Football Manager 2017 17.3.0 Official Feedback Thread

[Guest El Payaso]

2 hours ago, Svenc said:

You should upload those in the bug forums. I have never seen such matches outside of FM 2015 before the first patch, where there was space all over the pitch as some AI could have its entire AML/AMC/AMR strata not getting behind the ball, turning matches into counter attack / through ball / 6 man defenses easily overloaded fests. They had hockey scorelines every other week, same as human players who did similar (this isn't possible to do anymore). Class forwards convert no more than about 1 in 3 of their one one ones  though. I agree with quite a few of the defending stuff you've brought up (also seen on the last page). But there is the theory that the engine would nerf finishing down to comical levels, which isn't the case. If the CCCs were legit, you should expect to score no more than in between 1 in 3 to 1 in 5. Or any shot in space. The equivalent of that would be Opta data CCC / Big Chances. If you google, you will find EPL starters who missed 80% of their totals. Whilst I don't think that FM is accurate, it must take any such into account or it would be a fantasy, such as Fifa, Sensi Soccer, Nintendo World Cup. Outside of tap-ins and penalties, the keeper is supposed to edge this.

Imo it isn't that there is a gigantic amount of shots in space, outside of exploiting the stuff from the last page, and that is a major defensive issue (simply google for DEMOLISHER tactics for 10-1 miracle results) -- unless a team jam packs that middle with players. What is rather easy creating all those other ones. This goes years back, with human controlled matches uploaded showing up to 40 corners a match (unwatchable). It's not limited to those illogical tactics, it's just highlighting it to make for terribly viewing experience (and little goals). Aside of the more obvious (ranged attempts, easy blocks) as argued, if teams dismantle an opponent 7-0, it isn't at all unusual for them to have 90%+ of their attempts not merely within the box, but also from open play. On FM that is very rare if at all possible. A high amount of shots not being from play would typically be the telltale sign of a defense not getting stretched, FM or otherwise, but clearing every other move. As there isn't a stat for that, you have to trawl through every shots post match manually, which  is quite a bit of busy work. Hopefully SI are able to collect those internally.

Just seen that FrazT logged something that may be connected, though it relates purely to free kicks (which are converted at about 1 in 25 on average no more, and for all the highlights one could upload, Ronaldo et all did go fully seasons with minimal return). My first experience with that dates back to FM2012/3ish, where for fun I made ten players just sitting back and not advancing, and still it was impossible to go without a shot, as eventually you would win a free kick, a corner, a throw in, and get shots off those. That's naturally how those impressively defensive AI teams also collected their sneaky 1-0 wins (off a corner, the only shot all match) once in every SI logo shaped moons.
 

 

Should be quite well known issue that for example a striker on a support duty can be far too devastating in the ME. To me it's been like that for years. On that video above you can see that even small teams IRL make it really hard for the lone forward to perform and that is why IRL the lone forward role is one of the hardest to successfully play: you need a good technique and passing ability as most of the time the defenders only allow you to have that one touch under pressure and also you need to be strong enough to hold against defenders and have a good intelligence to time the movement right. On FM this role has been made really easy as there isn't that pressure and because of that the striker is allowed to perform completely freely. Like I've said, I've had games where the striker has had more passing attempts than any midfielder IRL is summing in for example La Liga and these passing attempts have been mainly made in dangerous areas and because of that the striker can single handedly run a riot against defenses: either round the centre backs and proceed to the penalty area or set up others to be through on goal. 

The CCC in real life is a bit of mystery. I would say that IRL it doesn't necessarily need to be an easy chance but instead it might fill some certain requirements. So it might even be a shot from a narrow angle and under pressure but it fills certain requirements and because of that it's a CCC but still not necessarily even close to an easy finish. 

I think that the free kick issue is related to this because teams do allow the attacking side to enter the dangerous area with too much ease and eventually they need to foul which of course leads to a free kick. There is clearly highly excessive amount of direct free kick attempts and that (like amount of goals also) has been limited with bad conversion rates. Same applies btw also with crosses: the amount of attempted crosses is far far higher than IRL and that once again is down to how easy it is for wide players to proceed to crossing positions and how 'well' the defending sides prevent them. All of these are reported and should be known issues. Not saying that any of these are easy fixes but seriously something to look at and also if some kind of solutions are found, then the match engine will be taking huge steps forward in terms of looking satisfying. 

[Svenc]

4 hours ago, El Payaso said:

The CCC in real life is a bit of mystery. I would say that IRL it doesn't necessarily need to be an easy chance but instead it might fill some certain requirements. So it might even be a shot from a narrow angle and under pressure but it fills certain requirements and because of that it's a CCC but still not necessarily even close to an easy finish.

What should be a mystery is the FM CCC! Unlike the Opta one, it doesn't have a definition at all. Which is why on some releases the header from point blank range into an empty net was considered clear-cut, and some not so much, and you're left guessing whether this season it's header season or isn't (there seems to be an on-going debate behind the scenes whether header finishes should be inluded or not, and several more, it's always changing). Opta doesn't do that. A CCC (or Big CHance, as they call it nowadays is always a resonably high probability shot, typically a one on one. Yes, the keeper may edge those, but in the grand scheme of things, that is a high probability shot. Even for a shot to have a goal expectancy over 1 in 10, a forward would need to be in reasonably range and space. What's oft forgotten that he still has to trap and control the ball at oft high pace, and that shows. Defending is easier than attacking.

http://optasports.com/news-area/blog-optas-event-definitions.aspx

In-game I ignore it entirelly -- and even that Opta stat is barely used anywhere. Looking at the shot spread in the analysis (ranges, positions) and watching whether a side just spammed stuff from set pieces (easy to do in-game) tells me more about an FM match than any other stat in the game. Which is the pity. There's a whole load of fake domination in this game, some of which relates to the defensive issues you also touched some (i.e. rather easy to keep the ball and/or drag defenders around the pitch). Not least of which because there also isn't a stat displaying how much that all conquering super tactic collecting 80% possession every match plus getting off 30 attempts (none of which in any space) has its back doors open, i.e. counter attacks, through balls in behind aggressive unprotected lines. The only one of which, naturally, would be constantly conceding a stupid amount of goals out of a lowly amount of opposition attempts, at which point it's all too little too late...

