that type

Edit: So you're not playing against a Hal

[Barside]

Being pedantic a computer today is no smarter than a computer from 30 years ago, software on the other hand is a different matter entirely which is why the pocket calculator has been left behind.

[mumble jumbo]

The AI in games is still extremely primitive. Like a Commodore 64 but with bigger numbers to play with to make the game look fancy etc

[Barside]

You really aren't the full picnic.

[wwfan]

I'm not saying that's exactly how it works. This game is essentially a roleplaying game. Your goal is to change the script in your favour and this is done via probability, which you can never sway 100% in your favour, and what you do in the game makes your probability fluctuate.

I.e. Like on a Monopoly board where you land on a bad square, in this game you don't want to land on a bad script, a storyline where you lose

Another example, exclude everything else, both teams are of similar quality but you have better tactics, that gives you less chance of landing on a bad square but your opponent has more of a chance of landing on a bad square because he has much crapper tactics than you. So the chance of you landing on a win, a story of success, is much greater

Your dice has i.e more 6's on it because you chose much stronger tactics

But this dice (just say a dice) can never have a 6 on all sides

So FM is a combination of a book, Monopoly and Yahtzee? Is it also like a car?

Rather than continue with these tortuous analogies, which are no use to man nor beast, why not actually use basic football terms. It's very easy.

1: The team with the best players usually wins.
2: However, a good match strategy and tactical adjustments can counter the player mismatches.
3: If you have good players and a good match strategy, you should do well.
4: However, if you can't get your players motivated, they might underperform.
5: Further, if the players haven't gelled or adjusted to your style of football, they won't be as effective as they could be.
6: Poor man management can destroy a squad, no matter how talented it might be.
7: Every team has the odd off day. If you learn to spot these, you can minimise their impact.

That's pretty much it. It is very simple to understand and isn't trying to peep behind the curtain, which is hiding a level of complexity far beyond the simplistic and highly flawed analogies you are producing.

Also, forget the result is scripted, then you see the match playing out that script. The match does get played out before you see it, but in real time. The ME drives the result, not the other way around. The basic error in your whole conception is that the scoreline is worked out through a few "throws of the dice" then reproduced in the ME.

[mumble jumbo]

You really aren't the full picnic.

I'm serious. The computer (PC I meant) is merely a calculator with graphics etc assigned to numbers and those numbers are called upon whenever unique chains of actions are performed, i.e. if 2+2=4 then do this. That's me simplifying it but computers really are not that sophisticated.

I.e. you click on the start button on your computer, you've entered an equation into your big calculator, and the following menu that pops up is the answer to that equation

The only different is that it doesn't show black numbers

[Barside]

We're wandering dangerously off topic here but just to clarify AI or at least the current definition of AI is found in software & that can be very complex indeed, computers are hardware & on their own are just expensive paper-weights.

[SCIAG]

Is it also like a car?

Yes!

A car won't work without wheels, just as it is important you have good players.
If you have wheels but don't have a seat (tactics), then there isn't much point having wheels because you can't use the car.
If you have wheels and a seat, that's great, but you better hope you're at the top of a hill and want to be at the bottom, because without an engine you won't be able to go anywhere else. If you can't motivate your players, you might as well not have players or tactics.
If you don't have a steering wheel, you might as well be managing skilled, motivated players in a good tactic without looking out for bends in the road when the opposition push for an equaliser.
Without brakes, you will be forced to keep driving until you either die in a horrible flaming wreck, or your engine stops working, which... is the equivalent of gelling?

[wwfan]

Very droll!

[Dr. Hook]

Very droll!

And furthermore, it is a like car in that if I buy a car and it doesn't work I get the company to fix the problem. With FM, if I have a losing season with my club, even after we've been very good, SI won't sort it out

[Barside]

Not quite got to grips with making sarcastic analogies Mr 1970's songsmith.

[slich]

Hmm, car analogies... how about this one?

Trying to drive the car forward while in reverse is your fault not the company's, just like trying to win games with a bad tactic/poor teamtalk is your fault, not SI's

[Dr. Hook]

Not quite got to grips with making sarcastic analogies Mr 1970's songsmith.

Ah well, I tried . . . thought the "car" analogy was apt, given that we've heard it about bugs so may times over the years. I'll get my coat . . .

[Ackter]

Don't make me ban you all.

[wwfan]

Don't make me ban you all.

Better a surreal turn than the usual switch into ranting.

