The Ask-SI-Anything Thread

[Guest]

The scouting bit makes sense & is a good idea, just sounds like someone simply forgot to hide a debug aid from the match section in the release skins, wouldn’t be the fit’s time that’s happenex.

[Colorado]

Genuine question - with all due respect, what made the SI team think the match screens would be an improvement this year (doing away with the match info tab, changes to 2D, and more clicks to access stats?

Personally, I'm astonished at how much of a backstep this is from previous years.

[Guest El Payaso]

3 hours ago, Neil Brock said:

Where specifically are you seeing this appear in game? Just want to make sure it's in an area we expected it to be and not a bug

Thanks. 

For example in match day screen if I look at formations. 

[Spawny]

Why do you remove all unfavourable comments about your game almost instantly?

[Lucas]

1 minute ago, Spawny said:

Why do you remove all unfavourable comments about your game almost instantly?

Perhaps you should read the house rules.

[Spawny]

Oh i see there's a 'no criticism allowed' policy is there? Sorry i didn't realise.

One further question .. whom do i contact to get a refund for the £38 that i paid you for a broken product?

[Lucas]

36 minutes ago, Spawny said:

Oh i see there's a 'no criticism allowed' policy is there? Sorry i didn't realise.

One further question .. whom do i contact to get a refund for the £38 that i paid you for a broken product?

No but sarky comments aren't acceptable. 

I don't know to your second question - I wouldn't know who you bought the game from. You'll have to speak to them. Thanks. 

[XaW]

2 hours ago, Spawny said:

Why do you remove all unfavourable comments about your game almost instantly?

Many in here have put forth well though out and constructive criticism of the game without it being removed. The ones who get removed are the moronic "tHe gam sux0rs" and other nonsense comments. As they should, because they bring nothing to the table in regards to help improving the game. If you have any issues with the game I would advise you to post bugs in the bugs section and suggestions in the suggestions section. If you feel the game is not up your alley and are moving away from your enjoyment, then I suggest you try to search for another game that will suit you better.

[Svenc]

7 hours ago, El Payaso said:

For example in match day screen if I look at formations. 

Plus if you re-open a match, saved pkm or otherwise, you see the formation + roles/duties in action by the end of the match typically. As AI dynamically manage matches, that's typically a bit different at the end than at the start of it. To me it's a means of "spoon feeding" some added info to players, largely.

Somewhat connected to this, I have a question whether it's being acknwoledged whether there are some possible AI tactical decision making conflicts connected to presumably reworked decision making over the last couple iterations. In any two random weeks of EPL football, going through matches you will semi-regularly see AI managers employing top heavy formations, with the two only central midfield players being pushed up alongside to everybody, on multiple occasions, e.g. advanced attacking playmaker type being fielded alongside to a box to box in the centre of the pitch and similar. I've yet to see that this is beneficial as to AI performance, naturally, too. Quite the contrary, every other AI side dominating the stats and dropping points, they semi-regularly seem to do such meanwhile.

On similar grounds, I'm questioning the inbuild tendency of managers under pressure being some prone to switch their formations, and what the thought process is behind it. Naturally, it's meant to mimic real life football some, in that teams oft roughly try to adapt what's currently most successful in real football. The way it's approached ingame is arguably similar to a throw of the dice -- could work, more oftenly than not likely wouldn't. No less as no manager will have the opportunity to change squads in an instant to suit a newly adopted formation during the season. Plus the effects of tactical gelling, etc. and all that. It seems the more "complex" the "though process" of AI, ironically, the less consistent they seem to get in their results.

 

Additionally, which is important, and I'm not decided, do AI managers at all much consider PPMs (player prefered moves)?

[Guest El Payaso]

10 hours ago, herne79 said:

Bear in mind we've always been told the AI has the same tools as us so that we (or the AI) don't have an unfair advantage. 

I hope that this is just a bug and thing being unnoticed and they will remove this 'feature' as soon as possible. In scouting this is alright as long as it is just an assumption from a staff member on how the AI opposition instructs the players. But having these actually available for us to see makes no sense and also takes some meaning out of scouting the opposition as we can without that see what they are doing tactically. 

[Neil Brock]

19 hours ago, Barside said:

The scouting bit makes sense & is a good idea, just sounds like someone simply forgot to hide a debug aid from the match section in the release skins, wouldn’t be the fit’s time that’s happenex.

Yeah what Barside has said, it's a bug rather than a conscious decision and it's something we'll look to address. 

