FM15 Complexity

I am one of those who find this seasons game utter unplayable, reasons being its finally hit my max time per game patience, and im wondering if FM15 is gonna be more of same.

Personally i feel the game have been made so complex in small details determinating your chances to win or loose a game, that for the casual player like me, but at same time 1000+ hours used per year, its like finding the needle in the haystack, that is reason you loose or win a game.

Now theres been plenty of threads complaining this year, so im sure we dont have to go into another fight with the same people in here always defending game, and never admitting anything wrong, even though im doing a bit of a whine thread here.

Ive bought this game since the start, and ive enjoyed it a lot, and always been itching to get the new game and get started with friends, but last year and this year, its just been impossible to play the game, without using enormous times between matches, ergo not even being able to complete a season in 2 days.

Play Classic then you say, well, before 2013 season, that werent needed, so why is it needed now to play a lesser setup to have fun?

I realise many in this forum wont agree with this thread, but i would really like an honest answer to the question below.

Based on whats been asked and replied on this forum, do you expect FM15 to be even more complex or less?

i think fm needs to play better in full match mode and not to play heaps of games quickly and theyve got classic mode so maybe make that more complex like your saying.

maybe have default team talks if your worried about that maybe for the full game but like you dont have to do that. and maybe a goals only view.

i just like it how it is though with the classic and full game mode and i just want it to still have the close camera.

This is exactly why FM Classic exists. It's a more streamlined way of playing.

Dont agree, classic is to streamlined, and the game worked fine in 2012, ive never even considered playing classic mode untill this year, and did and didnt like it.

FM14 is no more complex than FM13 was. On that basis, I have no idea what the issue is here.

Dont agree, classic is to streamlined, and the game worked fine in 2012, ive never even considered playing classic mode untill this year, and did and didnt like it.

Well, what exactly is the problem? Maybe if you can answer that clearly, someone can come up with an answer or solution.

Basicly im asking, will the game mechanics be turned up a notch in difficulty, or down? Imo 2013-2014 been horrible manager years for me, and instead of making a tougher game choice for those that want that, and stay on the path they were on before 2013, they made the game extremly time consuming and offered Classic mode,which really isnt satisfying in any way, for those who actually liked the game in current difficulty mode.

I think basically he wants plug and play tactics in full fm.

You're asking about FM15, when no features have been announced yet? We don't know, is the simple answer. Taking FM13 and FM14 into account, we can guess that it's going to build on from there.

FWIW, the game is less time consuming for me personally, because I don't have to fiddle with sliders anymore. Once you understand the game, it's very simple and very quick to play, if you want.

The games mechanics are never tweaked in terms of difficulty. It is what it is. The interface changes now and then, as does the ME, but the developers don't have a concept of "difficulty". Difficulty is how you set the game up - you start at a big club or a small club, and with a high reputation or a low reputation. That's it. Apart from that, the core approach to the game is the same as it has been for years.

You have classic mode in FM, that will suit your needs for a less complex game

I love how complex the game is, it is more interesting, you have more to do, more challenging, less boring, more realistic.. you have to actually try and the more you put in the more you get out

FM 14 has the right amount of detail, which makes it fun and challenging for someone who loves football, i actually feel like a manager

Crushall, why didn't you like FMC?

i like the full mode for pc and classic for the ps vita.

Thx hunt3r, i know you are very active on the forum and i know that nothing have been announced yet, thats why i asked about oppinion based on this years forum talks, and i appreciate your input.

And i "did" understand the game mechanics, but i must say, that the game is now contradicting in commands etc its basicly a matter of putting a puzzle together, more than based on common sence.

RTHerrinbone, im sorry, but thats very much a simplification of a game that have had a LOT of issues the last 2 years, but not onna go into a discussion about that, since thats been done enough already.

But for me as things are, ill probbaly go back to 2011, or 2012 game, it just suits me and my friends better for gaming time, as things stand atm, were just wondering what to expect for 2015, and felt id ask those on this forum what there guts tell them to expect.

The AI and ME is improving every year, so eventually not knowing what you're doing will catch up with you. Sorry to be blunt. You're either going to have to learn or go back to a previous, more forgiving version.

Agree Hunt3r, more or less what ive realised also, Classic mode were imo a mistake, they should have made an expert mode instead or both, many were lost last 2 years, speaking from my personal experience with friends playing the game only ofc, well, also based a bit on many threads this year.

I understand those that wanna have feel with every detail, and be punished on the field if they missed something, but for those of us that like the so called more forgiving versions, we have classic only now, and thats just not worth the price of the game each year.

Imo theyve neclected a big part of the gamers.

