FM16 - First thoughts on the early disclosures.

[samdiatmh]

In other words, looking forward to the next wave of frustration threads where those that don't give a hoot about what the AI does and just skimp through games not noticing

Match stats from my last game:

67% possession

17 shots to 6

5 shots on target to 4

9 corners to 3

10 fouls to 8

lost 2-1, and they pretty much deserved it too

and don't get me started on the league

I won it convincingly last season (by around 10 points, losing 3 games)

and so far I've already lost 3 games, and trail my closest rivals last year by 11 points (we're 5 games in)

BUG! PLZ FIX

in case you think I'm being serious, I'm talking about real life

the first scenario is PSV vs ManUtd, and the second is Chelsea

[ceefax the cat]

If the match engine and tactical interface are better and the game plays more like actual football, I'm in. That's all that's really important.

[Sunstrikuuu]

In other words, looking forward to the next wave of frustration threads where those that don't give a hoot about what the AI does and just skimp through games not noticing when half their team doesn't defend due to their instructioins (post intitial release of FM 2015). Or them going berserk when their a billion central forwards "borderline" exploit tactics suddenly become inefficient because the AI now adapts when facing such unusual formations. :-P

In fairness I am also looking forward to all the threads that go "Bug pls fix!" and then all the responses that say "oh it's just your tactics" and then the patch notes that indicate that, yeah, actually central attacking midfielders with an attack duty actually were broken defensively, and wide attacking dribblers actually were a bit too good, and that goalkeepers actually did react too slowly after blocking shots.

[Kriss]

In fairness I am also looking forward to all the threads that go "Bug pls fix!" and then all the responses that say "oh it's just your tactics" and then the patch notes that indicate that, yeah, actually central attacking midfielders with an attack duty actually were broken defensively, and wide attacking dribblers actually were a bit too good, and that goalkeepers actually did react too slowly after blocking shots.

We're thinking of banning the phrase "it's your tactics" sorry to pee on your parade

[Neil Brock]

Well.. If I was someone who reported issue since FM12 to FM14 and had no "satisfactory" result in the end - I would not report it for FM15. I don't blame anyone, but sometimes I think that "PR/Marketing departments" think only about "excitement", but not about "tiredness" and "lost hopes". First one is great to bring new buyers, second one is great to lose old ones. First one generate lots feedback and mostly inspired, second one - low feedback and mostly grumbling. I don't know numbers, but hope that at least inspired newcomers generate more cash than lost patrons.

The newgen system has been extensively overhauled since FM12 and changes have gone into every single version since to try and improve it further still.

[Snootch]

If the match engine and tactical interface are better and the game plays more like actual football, I'm in. That's all that's really important.

When do we usually hear about the new features for the match engine?

[Cougar2010]

In fairness I am also looking forward to all the threads that go "Bug pls fix!" and then all the responses that say "oh it's just your tactics" and then the patch notes that indicate that, yeah, actually central attacking midfielders with an attack duty actually were broken defensively, and wide attacking dribblers actually were a bit too good, and that goalkeepers actually did react too slowly after blocking shots.

Doesn't make the responses any less true though.

Whilst tweaks were and will always be made to the ME and the roles/duties they generally won't help those that have a poor tactical setup.

[flogside]

This.... This is what I'd love to see.

Just to point out those were two ideas by DANNY1000000 that i was agreeing with!! Definitely would like to see them though!

[mrdanbartlett]

Blimey, 'slag off FM thread'.....

Anyway I just wanted to say I love Fm15 and think it's the best yet, I've played every one since CM.

FM16 looks good, each year I can't imagine how they will make huge strides forward, but they don't need to, just keep tweaking it and adding small features. My own desires are:

- Better control of what you get news items about, i.e a screen where you can enable/disable each area and fine tweak it too, i.e I want to know every time a transfer target is approached by another club, I want to know who won player of the week but I dont want info about those weeks results from that league, or other smaller info. I want to fine tune it exactly so I'm not tapping space alot to get through all the messages, but I'm not missing key things I want to know.

- New stadium presentation - would be nice if a new stadium was made more of a big deal, maybe a computer generated image with the new stadium (from a generic pool) and just generally more than a 1 email thing about it.