[Neil Brock]

19 hours ago, Colorado said:

Genuine question - with all due respect, what made the SI team think the match screens would be an improvement this year (doing away with the match info tab, changes to 2D, and more clicks to access stats?

Personally, I'm astonished at how much of a backstep this is from previous years.

It was felt the new screens would provide better usability, aesthetics and easier access to more important aspects (like the match analysis). Given the feedback we've received there's areas which will need looking at again, and we've made changes even from the Early Access Beta phase to now. 

In regards to the changes to 2D, our match engine producer Neil D covered this reasoning behind this quite extensively here - https://community.sigames.com/topic/411123-how-many-of-you-still-use-2d-classic/?page=3&tab=comments#comment-11021284

We don't necessarily get everything right and very much appreciate the people who constructively tell us as such. One thing we've never had to mine for is feedback from our community which personally I think is a great thing. Even if it does come with a few hard truths sometimes. 

[craiigman]

20 hours ago, herne79 said:

Bear in mind we've always been told the AI has the same tools as us so that we (or the AI) don't have an unfair advantage.  Now I don't know if the AI is able to see our tactical instructions in the same way that we can see the AI's, but 2 things:

1)  If the AI does have this information about our tactical systems, how do we feel about that?  Further, is the AI then capable of adapting their systems based on this information?  That's getting into the realms of the AI "learning" our systems, which is something we've always said doesn't happen.

2)  If the AI doesn't have this information, or is incapable of using it, then don't we now have an unfair advantage over the AI?

So in FM18 we know opposition player roles / duties, mentality and team shape settings.  Why not go the whole hog and give us their TIs & PIs as well, why just stop there?  (Because then we could just copy AI tactics).

I understand and agree with giving us a certain level of information to help us make our own decisions, but why give us this level of detailed tactical information?

I personally like having this information to hand, but I understand why people would not. I'd like there to be an option to turn it on/off, like attribute masking at the start.

[TCSawyer]

I would like to ask that all SI staff have an amazing christmas and happy holidays because FM18 is the best game of the year!!! I've already racked up 125 hours and counting! 

 

So cheers! 

[Colorado]

Thanks @Neil Brock for the reply. Appreciate that.

 

 

[Guest El Payaso]

I think that in general it is not wrong to say that especially many more experienced FM players are finding the game too easy and this is especially easy to spot when you take a look of good player and team guide and also the career updates forum. Is there any plans that in the future there would be a "harder" mod of FM which would possibly both give us some more realistic in simulation and would in general be more difficult? I think that as loyal and long term customers we (I'm one of those mentioned) would deserve something like that as currently I don't feel that the game really offers much to me in terms of long term saves or challenge.

[ParanoidBuddha]

Football manager 15 15.2 update -> Wednesday 10 december 2014
Football manager 16 16.2 update -> Wednesday 16 december 2015
Football manager 17 17.2 update -> Wednesday 14 december 2016

Football manager 18 18.2 update -> Wednesday 13 december 2017?  

I know you don't say any date but I hope we will get it today  

[Farina]

For once and for all, does reputation (in itself) affect the performance of staff members and if so, how?

 

[Guest]

Forgot about this thread, one aspect I never investigated was the affect of  manager's language ability on implementation of tactics.

If a manager lacks fluency in the common squad language does this limit the effectiveness of tactical instructions? Are players less likely to follow instructions due to the manager not having the anguage skill to articulate the instructions & is there an exponential factor as they add more player & team instructions?

[Farina]

Re my question from a few days ago, and apologies if I'm pushy, but I was rereading this thread and I noticed this post:

https://community.sigames.com/topic/373890-the-ask-si-anything-thread/?do=findComment&comment=470737

Neil Brock replying no to a question on whether a scout's reputation affects how much information he delivers. This matter actually prompted my own question. See, I had came across a very old post by Glen Wakeford of SI, saying the following:

As you can tell, that contradicts what Neil Brock said. Before I'd read that I believed staff reputation had no other function other than signalling the person's qualities. It made me wonder whether reputation also had a benefit with coaches in player development, which has been claimed at times, without official confirmation AFAIK.

If nothing else, could it be confirmated that Wakeford's statement is wrong or out of date if that were the case? Thanks.