The game currently is still not really that complex. In a piece I wrote for Clear Cut Chance, I set out to purposely give completely wrong team talks. I didn't even really care about the starting line-ups and my tactic wasn't a "super tactic". It was just one I made in 5 mins. I still did well in those games. You don't have to get every little detail right to be successful.

It sounds like it is the tactical side of the game where you're failing. Why don't you ask for advice in the Tactics Forum? Try and get a better understanding. Once you do, the game becomes much easier.

That is easy to answer, ive since 1997 oe 8 when i bought the game the first time till 2012 not had any issue with setting up tactics, and do still know how to set up a tactic, in real life or in a game, but after 2013 a lot of other things determine to much compared to the right tactic.

But this has also been discussed a lot over the last year, and no point in debating again :-)

after 2013 a lot of other things determine to much compared to the right tactic.

Your experiences do seem consistent with the ME evolution of the game. This has, as you've said, been discussed to death, but the facts are:

1. Collision detection kicked in properly in FM13 (right when you struggled) which negated some previous "diablo" and "super" tactics, which just exploited that loophole in the system

2. FM14 obviously has the new interface, yet the underlying mechanics are just evolutions of what existed in FM13 and FM12 before

I can't possibly know how good (or otherwise) your tactical application is, but the fact that you struggled from the point that the main flaw in the game was resolved, suggests that perhaps you just haven't fully adapted. As HUNT3R says, the tactics forum has a purpose - we aim to help people get a better grasp of how the game works.

That is easy to answer, ive since 1997 oe 8 when i bought the game the first time till 2012 not had any issue with setting up tactics, and do still know how to set up a tactic, in real life or in a game, but after 2013 a lot of other things determine to much compared to the right tactic.

But this has also been discussed a lot over the last year, and no point in debating again :-)

What I was getting at, is that quality of players and a good tactic are the two main ingredients to winning a match. There are other little factors, like team talks, but they are minor and easy to manage and FMC cuts that out completely.

If you really can still build a good tactic, you shouldn't have too many problems.

Edit: I should say, that you still need to make in-match changes at times. Matches don't always go according to plan.

Thx RTherrinbone, that clears things a little bit and could partly be true, but personally ive never used any of these killer tactics people have posted in the 2012 and before, ive always very much depended on my own tacs, but must admit that it were fun to have a player score a gazillion goals in the early years, but also got tedious fast. And im in no way against progression of the game, as long as it makes sence.

Over the last year, theres been more whining post than ive ever seen on this forum before, and you know the saying, if theres smoke, theres a fire somewhere, but continuesly its always the gamer and not the game thats wrong.

Thats why im not really interested in a debate about tacs etc, i use your forums on this issue, and have tried some out that made sence.

Basicly i just wanted to know if im to expect the same or worse, compared to being a casual player who still normally play at least 10 seasons with hes favourite team, and a lot of different teams when having a weekend party where wife is send out of the house for a few days.

Game has just not been fun the last 2 years, and definately mostly this year, as a fun weekend game, it mostly ends in frustration, and we havent done this for a few months now, and is currently internly debating to drop it or go to an ealier version, or another game altogether.

But i will ofc follow the announcements when they come about the new game, but for the first time, our close little lan party, wont be buying and gettin together on release ddate this year, and thats sad, but most have agreed its better to wait till january update to decide if its worth the effort, and that will make it at least 6 months we dont grp for the game, and maybe eventually we wont do it anymore at all, since we will be getting out of the habbit of it.

Guess this is now to be considered a whine thread as well, sorry about that :-)

The game will never be like it was before, I'm afraid. A large portion of users like the heading FM is taking so SI has a market big enough to justify what they're doing. A lot of users who are used to an easier, more casual experience are left behind, though. It's just a reality one has to embrace or leave the franchise all together, as painful as it can be gaming-wise.

Just to give your voice some context, could you please post an example of a tactic you use?

The reason I ask is that you have suggested that you know how to build a tactic but that you are missing a bit of fun. There's a correlation in FM between "fun" and "winning". Many people gain great pleasure from playing the game and taking the peaks and troughs of performance on the chin. Some people are less willing to roll with the punches.

FM15 will not be markedly different from FM14 in terms of the way it plays.

Nah, not gonna go into another lets bash the players tactic debate :-), ive seen that happen enough over the last year in here. And ive more or less got the answer i wanted already, and i think shirajzl is right in above statement.

Imo they should have done things a bit differently, considering ive only read about happy players from last year in here, in real life ive heard nothing but people complaining about 2014 version.

Its like either you wanna get even more nerdy about game, and if you dont, you get to play classic.