I refer you to post # 137 as to why it is useful. :P

[TwinsFan86]

In an effort to sort of return to the topic:

Team shots/goal: 5.9
Team on target/goal: 2.8

Best player shots/goal: 3.5
Best player on target/goal: 1.9 (same player)

[mumble jumbo]

I was just saying that no matter how sophisticated a game appears it's still based on the same principle that if you click the correct options you win. But that would make the game empty, kind of linear, so you make it a probability thing and add lots of options that can go for or against you (a little bit of hit and hope)

Like a gambling machine and I get slightly more tries of winning because I swayed the probability slightly more in my favour

[Barside]

I was just saying that no matter how sophisticated a game appears it's still based on the same principle that if you click the correct options you win. But that would make the game empty, kind of linear, so you make it a probability thing and add lots of options that can go for or against you (a little bit of hit and hope)

That's not the case with FM though is it, you can do everything right, click all the correct options & have a tactic that is as close to perfect as it can be yet every now & then you will still fail to win.

[avine]

some how off topic: who are beta testers? i am not trying to prove anything(or beta testers prove something to the forum), just wondering. and how important are they?

[mumble jumbo]

That's not the case with FM though is it, you can do everything right, click all the correct options & have a tactic that is as close to perfect as it can be yet every now & then you will still fail to win.

And that is why you implement a probability thing so that there is always a high % for failure no matter what. And how to make the game a challenge? Well, you could give the game an overall higher probability (more chances of winning) by default and/or even make it adjust to your playing strengths.

[el_magico89]

btw. I dont know, whether you guys from SI are allowed to tell us this, but do you think, there are going to be massive ME changes, or is the new patch going to be focused on other areas of the game?

[tomtuck01]

The match engine doesnt need massive changes though.

[Cleon]

The match engine doesnt need massive changes though.

It does but far too many to do on an update imo

[tomtuck01]

I dont deny that changes are needed, just think that saying "massive" is a tad over the top.

[el_magico89]

It does but far too many to do on an update imo

well, after playing a full season with my villarreal side, I can admit, that the biggest problems dont lie in the match engine. its almost the same in my opinion. just need to fix this "throw-in marking bug", maybe less goals from corners and also reducing the effectiveness of quick players or make the defenders at least a bit more risky, so that they dont hesitate to go into challenges, when a fast striker wants to go through them

[mumble jumbo]

Maybe make it easier to buy/sell players? That's what kind of put me off this game, I found it too difficult to buy/sell. I want to go a really mediocre team and build my own team from scratch

[Ackter]

Which is very, very easy to do.

[mumble jumbo]

Yeah but by the time the season starts I've only managed to sell 1 player. Nobody's putting in bids for the other players. I would like to have 3 or 4 new players before the season starts. I just like the feeling of building my own squad, even if they are worse than the previous squad (or turn out to be worse)

[el_magico89]

Yeah but by the time the season starts I've only managed to sell 1 player. Nobody's putting in bids for the other players. I would like to have 3 or 4 new players before the season starts. I just like the feeling of building my own squad, even if they are worse than the previous squad (or turn out to be worse)

quite normal, because most teams dont have great budgets and mostly looking for loan deals.
in the scnd season, its far easier to get rid of your deadwood

[vlobben]

Would it be a correct assumption to say that people see the ME as more probability-based than it really is because the inner workings are hidden from view? That certainly explains the different point of views wwfan and el_magico89 has.

[Svenc]

SI have said this before, but I'll do it again - the TC+Shout strategy is an illusion. It fools you into believing that you are doing sensible, realistic changes in real-life footballing terms when all it does is - like Classic "supertactics" - allowing you to find a set of tactical instructions that works well... universally well, not just in that particular situation. Otherwise what I do wouldn't be possible...

In that case you are also arguing the entire thing was complete rubbish, never mind how you're dealing with opposition - via sliders, TC, whichever. You are suggesting that all the tactical changes the AI makes don't need to be taken into consideration at any point, nor do any match circumstances. You are suggesting what wwfan was pondering about in his first paragraph of post #35 was merely a clever marketing ploy to promote FM's engine and tactical setups, rather than an anything particularly useful. In either case muss lesser management games would trump FM's engine, from a gaming point of view. As crud as Konami's attempt at management was a few years back, it played out in a real-time environment fueled by an elderly PES engine, in which decisions did alter the course of a match, both from you and the opposition, as it should do. I struggle to cope with anyone arguing that playing a little safer away when being up and the home team likely to aggressively push for the equalizer, just to give a very basic example, would be merely an illusion rather than a sensible tactical decision. Maybe I got it wrong, but this is all that is being argued against - that there was a totally universal "tactics" that would suit any situation regardless of... hell, anything.

[chocolatecoatedballs]

Dude I just lost a game, the oposition scored before the wistle, time: 93:30. there was only ment to be 1, yes only one minute added on, now that pissed me off.
But it does happen in real life, I have seen up to three more minutes added on than was stated to allow a team to win this year in the league at home.