- Better interaction with players, to be honest I just found I get the same 'I want a new contract' request all the time, which I just reply 'no, plenty of time remaining' and thats the end of it, endless cycle, at first it seemed good now its just tedious.

- Create a club is great, as others said the editor is great but can be a pain, especially if you mess something up and end up paying for it when you realise way down the line.

- Better/more realistic dynamic growth/fanbases, for example I've put an amazing squad together with Ipswich town, won the CL, Prem 2 seasons in a row too, yet we dont even sell out the 30k stadium, that is simply not realistic, Ipswich get 18-20k in the championship, in the Prem we would sell out weekly even if we were a bottom half side.

- Dont change too much, the game is bl**dy excellent, people moan but they still play it/post on here, if they really hated it they won't even be here. Credit to SI team, it really is like nothing else, it's the ONLY game I've played in the last 5 years.

[hluraven]

Blimey, 'slag off FM thread'.....

- Better control of what you get news items about, i.e a screen where you can enable/disable each area and fine tweak it too, i.e I want to know every time a transfer target is approached by another club, I want to know who won player of the week but I dont want info about those weeks results from that league, or other smaller info. I want to fine tune it exactly so I'm not tapping space alot to get through all the messages, but I'm not missing key things I want to know.

- Better/more realistic dynamic growth/fanbases, for example I've put an amazing squad together with Ipswich town, won the CL, Prem 2 seasons in a row too, yet we dont even sell out the 30k stadium, that is simply not realistic, Ipswich get 18-20k in the championship, in the Prem we would sell out weekly even if we were a bottom half side.

You can largely do the first one, certainly you can do the examples you mentioned. Manage subscriptions from the inbox tab should do it.

The second one, it can be improved, and there should be more fans when you are winning the PL back to back, but I'm not sure about the selling out weekly in the bottom half! Ipswich's last season in the PL was a 24,000 average, the season before when not relegated was 22,000. It may be different now, but either SI need to program much more volatility into attendances (as you can't just increase massively promoted teams without a corresponding drop in relegated ones) or retain the current model which reflects well the long-term change in the baseline support, but maybe not so much the very fairweather drastic changes that are much more short term.

[Sunstrikuuu]

Doesn't make the responses any less true though.

Whilst tweaks were and will always be made to the ME and the roles/duties they generally won't help those that have a poor tactical setup.

It doesn't make those responses less true when they're applicable. But when people asked "why isn't my defensive forward closing down the way I want him to?", the answer wasn't tactics, it was because until 15.3 forwards on support didn't close down as often as they were supposed to.

Yes, there's always a tactical solution to the problem of not winning enough games. That turns into everyone playing a counterattacking 4-4-2 with two WMa on the wings, super pressing, because it's what works best. If someone wants to play with an attacking Libero or with inverted wingbacks, they're actually just out of luck because those roles don't work. Yeah, often people asking for help are resistant to the idea that their setup is deficient; some portion of them would be less resistant if their valid concerns about the match engine weren't knee-jerk dismissed with 'it's your tactics'. There needs to be an acknowledgement on the part of all parties that workable tactics make a gigantic difference, and also that sometimes issues go beyond the tactical. It would also help if, and I have no idea what SI can do to alter this, the difference between great tactics and terrible tactics wasn't so narrow, so subtle and so impactful. Often it can be a single player role or duty, caused by a misunderstanding of the little blurb that describes it or a misunderstanding of how the player's attributes interact with the job, that make the difference between a good tactic and a bad tactic; compounding this is that the difference between good and bad is huge. For the right team, changing from CM(a) to BBM(s) and adding the 'Close Down Much More' player instruction, and switching from a TM(s) to a DLF(s) can be the difference between promotion and relegation. The margins are so thin that it's very easy to feel like the game isn't in your control. Doubly compounding that is that there are no useful tactical resources in game.

[Neil Brock]

You can largely do the first one, certainly you can do the examples you mentioned. Manage subscriptions from the inbox tab should do it.

Yeah took me a little while to get my head around the subscriptions panel. At first I ignored it, but when I actually set it up to what I wanted (and didn't want) to see it made it much easier.

Now for example, when I have 'favourite teams' - instead of getting all the news about them, I turn off everything except Match Reports and Competition Winners/Promotion/Relegation so I can follow them from afar easier without having too much info.