3rd choice is ofc stop playinng it, and unfortunately, thats how it most likely ends for me, but at least i can still remember when i started game and i could get Michael Laudrup to the club for 2 years, up till playing Spurs with Eriksen as a main force on my favourite team.

(Hard to guess im Danish, right :-) )

Its been a good run to be honest :-)

I'm still in the dark as to why FMC is such an awful choice for you. It cuts out some of the additional influences on a match, letting you concentrate on the players and tactics.

Also, I'm not sure more people are complaining compared to previous years. People pretty much complain every year.

Imo they should have done things a bit differently, considering ive only read about happy players from last year in here, in real life ive heard nothing but people complaining about 2014 version.

IMO there has been no more whining & complaining this version than any other version, every year is more or less the same.

The issues might change from version to version but the bottom line seems to be consistently that a section of the user base can't enjoy the game unless they are winning.

In terms of SI making the game more complex its not something new its the direction they've been heading for many, many years. I reached a stage around seven/eight years ago where I needed to either walk away from FM or invest more time in it. Initially I didn't play that much and took a bit of a break but around FM09 I returned with the mindset of taking things much slower & learning about the depth of the game. I don't rush through seasons like I did 10 years ago but I do enjoy it now - win or lose!

SI have also worked to reduce the complexity in recent years with the likes of the TC and I can now setup a workable tactic inside a minute.

If you want to play a quick fire arcade football management game then FM isn't the one you should choose but if you want to play a more in depth simulation then FM is the right choice. SI have made it very clear what type of game they want FM to be, you need to decide if its the type of game you want to play.

I'm still in the dark as to why FMC is such an awful choice for you. It cuts out some of the additional influences on a match, letting you concentrate on the players and tactics.

Also, I'm not sure more people are complaining compared to previous years. People pretty much complain every year.

Tactics are as hard to master as in full game, that's the main reason FMC is not a solution for casual gamers.

Tactics are as hard to master as in full game, that's the main reason FMC is not a solution for casual gamers.

Why's that? It takes away the fluff such as morale management via team talks. All you lose is the Analysis Tab. That apart, it is the same. By removing the superfluous stuff, FMC allows users to devote more time to concentrating on tactics, so it could arguably be easier to focus on tactics in that game mode.

I use FMC now as I have a family and less spare time. FMC hits the spot perfectly and I imagine that people like me are the target audience that SI were aiming for.

Why's that? It takes away the fluff such as morale management via team talks. All you lose is the Analysis Tab. That apart, it is the same. By removing the superfluous stuff, FMC allows users to devote more time to concentrating on tactics, so it could arguably be easier to focus on tactics in that game mode.

I use FMC now as I have a family and less spare time. FMC hits the spot perfectly and I imagine that people like me are the target audience that SI were aiming for.

The basic tactical system is still cruelly unforgiving, compared to FM 12 and previous iterations. We know why, but it doesn't change a fact that a lot of people are still struggling to adapt. The amount of effort once needed to invest into tactics is now not nearly adequate for anything substantial.

The underlying tactical system is the same, the ME has evolved.

The underlying tactical system is the same, the ME has evolved.

Yeah, my wording was poor. Replace "tactical system" with "match engine" and the point remains the same.

I can't speak for FMC as I'm not familiar with it, although if it uses the same tactical setup, as suggested above, this also applies there.

The point is that it's too easy to set up a "bad" tactic that looks to a human eye like a good one. Then you struggle because the game is not doing enough to tell you that something is wrong. This is feedback related, as we've already talked about to death, but also a UI issue. If the tactics screen is not clear in telling you what effect your input will have and you don't already have that knowledge, your tactic risks becoming ineffective.

For example, common sense dictates that defenders should have a Defend duty. That is their job, first and foremost: to defend. However, in a thread the other day someone who does know the tactical side of the game (Hunt3r, possibly?) stated that having four defenders on a Defend duty is not advisable. I don't know why that is, but I trust that whoever it was that said that knows what they're talking about. But it was stated matter-of-factly, as though this was common knowledge when it's anything but- the game certainly isn't telling you that.

And this extends to the interaction of the commands themselves. Developing a tactic involves setting Roles, Duties, Mentality, Fluidity, Team Instructions and Player Instructions. There is no clear indication which of these take precedent over the other, or how these settings interact with one another. Playing, for example, with an Enganche (description: "it is a more stationary role as the Enganche acts as a focal point, instead of moving around into larger areas of space") but a Very Fluid Mentality- is he going to move around or hold his position?

We have a lot of tools on the Tactics screen to instruct our players to play exactly as we desire. But there is no real guidance in-game as to how these tools can be used, what they actually do, or how they work. There is a stark difference between a manager making bad tactical decisions that get punished by the game, and one who cannot communicate his intentions to his team in the first place.