[BiggusD]

In that case you are also arguing the entire thing was complete rubbish, never mind how you're dealing with opposition - via sliders, TC, whichever. You are suggesting that all the tactical changes the AI makes don't need to be taken into consideration at any point, nor do any match circumstances. You are suggesting what wwfan was pondering about in his first paragraph of post #35 was merely a clever marketing ploy to promote FM's engine and tactical setups, rather than an anything particularly useful. In either case muss lesser management games would trump FM's engine, from a gaming point of view. As crud as Konami's attempt at management was a few years back, it played out in a real-time environment fueled by an elderly PES engine, in which decisions did alter the course of a match, both from you and the opposition, as it should do. I struggle to cope with anyone arguing that playing a little safer away when being up and the home team likely to aggressively push for the equalizer, just to give a very basic example, would be merely an illusion rather than a sensible tactical decision. Maybe I got it wrong, but this is all that is being argued against - that there was a totally universal "tactics" that would suit any situation regardless of... hell, anything.

There are many such universal tactical setuops, not just one. Whichever tactical adjustment you set out to do via strategic (Balanced, Control etc) changes along with shouts will inevitably close in on one of them and this is reflected through improved player performances. To be clear - if I switch to my deeper-lying counter-attacking more balanced tactic and you click on Counter, Drop deeper, Play narrower we are essentially doing the same thing. However, the original attacking tactic I am normally using is much better than the Counter-tactic in almost every circumstance - also defensively. I rarely use it any more mostly because there is little need for it. Why is this? From your quoted post you assume that the risk of defensive failure is higher because it is an attacking tactic pushing up, wide etc - but it really isn't! Sometimes the opponent manages to exploit the space behind the defenders, but they manage this with my 5-4-1 ultradefensive tactic too so it isn't like dropping deeper is necessarily helping you gain points in difficult away matches. You just imagine that it is your tactical adjustments that stopped ManU dead at Old Trafford, while the truth is that if you found a good attacking strategy the same thing would have happened, or a counter tactic, or playing through the middle or crossing from the bylines... it doesn't really matter because that's the illusion I am talking about. "You should defend deep and play defensively in order to get a win vs huge favourites away" - no you don't. You just need a good tactic, a good team and good morale. Go 1-4-5 gung-ho, or 5-4-1 all-out defense (or 1-4-5 ultradefensive/5-4-1 gung-ho)... it doesn't matter as long as the tactic works.

[Bielsista]

I'm Female

A lot of people still try playing it like they did CM03/04 but the games moved on since then in the way you was able to play it.

Yeah, and that was FUN, that was A GAME, now it seems more like a bloody job...I guess FM is becoming far away from what I look in a computer game. If I want such "realism" I get a real job or take coach classes or something :P

[carragherisgod]

I'm gonna jump in here. Just because you, let's say, dominate possession for an entire match doesn't mean you will win. Real life example. Look at my beloved Liverpool. The number of times have I've seen them this season dominate possession and come away with a drow/loss is sickening! It happens mate.

[scott MUFC]

o...m...g
lose valencia to an injury.. he comes back.. broken jaw

dominating possesion is meaningless. you can quite happily sit with 1% possesion in defence stoping everything and score from a swift counter. its is what you do with it

[Harryohh]

I get annoyed with this game too. I find you often fail to win a game you should but rarely win a game you don't deserve.

Also I could be all over an opponent and get nowhere. But whenever I'm getting battered they ALWAYS score. Really p***es me off.

[Cougar2010]

I get annoyed with this game too. I find you often fail to win a game you should but rarely win a game you don't deserve.

Also I could be all over an opponent and get nowhere. But whenever I'm getting battered they ALWAYS score. Really p***es me off.

Probably because you build your tactics to attack rather than defend & counter.

[scott MUFC]

i played 13 games (excluding the preseason friendlies) on all of them. deserved to draw/lose about 5 of them. but scraped a 1-0
i beat bradford 3-2 in extra time away they had 2 shots on target, and were completly outplayed. dumb stuff happens.
more annoying when you play junk away from home. and get 4 away games in a row.
just had some bs officiating.
winger recieves ball starts to run at defenders - offside HOW CAN HE BE OFFSIDE WHEN I SEE 3 DEFENDERS INFRONT
striker has a shot it hits the keeper goes wide - goal kick WTF

[arsenalthebest]

hmmm powerfull wisedom cleon has

[el_magico89]