[fm2020.smith]

will we ever see a fm where the fbs play properly. the fb slowing down and allowing the winger to cross has been around for years. is it something thats been looked at ? 

the transfer market seems a bit off, can we expect this to be fixed.  17 yo with 180+ pot and the club want 50 mill upfront and yet dibala at juve valued at 60 mill goes to manu for 57 mill ? asensio valued at 65 mill goes for 60 mill. every player being sold is being sold for their value or below. asensio and dibala would go for 100 mill minimum each 

[Neil Brock]

19 hours ago, Farina said:

Re my question from a few days ago, and apologies if I'm pushy, but I was rereading this thread and I noticed this post:

https://community.sigames.com/topic/373890-the-ask-si-anything-thread/?do=findComment&comment=470737

Neil Brock replying no to a question on whether a scout's reputation affects how much information he delivers. This matter actually prompted my own question. See, I had came across a very old post by Glen Wakeford of SI, saying the following:

As you can tell, that contradicts what Neil Brock said. Before I'd read that I believed staff reputation had no other function other than signalling the person's qualities. It made me wonder whether reputation also had a benefit with coaches in player development, which has been claimed at times, without official confirmation AFAIK.

If nothing else, could it be confirmated that Wakeford's statement is wrong or out of date if that were the case? Thanks.

Given his information is almost 10 years old, yes it's out of date  

[Neil Brock]

4 hours ago, jamessmith010101 said:

will we ever see a fm where the fbs play properly. the fb slowing down and allowing the winger to cross has been around for years. is it something thats been looked at ? 

the transfer market seems a bit off, can we expect this to be fixed.  17 yo with 180+ pot and the club want 50 mill upfront and yet dibala at juve valued at 60 mill goes to manu for 57 mill ? asensio valued at 65 mill goes for 60 mill. every player being sold is being sold for their value or below. asensio and dibala would go for 100 mill minimum each 

The FB isn't slowing down to let the winger cross. But yes, as with every version we always look to try and improve the Match Engine as much as possible. It's a representation of real life football and we are aware it is not perfect. We have to balance the realistic factors of every single aspect (such as goals per game, passes, dribbles, tackles etc), which means say if we made it so Full Backs were say more realistic in stopping crosses, the number of goals scored in game would drop to an unrealistic level. So everything has to be done as one. Each aspect direct effects others. So it's a massive balancing act. 

We would need to see specific examples. In real life it's not always the best players who move for the most money, there are many factors to take into account. Look at the market values compared to actual transfer fees here - https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/statistik/saisontransfers

With every version we make improvements but a lot of factors (including active leagues, database size, how the user uses the market etc) do have to be taken into account alongside the more common factors like wages, how long is left on their contract and the standard of league they're playing in etc. 

[pablito15]

You should probably rename this thread if you're going to delete people's questions...

[forameuss]

Would you rather they changed it to "Ask SI Anything (as long as it isn't against house rules, because obviously) Thread"?  I just don't think that's quite as catchy, to be honest.

[Usame]

In the player instructions page, altough a player's passing directness is set to shorter passing, when you click it again it will add a specific player instruction ''pass it shorter'' to the player shown under the player instructions bar. Does this have a staggered effect?

[Neil Brock]

1 hour ago, pablito15 said:

You should probably rename this thread if you're going to delete people's questions...

What question did you have?

[Neil Brock]

15 minutes ago, Usame said:

In the player instructions page, altough a player's passing directness is set to shorter passing, when you click it again it will add a specific player instruction ''pass it shorter'' to the player shown under the player instructions bar. Does this have a staggered effect?

I believe the individual player instructions (where relevant) will override the team instructions. So if you're playing 'Direct' but ask one specific player to use 'Shorter Passing' they'll pass the ball short. 

[krlenjushka]

Just now, Neil Brock said:

What question did you have?

How to improve communication between customers and Si ?

Some areas of this forum are "dead" or 5km/h fast...

 

[Neil Brock]

Just now, krlenjushka said:

How to improve communication between customers and Si ?

Some areas of this forum are "dead" or 5km/h fast...

 

Depends on the areas really, which would you suggest fall into the slow/dead categories? 

Realistically we only have a limited amount of time to browse and respond to the forums, as, most of our time is spent on working on the game itself. We have active social channels and where possible we communicate as much as we can via these forums. 

We have a some house rules which are pretty easy to follow which indicate the way not to try and communicate with us as well. 

 

[krlenjushka]

Just now, Neil Brock said:

Depends on the areas really, which would you suggest fall into the slow/dead categories? 

Realistically we only have a limited amount of time to browse and respond to the forums, as, most of our time is spent on working on the game itself. We have active social channels and where possible we communicate as much as we can via these forums. 

We have a some house rules which are pretty easy to follow which indicate the way not to try and communicate with us as well. 