For example, common sense dictates that defenders should have a Defend duty. That is their job, first and foremost: to defend. However, in a thread the other day someone who does know the tactical side of the game (Hunt3r, possibly?) stated that having four defenders on a Defend duty is not advisable. I don't know why that is, but I trust that whoever it was that said that knows what they're talking about. But it was stated matter-of-factly, as though this was common knowledge when it's anything but- the game certainly isn't telling you that.

And this extends to the interaction of the commands themselves. Developing a tactic involves setting Roles, Duties, Mentality, Fluidity, Team Instructions and Player Instructions. There is no clear indication which of these take precedent over the other, or how these settings interact with one another. Playing, for example, with an Enganche (description: "it is a more stationary role as the Enganche acts as a focal point, instead of moving around into larger areas of space") but a Very Fluid Mentality- is he going to move around or hold his position?

I'll address these in parts

-Defenders on defend duty - sure, it'll keep you solid at the back, but the gap between your defence and your midfield will be too much (and allow for easy exploitation) - essentially, you need an out (a DM, or even auto on the FBs) otherwise you'll be reduced to long speculative punts forward (which may work on the odd game [when you're a massive underdog], but won't work over the course of the season)

-Enganche with very fluid settings

I see an Enganche as "the focal point, instead of roaming around into large areas"

Yes, the player in that role will always remain fairly central, BUT with a very fluid setting, then the players are likely to interchange fairly freely (watch your AMC be out on the left wing for an attack, and your ML will then be the 'enganche')

I prefer not to use fluid unless my players are pretty competent (no point having a pacy winger as a creative midfielder is there? all I want him to do is run down the wing and belt in a cross)

example... fluid would probably work with RealMadrid/Barcelona (any of James/Bale/Ronaldo/Benzema or Messi/Neymar/Pedro/Suarez can cover [at least competently] any of the AM slots, or the ST slot)

but then if your working with the likes of Everton (couldn't really think of anyone better) then you kinda want Lukaku up forward, with a creative outlet coming from Pienaar/McGeady (so you're more likely to play Rigid, so that they'd stay in that role - Lukaku as creator? hmmmm)

for the record, I've made minor tweaks to my formation since FM08, and have had relative success with it too

I hope FM 15 is MORE complex, rather than less

I can't speak for FMC as I'm not familiar with it, although if it uses the same tactical setup, as suggested above, this also applies there.

The point is that it's too easy to set up a "bad" tactic that looks to a human eye like a good one. Then you struggle because the game is not doing enough to tell you that something is wrong. This is feedback related, as we've already talked about to death, but also a UI issue. If the tactics screen is not clear in telling you what effect your input will have and you don't already have that knowledge, your tactic risks becoming ineffective.

For example, common sense dictates that defenders should have a Defend duty. That is their job, first and foremost: to defend. However, in a thread the other day someone who does know the tactical side of the game (Hunt3r, possibly?) stated that having four defenders on a Defend duty is not advisable. I don't know why that is, but I trust that whoever it was that said that knows what they're talking about. But it was stated matter-of-factly, as though this was common knowledge when it's anything but- the game certainly isn't telling you that.

It might have been me somewhere here in GD. I think I explained my reasoning though.

I learn through watching matches. I don't pay much attention to the AIs entire system, but more to my own. Are my players getting into space? Are there enough passing options? Those are the two main things I look for and it is important to me, especially when setting up a new system.

I don't have a Tactics Forum that I can consult if my tactic fails. I have to fix it on my own. You're right that the game/assistant manager doesn't not tell you much in that regard, so I watch matches to see where Im going wrong.

Mainly from an attacking/possession point of view, having all 4 defenders on defend duty is not a great idea. Where the full backs would usually be an "out ball" when there's a lot of pressure in midfield, they won't be in this case, because they're hanging back far too much. It is limiting passing options. That means surrendering possession a lot.

On the defensive side, it could be solid if set up right, but it usually isn't. There's usually a massive gap in front of that back 4, particularly the full backs. That gives the opposition wingers a chance to run at the flat-footed defence. If set up with good enough midfield cover, it could work. This would obviously be for a weak team in the league, so you'd only counter attack with a few players. It's an extremely defensive way of setting up.

I would never tell someone not to use something, but rather that it isn't advisable and explain why. It is up to them to decide how they intend playing then.

Tactics are as hard to master as in full game, that's the main reason FMC is not a solution for casual gamers.

I agree that tactics can be hard to master, as it should be, but setting up a basic tactic that gets you decent results is not too "hard".

