SaintsCanada Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Aye carumba, S.I., it's just embarrassing. I remember several years ago reading that for S.I. "realism" was the Bible. Lol. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTHerringbone Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Have a look at this: http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/388037-Tactics-amp-Training-Forum-2014-World-Cup-Thread Apart from one inspired tactical God steering England to the trophy, we've seen several different AI nations win the 2014 World Cup. Don't let the experience of your game alone cloud your judgement Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edgar555 Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 In my last two saves England have won the 2014 WC in both. In fact in one save they won the WC's in '14 & '18 and added the Euros in '16 also. If only. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HUNT3R Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Very embarrassing...for England. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David91 Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Have a look at this:http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/388037-Tactics-amp-Training-Forum-2014-World-Cup-Thread Apart from one inspired tactical God steering England to the trophy, we've seen several different AI nations win the 2014 World Cup. Don't let the experience of your game alone cloud your judgement It should be hard coded that England can not win WC. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forameuss Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Hmmm... England have as much chance as anyone of winning the World Cup, and each save is going to be skewed by whichever leagues are active. There is no bias, beyond the natural bias that exists because the vast amounts of money in the English game is actually used sensibly in-game, on facilities. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoxToBox Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 England tend to win all around on my saves. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbokav1971 Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 I'm not seeing this. World Cup 2014 Winner. Spain. World Cup 2014 2nd. Colombia. World Cup 2014 3rd. USA. EURO 2016 Winner. Germany. EURO 2016 Runner Up. Turkey. World Cup 2018 Winner. Italy. World Cup 2018 2nd. Denmark. World Cup 2018 3rd. Argentina. EURO 2020 Winner. Germany. EURO 2020 Runner Up. Belgium. World Cup 2022 Winner. England. World Cup 2022 2nd. Brazil. World Cup 2022 3rd. Croatia. EURO 2024 Winner. Romania. EURO 2024 Runner Up. Portugal. World Cup 2026 Winner. Ukraine. World Cup 2026 2nd. Mexico. World Cup 2026 3rd. Germany. EURO 2028 Winner. Portugal. EURO 2028 Runner Up. France. World Cup 2030 Winner. Italy. World Cup 2030 2nd. Belgium. World Cup 2030 3rd. Brazil. I know this is just one save, but I had come to the conclusion that this was a pretty realistic set of results. If I compare it to recent reality, Greece and Denmark winning EURO's, and Turkey, Croatia and Sweden coming 3rd in World Cups, then I would suggest that the AI might even be closer to reality than reality itself, (roll on 2022). ps. There is obviously a re-vote for the Qatar debacle because there is no way a European team are winning in Qatar. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
VonBlade Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 World Cup : 2014 - Argentina over Netherlands 2018 - Mexico over Uruguay 2022 - Brazil over England 2026 - Serbia over Turkey 2030 - England over France 2034 - Spain over Argentina Euro Champs 2016 - France over Russia 2020 - England over Portugal 2024 - Germany over Ukraine 2028 - England over France 2032 - Serbia over Spain 2036 - England over France Although the 2028 Euro, 2030 WC was me as manager. So that's harder to prove as a bit of AI stuff. Still, I wouldn't say it was particularly bias either way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pezza1 Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Uruguay won the 2014 World Cup on my save, whilst England got knocked out in the second round to Slovenia!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cougar2010 Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Playable leagues play a role as they always have. With a large variety I have the following in my current save: 2014 Winners-Croatia, runners up-Argentina, 3rd place-Holland 2018 Winners-Italy, runners up-France, 3rd place-England Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelron Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Honduras were runner up in my first World Cup in game, knocking out Brazil in the semis and losing to the Netherlands 2-1 in the final. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animasta Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 2014: 1st Italy, 2nd Germany, 3rd Brazil 2018: 1st Italy, 2nd Denmark, 3rd Brazil 2022: 1st Ghana, 2nd Switzerland, 3rd England 2026: 1st Brazil, 2nd Belgium, 3rd Argentina 2030: 1st South Africa, 2nd Uruguay, 3rd Spain Not for me, personally. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTHerringbone Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 My current save: 2014: 1st Spain, 2nd France, 3rd Argentina 2018: 1st Germany, 2nd Belgium, 3rd France 2022: 1st Croatia, 2nd Spain, 3rd Mexico Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kris0710 Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Totally agree with Cougar2010 about which playable leagues you have running. In my save i only had the English leagues running until 2055 and to be honest i am surprised by the results. The list of WC and EC winners are as follows: World Cup: European Championship: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzyoscy Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Alright, check THIS out: England's record, thought I'd add one particularly stellar campaign: Note how they didn't qualify in 2026. Anyway, their World Cup record looks pretty Englandy! Naturally the only time they won something was when I was in charge. Spare a thought for Turkey, 4-times runners up in 8 years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D0bi Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Ukraine have won 2 World Cups and a European Championship in my save, I'm in 2024 at the minute. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juventus FC Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 World Cup :2018 - Mexico over Uruguay Mexico over Uruguay in Russia is obviously a joke. What are the odds? Just saying... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawlore Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Well, bearing in mind Mexico are probably going to win this year's World Cup in Brazil, it's not that unlikely. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aderow Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Well, bearing in mind Mexico are probably going to win this year's World Cup in Brazil, it's not that unlikely. Hold on. Wait what? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krald Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Well, no England wins (or finals for that matter) in my Fm2013 save, up to and including the 2038 world cup. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D0bi Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Hold on. Wait what? In fairness, no European team has won a World Cup in South America. Kind of gives Uruguay, Mexico etc., teams who would normally be much larger outsiders, to have better odds at a winning run due to their acclimatisation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santander Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 In my game, England haven't reached any major tournament finals, although they were knocked out in extra time or penalties in the QF or SF stage in every major tournament between 2014-2019. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarroOxford Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 In my previous save, Ghana won a World Cup and the next African Nations cup, while England won zilch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forameuss Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Aren't Mexico pretty rank rotten now anyway? I'm all for the "those-countries-over-there" bias, but I'd go for the South American sides over Mexico. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kontermann Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 It cant be denied that the game is biased towards English footballers. But that doesnt come as a surprise as it is an English product, so thats only natural and maybe a subconscious thing. Would be the same for German/French/Italian/Spanish players if it was German/French/Italian/Spanish Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
baronia Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 I actually did a blog post that has pretty much confirmed who will win the World Cup, who will be runner up and top scorer.. and the winner will indeed be a South American team, based purely on the fact that South American teams have won all 6 World Cups held in South America. The only time a European team has won outside of Europe was in South Africa last time round. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawlore Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Aren't Mexico pretty rank rotten now anyway? I'm all for the "those-countries-over-there" bias, but I'd go for the South American sides over Mexico. With a lucky group draw, they could've been serious contenders. A lot of the squad are the same guys who won the Gold at the London Olympics two years ago. I bet on them back before qualifying began, and they made a real pig's ear of it, needing a playoff to get into the World Cup. The talent is there, but there was a lot of behind-the-scenes stuff and at one point they could seriously have not made it at all. Then they didn't get a lucky draw for the Group Stage, and their odds of winning it ballooned- they'll probably get through second in Group A, and then face... Spain or the Netherlands. D'oh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themadsheep2001 Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 It cant be denied that the game is biased towards English footballers. But that doesnt come as a surprise as it is an English product, so thats only natural and maybe a subconscious thing. Would be the same for German/French/Italian/Spanish players if it was German/French/Italian/Spanish That's not how it works at all. ME doesn't work that way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbokav1971 Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 It is biased towards active leagues. (And Barca obviously). Nothing else. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David91 Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 That's not how it works at all. ME doesn't work that way. It's not ME, but research. English players are too good. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngrookie Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 hi, the world cup in Qatar 22, is that harder to win (temperature) and is it played at a different date????? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbokav1971 Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 It's not ME, but research. English players are too good. And what about when all the real players retire? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themadsheep2001 Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 It's not ME, but research. English players are too good. You know individual researchers do the players right? Not a blanket thing done by SI. And as Jimbo says, what about regen players? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HUNT3R Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Does the fact that England do pretty much as well (or badly) on FM as they do IRL in the above examples not squash the accusations of bias? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Svenc Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 Far too small a sample, often, try this, the WC simulated 200 times via FM 2014: http://www.fmscout.com/a-can-fm14-predict-the-wc2014.html Whilst this doesn't predict (or reflect) youth development and talent pooling further years down the line, obviously, which is something else, it shows how the current team is ranked comparably decently. I say comparably because it is arguably debatable whether the current generation would close in on the chances of Italy or surpass France or Holland, but with bigger samples that might look different too. The gap in absolutes is just not significant enough to truly tell for sure, except that Team England are amongst the squads that are edited to have a realistic chance of going all the way in Brazil, and not to rely on a "one in 200 reloads" chance, for which there is naturally no equivalent in real football. As for youth development and future predictions, that's always going to be tough. FM and SI and the reseach are mostly hardly in a position where they can predict what's going to happen in a couple years from now. With the current structuring, a complete revamp of the system as in Germany is unlikely perhaps, as the FA doesn't hold that much power over the club game anymore. What happens in ten years from the start of a save should be approached as such: You're entering a fantasy realm on day one of a save and this increases with every result that differs from real football. Think of the different time lines from Back To The Future, if you will. No 2025 will look the same. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HUNT3R Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 I think I jinxed my game! After posting that screenshot in post #4, England just won the 2030 World Cup vs Brazil at the San Siro. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jujigatame Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 You can really only use the 2014 World Cup as any barometer of realism. By the time you've gotten to 2018 and beyond there are too many regens floating around and all bets are off. I'm gonna start a short career as USA manager in a few days and I'll see how it goes. It wouldn't surprise me if international play is less realistic because of team cohesion and tactic familiarity issues. I honestly wish you could disable those features, I've never seen much of a point to them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Svenc Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 You can really only use the 2014 World Cup as any barometer of realism. By the time you've gotten to 2018 and beyond there are too many regens floating around and all bets are off. Yupp. :-) However, England for instance have always been a team that consistently has had a slightly better international track record in the game than in real football. They make semi finals or third place play-offs comparably frequently, prior to FM 2014 anyways, whilst in real football they've only ever reached three semis and a final in a century. Going through all my FM 2012 saves, for instances, that's the case in almost all of them, and it's not unusual for them to lift Euro 2012 straight away. My saves typically don't last far into the 2020s or sometime where SI are entering completely foreign territory well beyond current football reality. In the real World Cup, whilst England did not participate prior to World War II, their record is one semi final and well, 1966. That's not rubbing it in, mind: The 200 reloads experiment above for instance isn't that far off if a study done in the book Soccernomics is to be believed. It uses a simplistic mathematical model to determine England's chances by going with a total win ratio in all international matches played ever since 1972, that is if you will starting by an era in which once obviously English superiority by being inventors of modern association football had faded and a bigger number of scholars had caught up. Germany, for instance, hadn't recorded a single win against England until the late 1960s, it took Italy until the 1970s to record their first ever win either, Holland prior to the 1970s were a complete minnow – and historically England still hold a positive or neutral track record against all associations I think except Brazil to this very day. Anyway, a draw was counted for half a win. Ever since, that win ratio has always been hovering around the 66% mark or somewhere thereabouts for England (Brazil's record is about 80%). By the logics of that numbers, once the knock-out stages have been reached, the chances to reach the final are 66% (for winning the round of last 16) x 66% (for winning the quarters) x 66% (for surviving the semis). Mathematically, this makes for a probability of about 20% for England winning the World Cup -- if the experiment is to be believed, it's currently less in FM 2014 for winning Brazil 2014, on the surface accounting for the fact and reflecting upon that the perceived Golden Generation of Lampard-Terry-Gerrard as it were has gone, if you will. However, as the book also accounts, things aren't that simple. Bar a few exceptions, such as easy draws or mass giant killings (as in 2002), usually the opposition gets more tough and experienced the longer you stay into the competition. That overall win-ratio doesn't apply anymore as there are no such teams you