[RBKalle]

Sunstrikuuu hit the nail on the head with his post about the general way criticism/questions about the tactical setup are addressed by many of the long-time posters and by the tactical experts.

Give people a less cryptical setup and they'll stop asking why their 2-2-6 is getting them relegated...

Anyway, back on topic, so far I can't say I'm excited about the announced features... The only tidbit I'm vaguely interested in is "suggested substitutions", but stuff like customized manager, fantasy draft and create-a-club seems way too gimmicky to me and I've no interest in them whatsoever.

A revamped PR section would be fine, but so far I only see more options, whose effectiveness is yet to be tested, and it'll all boil down to find the "right" answer to get the best out of every situation, in fear of upsetting the players in an irreversible way.

As said already, all the match analysis will be useless fluff if it won't help discovering WHY the target man suddenly ended up wandering around all across the attacking front, or who CBs can't close up properly etc.

Maybe SI have in store an actual revolution of the AI squad-building and of the transfers module, but I've learnt not to hold my breath... I understand it'd not make it for an appealing press release and it wouldn't even affect the majority of the casual customers, those who'll be happy to lead their favourite Top Club to a run of Quintuples and will drop the game as soon as the current batch of Wonderkids retires.

[Svenc]

It would also help if, and I have no idea what SI can do to alter this, the difference between great tactics and terrible tactics wasn't so narrow, so subtle and so impactful. Often it can be a single player role or duty, caused by a misunderstanding of the little blurb that describes it or a misunderstanding of how the player's attributes interact with the job, that make the difference between a good tactic and a bad tactic; compounding this is that the difference between good and bad is huge. For the right team, changing from CM(a) to BBM(s) and adding the 'Close Down Much More' player instruction, and switching from a TM(s) to a DLF(s) can be the difference between promotion and relegation. The margins are so thin that it's very easy to feel like the game isn't in your control. Doubly compounding that is that there are no useful tactical resources in game.

If that were the faintest true, the AI would be relegated with every team. There were versions were it on occasion didn't field a holding player in midfield, and its sense for the dynamic of formations, or how rigidly it can defend for prolonged periods and just invites pressure, or how it choses roles and duties, it's really not all that.. All the advice you get that you may think about encouraging a patient probing game against a side parking the bus rather than going battle ram against what in the game too visibly is a brick wall? Hasn't reached the AI yet either, which is in parts why you get 35+ shot games for one side (and miserely little of those being on target) semi regularly in league games in between AI teams too. And this is happening at the very top, such as the "elite" at Bayern completely isolating forwards from play from kick-off, whilst trying to get a possession based game going. Not once, not twice not thrice, but due to research and AI every time the first pick formation is employed. As that lone forward is in the Lewandowski class who is able to hold up the ball regardless of becoming isolated, the collateral damage isn't that big, at least in terms of performance in isolation. Some of this is basic stuff that has been covered by entry level advice for years. That is for the hardcore or semi-regular, the hardcore stuff has always been progressed "under the hood" with little marketing fare, though often being far more complex to implement, ironically. If it were an easy task, this all would have been sorted seasons ago.

With good players there is a league of headroom, and with average ones, there is still a ton of headroom due to the AI not being that profoundly great. Lots of advice in the tactics sub forum is beyond it, which is visible from play. It's lovingly dynamic, which means it takes initial expectations and current scorelines into account, and can go from (me just want a draw please) to (need a goal ASAP) in the same match, and it's not stupid as such. But the above is hugely exaggerating both the influence of tactics as well as how picky it all. I sympathize with frustration, hopefully the better visuals on the tactics screen might help some. But I think there isn't anything bad about combatting such myths. It's not quite the same as how team talks supposedly were game changers before, as obviously in some cases the change of a single role will have quite profound effects. For instance, fielding a target man hugely alters passing patterns, visibly, as he's made the, well target. That won't inherently lose you matches though but it may firstly stop your tiki-taka passes from happening. The same goes for changing a CM/a into a holding role that was needed, but that is basic football logics. You can't win anything with purely attacking kids (and nobody standing ground to cover).