Thing is, as i see it, tactics dont make sence anymore, thats why i earlier called it a puzzle to figure out more than making a tactic, to many small things happen and you have no idea why, then you start making small tweaks to the team, to turn things around, and usually with no effect, cause you have no idea where the problem is.

And after a while, you roll back to previous tactic that you knew worked at the time, and suddenly that tactic that didnt work, works again, and i realise you cant just play the same tactic, and the game will eventually exploit your tactic, but at same time it suddenly works again after a while, and still no answer to why?.

I always do tweaks on my tactic depending on who i meet and which players is on field, i really try playing to my players strenghts at the same time not compromising to much on my own game philosofy.

This has worked well for me since the start of this game, but especially this years version, so many strange things been happening, and i have no idea why.

Fair enough, anyone can make a decent tactic that will work most of the times, but making it work well isnt about tactics anymore, its more about figuring out how to set all the pieces of the puzzle 100% right.

I play Spurs mostly, sometimes Newcastle, or even wolves when i want a challenge,anything below that takes to much time to get up and running, and a big part of the game for me is getting to play with real life players and talents i know, and wanna try have on team, then look at the end of there career when they stop, see if i can do better next time around etc using the player, and not that i find it to hard to play lower leagues.

So im not actually playing with lousy teams, but at same time, i never play the top teams, since i want the challenge, and not just a walkover all team.

And i can do well 90% of the time, and then suddenly the team starts loosing or drawing, morale start diving like an olympic pole jumper, and i have no idea why, and thats basicly my problem in a nutshell with version 12 and 13, why?

I can get the team back on track, but at times it takes 10 or more games before i succeed, and even then, i still dont know why i got things turned around, since i never do anything drastic, its always based on players and philosophy. (I always buy players to fit my philosophy, and dont just buy names, so thats not the reason here, using players wrong)

Why? Thats the question i never get answered in this game.

In earlier versions, i could always find the reasons behind my ending winning streaks etc (no i dont expect to always win, as some have suggested), but not anymore, game just dont make sence for me anymore, the logic is gone from game. fair enough some of you have figured it out, but imo its not as much a manager game anymore as it is figuring out how to avoid secret mechanics you have no idea about.

I am very much agreeing with Lawlore's reply, why? is the number 1 question you never get an answer to in this game.

Personally speaking tactics make more sense now then they ever have done at any point in the series.

And after a while, you roll back to previous tactic that you knew worked at the time, and suddenly that tactic that didnt work, works again, and i realise you cant just play the same tactic, and the game will eventually exploit your tactic, but at same time it suddenly works again after a while, and still no answer to why?.

This is the crux of your problem - Expecting the same tactic to produce the same results time after time against a variety of teams with different players & tactics themselves.

AI managers have never "figured" out your tactic, they simply make changes which they feel will enhance their chance of winning an individual match. If you don't respond to these changes and also look to enhance your teams chances then your odds of winning the match will most likely drop unless the AI manager makes a mistake with his choices.

I always do tweaks on my tactic depending on who i meet and which players is on field, i really try playing to my players strenghts at the same time not compromising to much on my own game philosofy.

What happens if your player's strengths have a negative impact on the overall tactic or play into the opposition hands?

This has worked well for me since the start of this game, but especially this years version, so many strange things been happening, and i have no idea why.

Fair enough, anyone can make a decent tactic that will work most of the times, but making it work well isnt about tactics anymore, its more about figuring out how to set all the pieces of the puzzle 100% right.

I can liken tactics to a puzzle but its a two player one with both sides changing the boundaries constantly while each also attempts to give their side the highest % chance of winning the match.

How do you watch your matches? as it seems part of your issue is being able to understand the feedback from the match.

Have the pre-match scout reports been removed or changed by default as i don't recall seeing those in this version. Something along the lines of they prefer to get the ball down and play it, defend deep or use fast defenders as their front line has pace.

Sorry, not gonna go into a tactic in depth discussion, thats been done over and over already elsewhere, and i have read many of the comprehensive tactic threads on this forum.

I just wanted to give a general picture of how i like to play games, and saying that having 1 game philosophy and sticking to it, while still ofc respecting your opponent and changing it to fit oppossition is the crux of my problem, is just another thing that makes this game unrealistic then, if thats actually true for the new version of the game.

Ofc you cant play a game without keeping opponents choices and tactics in mind, but exactly how many top teams in the world play defensively against weaker teams, will they not play to there own strengths?

How many top teams have there own game philosophy, and stick to it?