I have now found out a way to deal with team talks.
basically, I have 2 coaches + ass. manager with good motivation, man management, determination and discipline attributes (motivation+ man management are the two most important) before a game, I always check up their opinion and mostly it is either "we should tell the players to do it for the fans" or "we are on a good run, we should encourage them" which means "impress me".
Ive experimented a bit, in which I relied my coaches for the pregame team talk and what has suprised me is, no matter, in what a good form/ bad form we were, no matter how strong the opposition was, they always used the calm tone. even as I played against a lower division team in the spanish cup, they just stayed with the calm tone.
so the pregame team talks are always coming from my coaches and since then, Ive managed to beat anything, no matter whether away or home with at least 3 goals difference.
at ht, when the score is level just "im far from pleased" in a calm tone, when youre losing "im far from pleased" in an assertive tone and when youre leading "youre doing well, but there is still room for improvement or keep it up, when youre having a big lead) in passionate tone.

since using these team talks, I have the impression, that I would play with a completetly different tactic. the improvements are just so great

so in my opinion, it isnt really important whether you use "expect a win or do it for the fans, or impress me and so on..." its much more the case of which tone you use. I have 3 great coaches with superb mental attributes and they taught me, that using the right tone can make a huge difference.

[Svenc]

TYou just need a good tactic, a good team and good morale. Go 1-4-5 gung-ho, or 5-4-1 all-out defense (or 1-4-5 ultradefensive/5-4-1 gung-ho)... it doesn't matter as long as the tactic works.

If that is your conclusion, I'm wondering how you - or anyone - would want to play the game. If any kind of decision making would be an illusion, and the corresponding statistics and match engine play to be analyzed that goes along with it, the game would be a total waste of time and money.

[BiggusD]

If that is your conclusion, I'm wondering how you - or anyone - would want to play the game. If any kind of decision making would be an illusion, and the corresponding statistics and match engine play to be analyzed that goes along with it, the game would be a total waste of time and money.

Neh, just think about it - many players drop deeper and more defensive against better opponents... and wins. Some wants a quick, short passing game... and pulls it off. Some like quick through balls and long passes from the back line... and wins everything with mediocre teams. There are more than one way to Rome; so since there are so many different tactics that works well, the ME allows great variety and individualization. SI has programmed it to be able to deal with multiple scenarios, so there is just as much skill involved in slider tweaking as there is in figuring out the right shout combination for your team. Everyone's happy!

And that's the whole point - if slider tweakers and shouters should both be happy with the game, adjusting your tactics according to the many-faceted situation at hand cannot be the only answer! Yet to the shouters that's what it must be, because otherwise the walls of the world would be crumbling and tumbling down into the abyss of realism. I'm not that dogmatic.

[mumble jumbo]

If that is your conclusion, I'm wondering how you - or anyone - would want to play the game. If any kind of decision making would be an illusion, and the corresponding statistics and match engine play to be analyzed that goes along with it, the game would be a total waste of time and money.

The game's just trying to be realistic in that you never know what can happen. Chelsea are sitting 4th (I think) but I'm pretty sure they were dominant in those games they lost and/or drew. I realized that the game would be too easy (or rather too predictable) if it were mostly about looking at the ME stats and just tweaking here and there per game

[milnerpoint]

You mean Chelsea in real life? They have been anything but dominant in most games this season, especially not the ones they have lost.

[mumble jumbo]

You mean Chelsea in real life? They have been anything but dominant in most games this season, especially not the ones they have lost.

Come on, they probably had the better of the overall play though. Ok maybe not lots of chances but most of the possession or something, if you had to go back and watch the full match again

[Ackter]

So you';ve not actually watched them but are guessing based on how you think it was?

[mumble jumbo]

So you';ve not actually watched them but are guessing based on how you think it was?

God I'm not trying to cause arguments here. I'm just saying that many people had the wrong idea about this game

[milnerpoint]

Come on, they probably had the better of the overall play though. Ok maybe not lots of chances but most of the possession or something, if you had to go back and watch the full match again

I suggest you watch football, before commenting on it.

Ill say again Chelsea have been anything but dominant, that is the whole reason they are struggling. They do not keep the ball well, do not create a lot of good chances, and are dodgy at the back, especially when you consider they are suppose to be a title challenging side.

[Ackter]

God I'm not trying to cause arguments here. I'm just saying that many people had the wrong idea about this game

No, they didn't - the majority of people know how the game works. You just assumed they did and then started confusing everyone with probabilities and dice.

[mumble jumbo]

I suggest you watch football, before commenting on it.

Ill say again Chelsea have been anything but dominant, that is the whole reason they are struggling. They do not keep the ball well, do not create a lot of good chances, and are dodgy at the back, especially when you consider they are suppose to be a title challenging side.

You're focusing on the dodgy moments. Your memory can deceive you. If you were to watch those full matches again, even though they lost, they still would of showed that they had more class than their opponents.

[milnerpoint]

Hang on, you've already made it clear you havent really watched them, yet your telling me im not watching the games properly? Have a day off.

Having class and dominating a game are two completely different things altogether, and do not need to be tied into each other.

Do you actually watch football?