Arguing the smallest of changes in general would make the difference between promotion and relegation, that is a hugely stretch though and not how the game would work even if the AI were more complex. It's also demonstrated by players version in version out. Football is a game of super fine margins due to the very low scorelines, which means it is key moments settling a tie (not seldom moments of individual class or error, or elements of random chance, or both combined), and with the exception of exploits the game has always acknowledged such, the same as how some real managers excel by being tinkerers, and others by being wheeler dealers (though often being a generalization made by media to typecast individuals). In a sense this doesn't make for good gameplay in the traditionalist sense, as it takes a leap of gaming faith to acknowledge that it may be great players performing [and some remaining AI brain farts interfering] rather than going full-on egotist and proclaiming to be the "Special One" after coming away with a lucky draw at Camp Nou against Barcelona who went full-on attack with everybody rushing headfirst into the area rather than trying to stretch your side despite it sitting ducks. Football management (in general and in FM), bloody hell.

[Sunstrikuuu]

Sven, I don't understand the point you're trying to make. AI tactics are bad and there's headroom. Fine. So?

[Svenc]

No. The main point was supposed to be that the following doesn't make sense. And not merely because it disregards all the other dynamics that happen in a save which eventually form the standings, such as runs of confidence (or lack thereof), injuries, failed and secured transfers, etc. -- for both the human player's team as well as the teams around him.

For the right team, changing from CM(a) to BBM(s) and adding the 'Close Down Much More' player instruction, and switching from a TM(s) to a DLF(s) can be the difference between promotion and relegation.

Great point about the lack of in-game cues and documentation proper though. The online manual is that brief it is barely scratching the surface of things, and this doesn't start nor end with tactics -- some concepts that are in the game aren't even acknowledged, such as player personalities or media handling styles and what they are supposed to represent, and many many more.

[Sunstrikuuu]

Over two half-seasons, changing those three instructions improved my team's goal difference by about 1.3 a game. Across a 46-game Championship season, that works out to just about 60 goals per season. Last year, the 5th and 6th placed team had goal differences of +19 and +18; the 22nd and 23rd placed teams had GDs of -34 and -25. While goal difference obviously isn't everything, it's clearly highly correlated with results.

[Artin]

It's almost 2016 but the 3D graphics still look similar to games released in 1996. How can SI's graphics technology be consistently this bad? I'm not expecting FIFA graphics but come on! At the very least I'd like to see 2000s and up style graphics, not 90s.

[Cougar2010]

It's almost 2016 but the 3D graphics still look similar to games released in 1996. How can SI's graphics technology be consistently this bad? I'm not expecting FIFA graphics but come on! At the very least I'd like to see 2000s and up style graphics, not 90s.

They look nothing like graphics from 1996 ffs.

If you had ever played a game from back then you would know that.

[BoxToBox]

If anything, it looks like FIFA 2001-2002.

[DMaster2]

I don't see the point to purchase this year's version since i have fm2015. Disappointed with the new "features"

[grade]

The announced features. There will be new features announced... I hope.

[DMaster2]

Because a ME update takes quite a lot of work? Because all the UI changes take quite a lot of work? Because everything else you don't even realise has happened takes quite a lot of work? That's a gross underestimation of what goes on each year. It still amazes me how many comments like this we get.

Still i don't think it's worth the 40+ euros i have to pay. At least last year was worth it for me due to the fact that the co-ownership were shut down, the new italian's Lega Pro was at the start and because italian's transfers of free agents was bugged to death in fm 2014. So i don't think it's worth it for the new game. If it costed less then it would be another matter, but at full price for now it's a no.

[Guest]

It's fortunate then that there will likely be various sales during the life of FM16 & of course there's nothing wrong with skipping a version you're not impressed with.

[all4everdragon]

Still i don't think it's worth the 40+ euros i have to pay. At least last year was worth it for me due to the fact that the co-ownership were shut down, the new italian's Lega Pro was at the start and because italian's transfers of free agents was bugged to death in fm 2014. So i don't think it's worth it for the new game. If it costed less then it would be another matter, but at full price for now it's a no.

If you pay 40 euros you must enjoy to spend money. There's a lot of partnerships and you can get the game for 25-30 euros.

[DMaster2]

If you pay 40 euros you must enjoy to spend money. There's a lot of partnerships and you can get the game for 25-30 euros.

I don't buy online.

[all4everdragon]

I don't buy online.

So, why being critic with SI for your own options ?