Saying thats my crux, is actually imo proving my point of this game, when you have a strong team, a good tactic, and suddenly the team takes a nose dive, and theres no apparent reason why its happening, is it then the game philosophy and tactics thats wrong, or is it actually the game mechanics that is wrong. (Repetative line, but explains better how i feel than line above :-) )

As ive said, i dont expect to win all, all teams stumble and fall at times, but if you have a good side and tactic, your team should have a consistent season most years, some better than others, but when the game suddenly goes into lets kill this team and make it relegate material mode, somethings definately wrong, that never ever happens in real life, and its just not realistic, and its not easy to spot the reason why anymore, most of the time you dont ever find the reason why.

Like i also said, i get things turned around when it happens, but i rarely know why it happened or what fixed it.

What the game won't tell you, posters on this forum will. Not posting your tactic will result in you getting no help and the same spiral continuing leading to more frustration, your refusal to post your tactic on more than 1 occasion in the one thread suggests that you know it will get picked apart and don't want that to happen for some reason.

I'll be honest. I have played FM for years and only in the last two to three years has my enjoyment levels dropped.

With the tactics. I cannot watch a game and react from there, as I never seem to get it right. Winger beating my guy for pace, drop off. Now he's standing off too far and allowing the cross. I can never get any balance right.

THIS IS MY FAULT (before people think I'm bashing the game). But what I would like to see it is a graded Ass Man. A Skrill South one might say "Your 4-4-2 setup will struggle against your next opponent", where as a Premier League one might say "Your right back instructions mean that Navas is going to find holes all the time. Make sure he marks him tightly"

I've tried and tried to read the various tactics threads, also reading books like Calcio & Inverting the Pyramid. But I STILL cannot make a tactic for the life of me.

stevie_G_32201

Yeah, i realise that is what most will take away from this post, and fair enough, but tbh post werent made to make a new tactic debate, i just wanted to know if i should expect same or worse (I know some will phrase it same or better) and i do have my answer on that part, and i thank you all for giving this thread and this now absolete manager the time of day :-)

Hope you all will enjoy the game forever and ever :-)

Sorry, not gonna go into a tactic in depth discussion, thats been done over and over already elsewhere, and i have read many of the comprehensive tactic threads on this forum.

I just wanted to give a general picture of how i like to play games, and saying that having 1 game philosophy and sticking to it, while still ofc respecting your opponent and changing it to fit oppossition is the crux of my problem, is just another thing that makes this game unrealistic then, if thats actually true for the new version of the game.

Ofc you cant play a game without keeping opponents choices and tactics in mind, but exactly how many top teams in the world play defensively against weaker teams, will they not play to there own strengths?

How many top teams have there own game philosophy, and stick to it?

Saying thats my crux, is actually imo proving my point of this game, when you have a strong team, a good tactic, and suddenly the team takes a nose dive, and theres no apparent reason why its happening, is it then the game philosophy and tactics thats wrong, or is it actually the game mechanics that is wrong. (Repetative line, but explains better how i feel than line above :-) )

As ive said, i dont expect to win all, all teams stumble and fall at times, but if you have a good side and tactic, your team should have a consistent season most years, some better than others, but when the game suddenly goes into lets kill this team and make it relegate material mode, somethings definately wrong, that never ever happens in real life, and its just not realistic, and its not easy to spot the reason why anymore, most of the time you dont ever find the reason why.

Like i also said, i get things turned around when it happens, but i rarely know why it happened or what fixed it.

You don't want to go into an in-depth tactical discussion, but then show a complete lack of knowledge regarding real world teams and their tactics.

Teams make tactical changes. Some make small changes, some big, but they make them. Some tinker with the line-ups, others don't. Some make changes before the game (and train accordingly the week before), so make adjustments in-game and others do both. The philosophy is still the same, but they make changes still.

I'd echo what Cougar asked - just how much of a game do you watch?

The AI in FM will adjust to your reputation. If you're one of the weaker clubs (low rep) in the division, it will generally try and dominate the game. If you're a top team, it'll generally sit back and counter attack.

One of the most common complaints we get is users that over-achieve with weaker teams by hitting the opposition on fast breaks forward. Eventually their rep rises (mid-season or end season) and they can't win anymore, because teams now sit back against them and the fast breaks now are worthless because there are enough defenders back to cover. Still, it's obvious to pick up if you watch games.

All valid points Hunt3r, as ive already made clear imo, but maybe im not writing what i mean well enough, but i agree in all youre saying.

How much i watch of the game depends on how the game is going and if im alone or in company.

Lets just leave this be, its turning into another tac bashing thread, and less about game mechanics, which is where my issue is, its to hard for a casual gamer to play this game anymore, and thats imo a shame, but obviously what the masses want, i just wish they had kept the "More forgiving" version and dropped the classic one, or made both, since i like all aspects of the game except the unforgiving tactic system.

