TSH Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 This has become completely ridiculous and it's the same all these years. You get more shots, more possession, more CCC, better passing ratio, etc and the A.I. gets 5 shots and wins or gets a draw. The A.I. stat is the one that makes sense though. For normal teams 5 or 6 chances per game are REALLY good stats. How can I achieve it,? Does ANYONE achieve realistic shots ratio as opposed to what the A.I. achieves generally? Does ANYONE from SI? I know it can happen in some games but not most of the games. It's evident that the player is artificially being restricted because the engine can't keep his chances to normal levels. But why? Is it so difficult to program? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
faraowww Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 It's your tactics Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Stuart Wilson Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 Goals...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott MUFC Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 i got dominated by arsenal at theirs as united... and won 1-0. it is all about quality of possesion. the better quality of your strikers the more chance of that 1 shot being a goal. i is that and luck, i dominated a game with 15 shots on target and only won 4-0 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
axehan1 Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 It's your tactics great insight you tactical genius,have your previous 23 posts been as inspiring? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philly_flyer10 Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 Going from previous threads, fanbois state CCC have no relation on how good the goalscoring chance is and also theres a low chance of scoring on a 1 on 1 CCC through the middle so you are creating the "wrong" type of CCC and its all your fault, not the faulty ME. Ive always said the game has way too many chances and thus you have to miss way too many chances to get a normal score. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themadsheep2001 Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 Not sure to be honest normally convert most of my really good changes, but then i tend to focus on what is happened in the final third as opposed to more possession etc, i pay particular attention to key passes and balls into the box Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philly_flyer10 Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 Possession is a meaningless stat, you can be boring like Swansea and pass around for ages and not even get in the final 3rd or you can be incisive and cut through at will, Ive been 2 or 3 up with 35% possession because the other team cant break me down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wwfan Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 This has become completely ridiculous and it's the same all these years.You get more shots, more possession, more CCC, better passing ratio, etc and the A.I. gets 5 shots and wins or gets a draw. The A.I. stat is the one that makes sense though. For normal teams 5 or 6 chances per game are REALLY good stats. How can I achieve it,? Does ANYONE achieve realistic shots ratio as opposed to what the A.I. achieves generally? Does ANYONE from SI? I know it can happen in some games but not most of the games. It's evident that the player is artificially being restricted because the engine can't keep his chances to normal levels. But why? Is it so difficult to program? I consistently better the AI's chance conversion percentage and have done for years. The 'easiness' issue in 12.0.0 was also down to users massively bettering the AI in this area, simply through set piece conversion. I'm afraid, unfortunately, that your problem will be tactical in nature. My advice is to stop looking at stats so objectively and try to look at matches through a subjective lens. Of course, posts like this: Going from previous threads, fanbois state CCC have no relation on how good the goalscoring chance is and also theres a low chance of scoring on a 1 on 1 CCC through the middle so you are creating the "wrong" type of CCC and its all your fault, not the faulty ME. really don't help as they prevent you from being able to do this properly. This is a bitter and biased interpretation of two issues. 1: The SI calculation of CCCs is far too liberal, meaning that hurried shots from 20 odd yards are treated the same as 5 yard tap ins into an open net. 2: If you are tending to create lots of TB one on ones down the middle with a quick and narrow tactic, the AI will read it as a CCC, but it will mainly be of the former type and thus easily saved / missed. A subjective eye helps you recognise this and adjust. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCIAG Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 It's your tactics Please don't make posts like this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott MUFC Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 erm this i am sure has never happend in a game before shots on target. zero, nothing, nada, diddly squat. and i rarely get zero goals in a game, usualy a few a season at most. this is not down to tactics, it is down to luck. you could reload the game and dominate it is just the good old random number generator, if your tactics work on the most part and very little changes then it is just RNG. i find 20 yarders to miss far to often, the ammount of times a goal is scored from 20-30 yards in real life is higher then in the game in my view. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperlz Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 Try being an Everton fan in the last couple of seasons. In our last two games we have hit about 30 shots on target and scored twice. It happens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagoonerfan Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 Its very realstic look at this http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/6513343.stm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayne'o Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 liverpool real life.? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephanie McMahon's Secret Lover Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 My advice is try and get better players. I know it sounds as bad as "its your tactics" but its not meant to be patronising. Sometimes one player in your weakest postion can make all the difference. I think once you have a reasonable tactic in FM it's all about the players. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty206 Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 Completely agree with the above. With a poor/mediocre team I have to literally scout out the opposition myself. Look at their centre backs and try work out how I can stop their forwards etc. Constantly tinkering with my tactics. Once I have a good team though with a few world class players I can just sit back,play 4-4-2 and nearly always do well. The odd poor result here and there but overall it becomes a lot easier. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al_Pacino Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 liverpool real life.? They've hit the woodwork 17 times so far in the league this season Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aderow Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 The only thing that irritates me is my percentage of shots that are on target for me is usually between 25-50% while my opponents rarely has a percentage that is less than 70%. It happens regardless of what sort of form they are in, regardless of what their morale is or their condition or what their attributes look like. Good thing that I have the best goalie on the planet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.