[mrdanbartlett]

You can largely do the first one, certainly you can do the examples you mentioned. Manage subscriptions from the inbox tab should do it.

The second one, it can be improved, and there should be more fans when you are winning the PL back to back, but I'm not sure about the selling out weekly in the bottom half! Ipswich's last season in the PL was a 24,000 average, the season before when not relegated was 22,000. It may be different now, but either SI need to program much more volatility into attendances (as you can't just increase massively promoted teams without a corresponding drop in relegated ones) or retain the current model which reflects well the long-term change in the baseline support, but maybe not so much the very fairweather drastic changes that are much more short term.

Ahh so you can! Gosh this is embarrassing as a FM addict, I didn't know about this screen. Maybe it could be easier to use, but it's good to have it

As for town - hmm I think that was the capacity at the time, I think they got relegated when they increased the stadium from 22k to 30k via the new stands.

[warpedpolecat]

I'm a bit of a sucker - I always buy the game. 15 is my least favourite for a while. But I still get excited and the wife still dreads the release!

[Caccio]

Greetings!

I have the following suggestion for FM16, basicaééy regarding more realistic match results and goal numbers:

As football fans know, the number of goals scored on matches, as well the end result usually depends from the quality of the teams, more specifically of the competition involved.

Namely, in average, much less goals are scored in elite, high-level matches, like in international cups, in domestic, 1st, or eventually second divisions, divisions, than for example on some low league matches, meaning lower divisions, and weaker quality domestic competitions of some "third-world" countries.

Fro example, a 0-0 draw, or a 1-0 win is pretty common in FIFA World Cup, or on Italian, German, Spanish, or English 1st division mathces, while it is quite an unlikely result for English 5th, 6th division, or in second division of some Asian or African domestic competition.

On those matches, the average number of scored goals is much higher, and summarized often exceeds even 10 per match.

(mostly due the much lower quality of players involved, including defenders and goalkeepers, and much less tactical experience of the team's staff)

So my suggestion is, to somehow implement that important realism-element into the next Football Manager game, obvsiously in order to make the match results more realistic, which would greatly improve/increase the game realism in general, and that is after all one of the primary aims of the game I guess. (similarly to the most of other sport-manager simulation games)

To put my improvement idea simple: Lower divisions-more golas, or the lower the level of the comeptition is, the higher the end results, meaning the more goals should be scored in average per matches.

[forameuss]

Greetings!

I have the following suggestion for FM16, basicaééy regarding more realistic match results and goal numbers:

As football fans know, the number of goals scored on matches, as well the end result usually depends from the quality of the teams, more specifically of the competition involved.

Namely, in average, much less goals are scored in elite, high-level matches, like in international cups, in domestic, 1st, or eventually second divisions, divisions, than for example on some low league matches, meaning lower divisions, and weaker quality domestic competitions of some "third-world" countries.

Fro example, a 0-0 draw, or a 1-0 win is pretty common in FIFA World Cup, or on Italian, German, Spanish, or English 1st division mathces, while it is quite an unlikely result for English 5th, 6th division, or in second division of some Asian or African domestic competition.

On those matches, the average number of scored goals is much higher, and summarized often exceeds even 10 per match.

(mostly due the much lower quality of players involved, including defenders and goalkeepers, and much less tactical experience of the team's staff)

So my suggestion is, to somehow implement that important realism-element into the next Football Manager game, obvsiously in order to make the match results more realistic, which would greatly improve/increase the game realism in general, and that is after all one of the primary aims of the game I guess. (similarly to the most of other sport-manager simulation games)

To put my improvement idea simple: Lower divisions-more golas, or the lower the level of the comeptition is, the higher the end results, meaning the more goals should be scored in average per matches.

Yeeeeah...it's nowhere near that simple.

[s1111]

Greetings!

I have the following suggestion for FM16, basicaééy regarding more realistic match results and goal numbers:

As football fans know, the number of goals scored on matches, as well the end result usually depends from the quality of the teams, more specifically of the competition involved.

Namely, in average, much less goals are scored in elite, high-level matches, like in international cups, in domestic, 1st, or eventually second divisions, divisions, than for example on some low league matches, meaning lower divisions, and weaker quality domestic competitions of some "third-world" countries.