When me and my friends take a weekend out of the schedule to have some fun, theres no time to watch full games etc if we want to have a chance to complete a season, and this used to be possible, when at home playing the game solo, you worked on your tacs etc, and then when we got together, we could finish at least 1 season in 2 days, now its all about why did this or this happen, and answer is to watch full games each time each little thing messes up. Its just not a game that works for socialising anymore, since everytime we get got together since 2012 version, theres always 1 or 2 having a crap season and not knowing why, and thats what frustrates us, when this happens, we dont know why or how to fix it, it just happens, and eventually you will get back on track, but most times wont know why.

Im sorry that you guys feel im steppinng on this games toes, but ive enjoyed this game for 13+ years, and always been able to adapt to the changes, but this new way of things, just dont sit right with anyone i know.

And i just dont buy into the, its the gamers fault, not the game, every single time.

Im trying not to make this a negative thread and keep it light and about general concerns about game, but i now see were heading in opposite direction, and ill bid you all farewell and may the wind be in your backs :-)

Thx RTherrinbone, that clears things a little bit and could partly be true, but personally ive never used any of these killer tactics people have posted in the 2012 and before, ive always very much depended on my own tacs, but must admit that it were fun to have a player score a gazillion goals in the early years, but also got tedious fast. And im in no way against progression of the game, as long as it makes sence.

Over the last year, theres been more whining post than ive ever seen on this forum before, and you know the saying, if theres smoke, theres a fire somewhere, but continuesly its always the gamer and not the game thats wrong.

Thats why im not really interested in a debate about tacs etc, i use your forums on this issue, and have tried some out that made sence.

Basicly i just wanted to know if im to expect the same or worse, compared to being a casual player who still normally play at least 10 seasons with hes favourite team, and a lot of different teams when having a weekend party where wife is send out of the house for a few days.

Game has just not been fun the last 2 years, and definately mostly this year, as a fun weekend game, it mostly ends in frustration, and we havent done this for a few months now, and is currently internly debating to drop it or go to an ealier version, or another game altogether.

But i will ofc follow the announcements when they come about the new game, but for the first time, our close little lan party, wont be buying and gettin together on release ddate this year, and thats sad, but most have agreed its better to wait till january update to decide if its worth the effort, and that will make it at least 6 months we dont grp for the game, and maybe eventually we wont do it anymore at all, since we will be getting out of the habbit of it.

Guess this is now to be considered a whine thread as well, sorry about that :-)

I agree with much of what has been said about the change from FM12 to FM13 and onwards re. the match engine and tactics. It is absolutely right that SI introduced collision detection to reduce / remove exploits. In FM11, with hindsight, I probably took advantage of an exploit without any intention to do so, I just stumbled on it with tactical tweaking and I suspect a lot of players have done the same, and then found it hard to adjust from FM13 onwards.

I do think, and hope that SI have put this very high on the priority list for FM15, that we need more feedback on the match itself on things like what the opposition AI are doing etc. It does need to be recognised that not everyone has the time to watch full matches or pore over stats/heat maps etc. FMC doesn't solve this issue. It can be really, really hard on some occasions to work out why your team isn't doing well and this needs to be improved. I think better feedback in-game and at the end would massively improve the user experience.

I also think there are one or two bugs that can have a very disproportionate effect on performance e.g. goalkeeper distribution and, if you don't know how to work around those, then the effect can be very frustrating.

I'm really enjoying my current save with Sunderland now. I feel I've got to a point where I understand the game enough now, but it has took me a long time to do so.

I think this is a common issue for game series where they either seem to get more complicated or simplified which annoys a small or large proportion of the people who originally played in the game.

I recently started playing FM14 after having a lengthy break from FM so I've had similar issues with trying to work out what makes a good tactic. I did start off watching the highlights but at a conference level its hard to tell whether things are going wrong because of the player ability or something wrong with the tactics so in the end switched to text only to get through more matches. As far as I can tell the assistant manager does give some useful mid game advice but doesn't offer insights or recommendations for future matches which I think would help casual players. The interface could be improved a bit as well as the team instructions page is quite confusing at first glance.

There are already some options that make the game easier or harder like the player attribute masking option so potentially there could be an option to control the level of advice that the assistant manager can give or something similar.

Have the pre-match scout reports been removed or changed by default as i don't recall seeing those in this version. Something along the lines of they prefer to get the ball down and play it, defend deep or use fast defenders as their front line has pace.

It's still there. On your tactic screen. There should be 4 tabs under the pitch view (unless it is only on the skin I'm using) called "Next Match", "Past Meetings", "Report" and "Opp Players". The part you're looking for is under Report.