 

I know that - but bugs solving usually takes lot of time because communication is simply - slow.

Editor bugs section for example - i start new thread , after 10 days someone responds and ask for some additional file. I upload that file and after that usually nothing for months/years. We have/had some bugs 5-6 years old.

I know editor staff is limited but this is not solution for us - we should move forward i guess??

Is there any chance this will be better in the future? I know internal SI policy isnt something you can discuss here with me but something is obviously wrong - and someone should make some changes in order to make things better.

I usually get "angry" answers when i ask something like this - lets hope this time will be different.

[Neil Brock]

We tend to address things by levels of priority. Although we have a QA lead and coder who look after the editor, they're also directly responsible for at least half the leagues and competitions that appear within the game amongst other things. So if an issue comes up, it's analysed for the priority and addressed accordingly. Normally an issue related to the editor, unless making it makes the editor fundamentally unusable, will be considered lower down the scale than say making sure certain competitions and leagues have the correct rules and are working correctly. 

In an ideal world every thread which is raised would have a swift response, but unfortunately due to time and resource constraints this simply isn't possible. 

[krlenjushka]

21 minutes ago, Neil Brock said:

We tend to address things by levels of priority. Although we have a QA lead and coder who look after the editor, they're also directly responsible for at least half the leagues and competitions that appear within the game amongst other things. So if an issue comes up, it's analysed for the priority and addressed accordingly. Normally an issue related to the editor, unless making it makes the editor fundamentally unusable, will be considered lower down the scale than say making sure certain competitions and leagues have the correct rules and are working correctly. 

In an ideal world every thread which is raised would have a swift response, but unfortunately due to time and resource constraints this simply isn't possible. 

Some "editor testing team" can improve this. Beta testers often doesnt know 10% of bugs related to editor. 

This way we can improve number of solved bugs and help coders to solve issues easier. 

Also we can make list of bugs and check this when beta version is out. 

One more thing - when coders add some new option its easier to explain this - we cant find out everything by ourselfs.

 

[forameuss]

1 minute ago, krlenjushka said:

Some "editor testing team" can improve this. Beta testers often doesnt know 10% of bugs related to editor. 

This way we can improve number of solved bugs and help coders to solve issues easier. 

Also we can make list of bugs and check this when beta version is out. 

One more thing - when coders add some new option its easier to explain this - we cant find out everything by ourselfs.

 

If there was a budget to create a new team with the purpose of testing a feature, I'd be fairly confident in saying it wouldn't go to purely test the editor.  It simply isn't a priority, and by the looks of it it hasn't been for some time, as explained by Neil.

[krlenjushka]

6 minutes ago, forameuss said:

If there was a budget to create a new team with the purpose of testing a feature, I'd be fairly confident in saying it wouldn't go to purely test the editor.  It simply isn't a priority, and by the looks of it it hasn't been for some time, as explained by Neil.

I guess no need for budget - many people would test this voluntarely just to help.

[forameuss]

10 minutes ago, krlenjushka said:

I guess no need for budget - many people would test this voluntarely just to help.

And they have no control over what happens after.  You're already doing testing, providing bug reports, etc etc.  To truly make a difference, you simply need someone in a position to actually fix things.  That's what they don't have, because as a small team there's a lot of other things that are more important than the editor.

Personally I'd like some time set aside to clear the decks on it and make improvements, but I can completely understand why it's been neglected.

[herne79]

4 hours ago, pablito15 said:

You should probably rename this thread if you're going to delete people's questions...

fyi the person who posted the question removed it, not SI.

[janesy20]

Have they noticed the perceived negative tactics the AI uses, especially surrounding full backs? FM 18 seems to be that the only way to consistently beat the AI is playing 3 poachers/advanced forwards up top because they always have about 5 back in defence. The full backs rarely ever get forward and it feels like you're just trying to exploit the match engine rather than build a decent tactic with one striker up front for instance.

[turnip]

11 minutes ago, janesy20 said:

Have they noticed the perceived negative tactics the AI uses, especially surrounding full backs? FM 18 seems to be that the only way to consistently beat the AI is playing 3 poachers/advanced forwards up top because they always have about 5 back in defence. The full backs rarely ever get forward and it feels like you're just trying to exploit the match engine rather than build a decent tactic with one striker up front for instance.

Enquiring minds would be interested to know why you're trying to play with one striker up front against a team you're clearly far superior to (thus why they have 5 back in defence).