Fro example, a 0-0 draw, or a 1-0 win is pretty common in FIFA World Cup, or on Italian, German, Spanish, or English 1st division mathces, while it is quite an unlikely result for English 5th, 6th division, or in second division of some Asian or African domestic competition.

On those matches, the average number of scored goals is much higher, and summarized often exceeds even 10 per match.

(mostly due the much lower quality of players involved, including defenders and goalkeepers, and much less tactical experience of the team's staff)

So my suggestion is, to somehow implement that important realism-element into the next Football Manager game, obvsiously in order to make the match results more realistic, which would greatly improve/increase the game realism in general, and that is after all one of the primary aims of the game I guess. (similarly to the most of other sport-manager simulation games)

To put my improvement idea simple: Lower divisions-more golas, or the lower the level of the comeptition is, the higher the end results, meaning the more goals should be scored in average per matches.

That isn't even true. 2.8 goals per game in the English Conference North (6th tier) this season after 10 matches, about the same as in the Premier League, Serie A or La Liga. The Bundesliga has even averaged over 3 goals a game in recent seasons.

[Sir James Lancaster]

Sven, I don't understand the point you're trying to make. AI tactics are bad and there's headroom. Fine. So?

Morale and squad cohesion are far greater determinants of success than tactics. A squad that "will die for each other" and Superb morale will make even the stupidest tactic work (thank goodness). The OI, and fancy role names, are just pretentious fluff.

[themadsheep2001]

Morale and squad cohesion are far greater determinants of success than tactics. A squad that "will die for each other" and Superb morale will make even the stupidest tactic work (thank goodness). The OI, and fancy role names, are just pretentious fluff.

This is factually incorrect in terms of how the game works.

[Caccio]

Well ok, I admit, I might be wrong particularily with English competition, after all I don't live in the UK, so I guess I am quite unfamiliar with its results in reality......however, I can tell you about my ex, and current home countries, Yugoslavia and Hungary.

Here. there are often more than 10 goals on lower division matches, (some of them I watched personally), basically everything lower than 2nd division often features goal-shower.

I mean results like 6-4, 7-5, or even 10-8 are pretty common........

Now imagine some 3rd-world-party, Asian or African countries, whose overal football quality is even way lower than in the mentioned countries......

Or you believe, that in let's say Ghanian second division, 0-0 and 1-0 results count for common???

[Cougar2010]

Well ok, I admit, I might be wrong particularily with English competition, after all I don't live in the UK, so I guess I am quite unfamiliar with it......however, I can tell you about my ex, and current home countries, Yugoslavia and Hungary.

Here. there are often more than 10 goals on lower division matches, (some of them I watched personally), basically everything lower than 2nd division often features goal-shower.

I mean results like 6-4, 7-5, or even 10-8 are pretty common........

Now imagine some 3rd-party-world, Asian or African countries, whose overal football quality is even way lower than in the mentioned countries......

Or you say, that in let's say Ghanian second division, 0-0 and 1-0 results count for common???

But those leagues aren't in FM are they.

[Dagenham_Dave]

Well ok, I admit, I might be wrong

You should have just stopped the post there, in fairness.

[Caccio]

That is only partially true.

They were indeed not included in the original, default FM15 game, but they were still made available, (not merely featured, but selectable to manage), as an update or add-on, along with other things like player pictures, team logos, skins, flags, etc.

I still remember downloading and implementing the most of those updates/add-ons round 6 months ago, from a website called Sortitoutsi, or something like that.

Just found the link for you: http://sortitoutsi.net/

Ever since then, by starting of a new career, I am able to select second division teams of many Asian and African countries.

[kefalo84]

They look nothing like graphics from 1996 ffs.

If you had ever played a game from back then you would know that.

Well I agree with his point and it doesn't matter if it looks 2000-2001 it still looks horrible.

[Cougar2010]

That is only partially true.

They were indeed not included in the original, default FM15 game, but they were still made available, (even selectable), as an update or add-on, along with other things like player pictures, team logos, skins, flags, etc.

I still remember downloading and implementing the most of those updates/add-ons round 6 months ago, from a website called Sortitoutsi, or something like that.

Just found the link for you: http://sortitoutsi.net/

Ever since then, by starting of a new career, I am able to select second division teams of many Asian and African countries.

With user made files which are not official or supported by SI and FM was not designed to simulate football at those levels.