typically face in friendlies or qualifiers anymore. For instance, it is astounding that in five of their last eight World Cups, England were knocked out by either Argentina or Germany. The other exits came when facing Brazil in 2002, Portugal in 2006, and in 1982 they didn't exit by knock-out but didn't get past the now obsolete second group stage. For Euro tournaments, much the same applies: exit by good and experienced international opposition in the tournaments that were entered and in which the group stages were survived (starting with 1980, that was the case thrice). Going by that, even if Lampard's goal had stood in 2010 and England won or if England had won the shootout in 2006, for instance, England would have still had to beat two to three experienced and excellent teams. More bluntly put: Upon entering a tournament, Team England are typically a pretty good but rarely great team; one that can beat anyone on its day but typically falters when it needs to do so in succession for likely a reason. Personally, I think that is something that's never been quite reflected 100% by FM, even though if you ranked international sides by their purely overall CA, England have probably been a top ten team (plus/minus a couple places) without being a truly top side for most iterations, as it arguably should be as things currently stand and stood in past and present. Still things aren't that off, as they shouldn't be one of the complete outsiders. And somewhere in between Champ Man 03/04 and Football Manager 2007 in particular, the idea of England lifting a trophy arguably didn't sound too unlikely either. However, older iterations also more prominently favoured physical attributes, a typically trait and expertise in English game and coaching, which likely also contributed to it all. Going back to Soccernomics, it partly attributes the FA's failure to win trophies to the exhaustive nature of an English league season as well as isolation from the rest of the footballing world (the two foreign managers combined hold a better track record than the English, in fact). However, it also argues that contrary to the claims of England being perennial underachievers their track record really isn't that far off overall. In all fairness, as England gets special attention firstly because FM is a hugely popular game in England and secondly is also made there (and thus players are keeping a close eye on possible bias), England are pretty certainly not alone in being a team or nation that produces slightly different results in the game than in real football. That's, well the nature of the game. Every game. :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David91 Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 And what about when all the real players retire? Probably their Youth rating is too high as well. You know individual researchers do the players right? Not a blanket thing done by SI. Unfortunately, yes. This is not SI's error, but research. It happens in many other countries, also. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavePott Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 I find it more un-realistic that scotland qualify all the time. They are too **** for that! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kris0710 Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 I find it more un-realistic that scotland qualify all the time. They are too **** for that! I'm in 2057 and Scotland have only qualified 4 times. 2026 they finished 3rd in the group 2030 lost to England in the 2nd round 2034 and 2046 saw the same as 2026, 3rd in the Group. Qualified for 8 of the last 9 European Championships, in six they finished 3rd or 4th in the group, 2028 lost to England in the QF and 2052 lost to Spain in the 2nd Round. They are 48th in the World, behind N. Ireland, Kazakhstan, Algeria, Wales, Armenia, Angola. But ahead of Sweden and Denmark! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbokav1971 Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 I find it more un-realistic that scotland qualify all the time. They are too **** for that! Again, (AGAIN), this is related to the leagues that you have loaded, (and the new qualifying rules). There are now 2 automatic qualifying places from each group, (with more Nations qualifying via the Playoffs). This wasn't always the case. The number of Nations available to compete in these competitions has risen over the years, (every time an Eastern European Nation forms or a new area is given independence from whoever or whatever, then this creates an additional team. Gibraltar joined UEFA in 2013, (still waiting for UEFA membership), Montenegro in 2007, Kazakhstan, Boz & Herz, Andorra, Slovenia bla bla bla bla bla. Now you can come 3rd in a qualifying group and still qualify. If, (just for example), you only had the Chinese league running, then this would give absolutely no benefit to the likes of Scotland and England, but would give an advantage to maybe China and South Korea. So many play with the English structure, (at least loaded if not managing in), then this has a positive impact on the English NT, (and also the Scottish NT, many of who's better players play in the English structure). If I look at my game now, (2032), 14 members of the current Scottish squad play in England, (5 playing in Scotland,1 playing in France and 1 playing in Italy). The leagues you have loaded directly impacts on how NT's perform over a longer-term save. I can't understand why people don't get this? The Welsh NT also benefit enormously from the English structure being loaded. It's not just a "British and Irish" bias though. From my own personal experience, of course San Marino benefit from the Italian structure being loaded. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinji Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 Again, (AGAIN), this is related to the leagues that you have loaded, (and the new qualifying rules)..... The leagues you have loaded directly impacts on how NT's perform over a longer-term save. I can't understand why people don't get this? The Welsh NT also benefit enormously from the English structure being loaded. It's not just a "British and Irish" bias though. From my own personal experience, of course San Marino benefit from the Italian structure being loaded. that doesn't make it right though does it. Surely that means SI have a job to do to ensure that international sides perform equally well whether or not they have active leagues running, by eg reviewing the quantity and level of players newgenerated from inactive nations. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forameuss Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 that doesn't make it right though does it. Surely that means SI have a job to do to ensure that international sides perform equally well whether or not they have active leagues running, by eg reviewing the quantity and level of players newgenerated from inactive nations. And that takes processing power, which will negate any benefit in not loading a league. There is no other way to do it - if you can't/won't load a country up, then it will suffer in the long run. There is no way around that, short of loading it up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbokav1971 Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 that doesn't make it right though does it. Surely that means SI have a job to do to ensure that international sides perform equally well whether or not they have active leagues running, by eg reviewing the quantity and level of players newgenerated from inactive nations. I can't argue with that. When you have 1 pool of players generating xx players per season, and another group of players generating xx(x20) players, then how do you do that? To my mind SI have lots of areas of the game that are an issue and which if you look at you can see that they should be able to do better. When I look at this area, even from an ideas point of view, (ignoring programming), I don't know how you would resolve this. As a result, I don't think we can be too critical. If you want to play an International management game, then the obvious answer is just to load structures that would create a proportional development of National teams. How you do this is up to the individual. (It might be loading lots of leagues, but equally it might be loading very few, maybe even just 1, smaller structures). The tools are there for International NT development to work as intended. The problem is that we, (as players/users/fans/whatever you want to call us), choose to do something differently because we want to priority club management over International management. SI know this so what they do is they give us what we want. It's the reason why INternational management has fallen so far behind club management. It's got a little better in recent issues, but it's still a very poor second. SI simply spend their resources on areas of the game within which it will do most good for the most people. International management is not and never will be it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Svenc Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 (and the new qualifying rules). I fully expect Scotland (and Wales!) to feature in one of the coming Euro tournaments. P.S.: Wales have reached the final in 2016 in one of my FM 2012 saves - and beat England on penos. :-P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forameuss Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 If Scotland do not qualify when close to 50% of competing nations will be appearing at the finals I think we should be obliged to give up our UEFA & FIFA membership. How dare you! I wouldn't go as far as that (but I realise you're probably just being tongue in cheek) but yes, if nations like Wales, Scotland, Northern or Southern Ireland can't qualify from that field, then they better at least have a hard luck story, otherwise it's pretty poor. For Euro 2016 though, one of either Scotland, Republic of Ireland or Poland is going to miss out completely, and one of them is going to go through the lottery of a play-off. It's not as slam drunk as it seems with the 50% number with some of the groups. But to keep it vaguely on topic, Scotland often become heavily overpowered later on (or sooner) in saves in my experience. In FM13, Craig Levein led them to the final of Euro 2012 where they were beaten by Germany. Around the 2020 mark they were very strong, although not quite strong enough to challenge for titles. Much later on, regens give them a good enough squad to win the World Cup in capable hands (*cough* mine *cough* twice). I'd say Scotland should be around the level of qualifying for every other tournament, maybe reaching the knockouts every so often. And for the most part they do in FM14 at least, but I've seen them go a bit mental sometimes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbokav1971 Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 Must admit that I have never seen Scotland become "over-powered". They always seem to have some really good players but lack balance in the squad. I once saw an AI managed N.Ireland team, (with Super Kyle Wilson playing up front), get to the final of a World Cup and lose. That was pretty impressive. (Must have been about FM05 or FM06 I think). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott MUFC Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 on mine Russia have chucked out 3 or 4 star potential newgens in one intake. only newgens that are "world class" potential are from Scotland and Mexico so far on mine. English intakes have been a bit meh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.