Sage minds would simply point out that this has been the case for several iterations of the game and is, in fact, the case in real life, which is why you get petulant snots like Mourinho or Conte whining about how it's just unfair that people don't try to play 4-3-3 against them, oh and it's just not sporting to actually field a goalkeeper when we're trying to score.

[MBarbaric]

1 ora fa, turnip ha scritto:

Enquiring minds would be interested to know why you're trying to play with one striker up front against a team you're clearly far superior to (thus why they have 5 back in defence).

higher number of strikers doesn't mean better/more attacking play. 

[turnip]

9 minutes ago, MBarbaric said:

higher number of strikers doesn't mean better/more attacking play. 

No, but 1 Forward vs 5 Defenders isn't going to give the attacker the best chance of doing anything worthwhile with the ball, is it?

[MBarbaric]

2 minuti fa, turnip ha scritto:

No, but 1 Forward vs 5 Defenders isn't going to give the attacker the best chance of doing anything worthwhile with the ball, is it?

in one moment you will have one man up front, in next, it will be six... man city nominally has one striker in their line-up but they arrive in the attacking third with six or seven players. attacking is far more fluid than numbers in formation show it.

[simple_man67]

Is Serge Aurier as bad at taking throw-ins in the game as he is in the real world???

He MUST hold the record for the most fowl throws in a game and career.

[jinjinn]

is there statistical advantage over picking the shooting PPMs (shoot with power/place shot), or is it just aesthetically pleasing?

[Neil Brock]

37 minutes ago, jinjinn said:

is there statistical advantage over picking the shooting PPMs (shoot with power/place shot), or is it just aesthetically pleasing?

Generally shots with power are less accurate, but when on target have more chance of going in, whilst placing shots make shooting more accurate (than normal or if a player shoots with power) but if they are on target have less chance of going in than a shooter with power.

Both have pros and cons. 

Hope that help. 

[SanMarinoMan]

So I have a question relating to Youth Candidates.

 

In the world screen you can get a list of all new youth intakes. This allows you to see them before they have signed a contract. However there is not a single way I have found to sign them in that day or so. They all say they would like to commit to their club or they've just signed a new long term contract. However the AI mkaes these sort of signings all the time. For example Southampton picked up a 16 year old rb from a swiss club on a free. Am I missing something/is there something I'm not doing? Or are youth intakes sacred until they have signed contracts and become available?

[Neil Brock]

7 minutes ago, SanMarinoMan said:

So I have a question relating to Youth Candidates.

 

In the world screen you can get a list of all new youth intakes. This allows you to see them before they have signed a contract. However there is not a single way I have found to sign them in that day or so. They all say they would like to commit to their club or they've just signed a new long term contract. However the AI mkaes these sort of signings all the time. For example Southampton picked up a 16 year old rb from a swiss club on a free. Am I missing something/is there something I'm not doing? Or are youth intakes sacred until they have signed contracts and become available?

Teams sometimes can sign players directly from youth academies prior to the player coming through as what the user would see as a 'Youth Candidate'. It can also happen at your club - you may seen that one of your 'Youth Candidates' came through at a different club via their history -> milestones. This is all done 'out of sight' so to speak and can't be influenced directly the user. 

What you're asking in regards to poaching a player on a youth generation day can't be done. And some people would suggest checking the youth intake screen as cheating in itself - but hey, everyone's allowed to play the game however they like!   

[HemHat]

Happened to me. I got a notification through saying Blackburn have paid me £10k because some left back I've never heard of has played 10 games for them. Checked his history and he came through at my club but immediately joined Blackburn. 

Easy 10k.

[SanMarinoMan]

32 minutes ago, Neil Brock said:

Teams sometimes can sign players directly from youth academies prior to the player coming through as what the user would see as a 'Youth Candidate'. It can also happen at your club - you may seen that one of your 'Youth Candidates' came through at a different club via their history -> milestones. This is all done 'out of sight' so to speak and can't be influenced directly the user. 

What you're asking in regards to poaching a player on a youth generation day can't be done. And some people would suggest checking the youth intake screen as cheating in itself - but hey, everyone's allowed to play the game however they like!   

Ah good ok. To be honest I think that's the best way to do it.

 

Shots fired  I dont use IGE to check potential ability like many others do so I think I'll take the moral middle ground considering checking the intake screens requires knowing the correct dates, haveing those countries scouted, and then scrolling through the information circles on 1000+ players... I at least work for my cheat if thats what you want to call it

[Heywood JaBlowme]

Would an In Game Editor for FM Touch require a total rewrite and separate code? Is that why there hasn’t been one released?