[pauly15]

Bells and whistles. Here is where I will judge it:

1. AI team selection and not leaving good players out.

2. AI transfers - can they remain competitive in a realistic way?

3. Online game speed.

[Caccio]

This is something I totally agree with.

However, IN CASE lower divisions of Asian and African countries WILL be implemented in the original, default FM16 game, (which I the case I actually meant), TEHN my suggestion should definitely be considered, for the sake of overal game realism.

Unfortunately I don't know if those Asian-African second, or even thitd divisions are planned to be implemented into the original, default FM16 game, so this match-score realism idea of mine is only PROVISORY, sorry if I failed to describe and explain it accurately enough.

[MBarbaric]

@Caccio

since results go higher as you drop levels, what results should occure in youth leagues? should there be 30 goals a game since level is really low?

[Caccio]

Well I ain't familiar with youth competitions either, so I don't know what are their actual results like in reality, but I am quite sure FM game developers are well informed about the matter.

So as long they make youth match results REALISTIC too, I won't have any further objections about the matter.

(if that average is really round 40 goals per match, they should make it so, the same if it is round 4)

[Cougar2010]

Well I ain't familiar with youth competitions either, so I don't know what are their actual results like in reality, but I am quite sure FM game developers are well informed about the matter.

So as long they make youth match results REALISTIC too, I won't have any further objections about the matter.

If you aren't familiar how do you know if the results are realistic or not now?

Lets look at one of the lowest leagues out of the box in FM which is Hong Kong. We can see from here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013%E2%80%9314_Hong_Kong_First_Division_League that during the 2013/14 season that 311 goals were scored in total over 90 matches which equates to an average of 3.46 goals per match. Not exactly the common high scoring matches that you claim are they.

[Caccio]

I didn't claim to know the level of realism of youth matches in FM15.

All I know is, that even in weakest competitions and lowest divisions, the average of goals scored per match are currently round the same as in elite and high level competitions.

Don't know how realistic that is in case of English championship, (so I had to accept the correction of those who know better), and also don't know how realistic youth competition results are, (SI guys sure know that better), all I know is, that in the case of the most nations of below average football quality, the number of goals scored per match normally significantly increases in lower divisions, and lower level competitions. (in senior competitions at least)

That is the change I would like to be implemented into incoming FM16 game, normally only in case IF those mentioned lower divisions, or lower level competitions will be featured in the original, default game at all.

Phewww......I hope I finally managed to express myself clear enough. (despite speaking it fluently, english is after all not my mother tongue, sorry)

[Caccio]

Some examples I spectated personally:

Yugoslavian 3rd division scores: 7-4, 8-2

Hungarian 3rd division scores: 9-5, 11-3

(both senior competitions)

It's true, those are all old scores, especially the Yugoslavian ones, but the basic football rules were already the same back then. (for example offsides did exist)

So it is quite logical to presume, that for example 2nd division of the most Asian and African countries, (which are of weaker quality than Yugoslavian and Hungarian 3rd division), often have such high end-match results as well.

I don't know if the above mentioned divisionw will, or will not be featured in the original (default) FM16 game, but in case they will, it would make the game more realistic, if this circumstance would be adjusted.

[Guest]

Guys, you've stray quite some way off topic as I can't see all that much discussion on the early known details of FM16.

Caccio, if you can demonstrate that lower league match performances do not match those from real life then you need to take up the issue in the match engine section of the bugs forum, this isn't the thread for that.

[Cougar2010]

Mod Note: No offense intended here, but the thread needs to be back on track

[DogMartin]

I've taken to only buying the 'new' game every other season or so now and will certainly never ever buy a beta version again. I would rather lick my wheelie bin clean than go through the angst of waiting for updates to make the game playable.

The main reason is that I get quite into a long term save and I don't want to give it up when the changes between one version of the game and the next are comparatively minor. I say 'comparatively' because I appreciate there is a lot of work put into each update and I don't want that comment to be interpreted as a knock at SI but from the user end it's not such a huge impact on the game as a whole moving from one year to the next.

I wouldn't want to give up my save just so I can play 'Sims' with my manager character so unless the yearly updates become save game compatible (and I understand why they are not) or there is some huge and impressive feature added that fundamentally changes the game then it's no longer an automatic yearly buy for me.