I think the problem which facing SI is going to be that the CM series, and FM until 2012 were playable for me as a kid when I had loads of time on my hands and would still be good fun now with a family and full time job.

Unfortunately since FM 2012 the 'realism' has gone a bit too far, and the time required is so great that it is not a possibility for someone with other demands in their lives. FMC is not a realistic alternative, it strips out the areas which are largely optional in the full game anyway, and leaves in a large amount of the time consuming parts. It is quicker- but FM 2012 is as quick and more enjoyable.

The reason this is a problem for SI is that I don't think I am the only person who has been buying the games since the early days (I remember excitedly buying CM2 in Woolworths) but who will for the first time not buy next years game, not because of any melodramatic reason but simply because FM 2014 was the worst value for money version of the game I have bought in terms of the hours I invested in it and there is no point wasying money for another year.

If the game is simplified a bit, or if FMC is overhauled then I may be back- but I don't think I am likely to be. It's been a good run!

Unfortunately since FM 2012 the 'realism' has gone a bit too far, and the time required is so great that it is not a possibility for someone with other demands in their lives. FMC is not a realistic alternative, it strips out the areas which are largely optional in the full game anyway, and leaves in a large amount of the time consuming parts. It is quicker- but FM 2012 is as quick and more enjoyable.

I think the "realism" isn't there. Player interactions for example are ridiculous. Congratulate a lad on getting his first cap or first international goal and he basically tells you to eff off. That sort of thing would not go down in real life without some serious repercussions. I feel as a manager we're powerless to deal with players in terms of interactions when they throw up odd ends like that.

I agree that tactics can be hard to master, as it should be, but setting up a basic tactic that gets you decent results is not too "hard".

Just want to touch on this and an earlier quote of yours about the match engine evolving; I'm sure if you've seen my previous posts you can accuse me of sounding like a broken record by now(!)

1) Tactics and the tactic creator needs more tutorials/guidance - At the moment it's whimsical, I've seen you and Cleon and various others over on the tactics forum debate and disagree on 'interpretion' of what each setting does. - Key thing here, outside of this site and select few others, none of this information is presented in a clear and concise way. Before, the problem was the big 'T+TTF' book, not many gamers want to bother reading through all that for accessibility. At the same time, I don't think gamers should be forced to go to the forums to find out all the relevant bits of information.

2) Following on from that; How many users actually understand the tactics and roles in any capacity outside of here? I reckon it's surprisingly few. This information is more accessible now, I mean we've all seen people going 4-2-3-1 with all the defenders on Defend and all the midfielders on attack. We all try and 'educate' them about the flaws in that. Yet some of the more highly downloaded tactics on sites like FM-Base and a lot of the rubbish that ends up on the Steam Workshop is formations of that kind. (I say, not being offensive, but use sites like Steam as the lowest common denominator - They are the 'majority' of players I reckon, because outside of this forum I rarely get to have a competent discussion with anyone who plays FM - I got laughed out for saying you need to watch the matches to see the tactical issues...)

3) The Match Engine isn't that 'evolved' - I loved the new features and I was a massive fan of the engine in the beta but towards the end of 14 I think it's actually one of the poorer versions.

i) Collision detection isn't nailed down yet - There's too much finiky bits where players are 'stonewalled' - maybe an animation issue.

ii) The shooting issues from ridiculous angles, the shots that are skied but the commentary says is 'whistling past the post!'

iii) The dreadful corners

iv) The penalty faults

v) The three man defence gap

vi) Various other bits and bobs that are 'open to interpretion'

I hope for 15/16 that those issues are resolved; that the commentary better matches the on-pitch action. But also that the animation demonstrates a lot more clearly what is going on. A though of mine, is that it would be good for the commentary to further elaborate on the 'why's' of something happening. The defender lost the ball because he was weak (strength issue), didn't pay attention (concentration), was lack-a-daisal in his clearance / his first touch let him down, etc.

I often see incidents where things happen and I strive to figure out why it happened but without the full story the common user is often groping in the dark.

Anyway; Tl:dr I think there needs to be more clarification, tighter animations, better tutorials or better wordings for the tactical roles/formations/fluidity and so on.

So I'm not surprised people like Crushall are struggling; I don't think it has to do with diablo or the 'collision detection', I think it has to do with a complete lack of understanding of the game, something fostered by poor documentation and over-complication in recent years. That's just me though, and I do understand why people get defensive on here about this, it's annoying seeing it happening but as I said, go to Steam, go to anywhere but here and it's 90% of the users there struggling to comprehend the game or if they're winning they're using absolute jokes of a formation/tactical set ups.