Or dare I say too little to not ragequit.

Edited May 6, 2017 by Svenc

[Guest El Payaso]

17 hours ago, Svenc said:

What should be a mystery is the FM CCC! U

Well that's true. I think it was back in the day quite common to 'defend' the game by telling that well the game isn't that good at counting HCs and CCCs so there are actually less while for example I've thought straight from the beginning that the stats are more likely to be missing CCCs instead of counting too many. 

BTW in terms of Match Engine I would say that FM 2013 was really good. Had a good balance between defending players and attacking players, not too many chances with sensible tactics, generally satisfying looking match day experience. 

One thing also to note in the engine is that it should be balanced on small details too: defenders at the moment seem to be really error prone (clearances straight to opposition, missed headers etc.) so it should be balanced by making attacking players make bad first touches, runs to wrong direction and misskicking the ball when a chance is presented. I've seen none of those happen to them and while it's been made quite easy for attacking players to perform in the engine, I would say that they are too precise at controlling the ball in many situations.

[Svenc]

5 hours ago, El Payaso said:

One thing also to note in the engine is that it should be balanced on small details too: defenders at the moment seem to be really error prone (clearances straight to opposition, missed headers etc.) so it should be balanced by making attacking players make bad first touches, runs to wrong direction and misskicking the ball when a chance is presented. I've seen none of those happen to them and while it's been made quite easy for attacking players to perform in the engine, I would say that they are too precise at controlling the ball in many situations.

I'd agree with that too... technical stuff isn't modeled precisely/varying enough. I'd even tested that on previous by going into the editor with extreme data experiments. That goes back to the defending stuff some. At the moment FM is limited in how it models the more physical aspects of defending. There is no real shoulder charging modeled as such when players compete for a ball, they can't really shield it either (either to waste time at the corner flag or in general), etc. I think that is also in parts where that perception of chances is coming from... If the more physical side is somewhat limited, it can appear as if players where unchallenged. However, as FM obviously tracks the movement of players (or 2d dots, whichever tickles your fancy), it's not hard to code into that the ME recognizes when there are defenders near, and the guy is being flagged "challenged". Hopefully will see improvements. It's interesting that you should bring up 2013. AFAIK was a version where due to lacking support movement around the ball carrier the shot counts could rack up by itself, as they would then be forced into additional ranged shots.

As for defending the game via the CCCs, my experience is thus. Often an accusation directed at the mods. Take a few pages back at what themadsheep posted. He'd want the thing to be taken out as he knows it's bad idea and is never going to work. He doesn't say that because he defends anything. He says that he knows it's tosh. Firstly, whilst the argument against Expected Goals or similar seems in parts that this wouldn't be standard and used anywhere much  -- tell me where exactly a wholly subjective clear cut / half chance category is ever used on  Match Of The Day (possession and shots, that's all there is). Secondly, even against better judgement, such a category tends to be treated as if every attempt was equal, which is ludicrous. Thirdly, it's being misused thus as objectively "proof" how the game were broken, which no number will ever show how and why, as it's the match play making those numbers. Realistically, all of this would only really go away if SI could introduce a red flashing bar that pops in every time, like "NOW THIS IS A GOOD CHANCE! (what we have programmed one to be anyhow". However, none of that were of any use if it wasn't acknowledged that even a good chance may see the keeper in the advantage still. Unless, it is a penalty, tap-in, etc. outright.

I would always upload any such match, it was acknowledged there to be an issue with certain kind of one ones on an older iteration before. This harks back to how SI should invite the more popular "engine breaker tacticians". Their stuff will be copy/pasted at the core all year anyhow, there is few variation on that. They shouldn't care about that. What they should care about is that this always highlights issues that are missed on testing. It should be obvious that tactics influence who gets a chance in what positions from what kind of assists, i.e. keeping wide guys back in a narrow formation or playing ultra narrow in general will tend to never involve much angled balls from wide positions and create exclusively narrow one on ones (may favor the GK some more). Which still also happens to be where an issue was with before, as contrary to "exploits" likely no balanced "tester" tactics nor any AI tactics visibly ever is that one dimensional in the type of shots it creates. They may all try to let their team play "football" within the confines of it all, rather than aim defensive holes. If that were the case, this would be always picked up on testing.

Edited May 7, 2017 by Svenc

[Guest El Payaso]

@Svenc I think that the problem I'm having is well covered in here. My aim though was not to exploit the engine but to use a logical setup and also at the same think the defensive shape that the team has. Especially the Enganche I have as the middle AM is running a riot when at worst and usually when my teams is in a mood to play I get about 4-6 decent or easy chances throughout passage of play where my team seems to wait for someone to make a run behind and defenders falling asleep. The two main issues that I see are:

- The teams allow us to access the area where the Enganche can destroy you with ease and also allow us to pass the ball there quite freely. 

- They keep falling asleep several times a game. Yet my team are quite poor at finishing those chances.

If you, or anyone else wants to try it. Feel free. The three instructions for the team are to 'dribble less' 'be more expressive' and drop deeper for some reason (don't remember adding that). Of course it also produces some valid goals like my DLP putting in a long through ball over the top when we break quickly and in those kind of situations it's okay for one of the pacey shadow strikers to escape. But the thing is that from slow build ups and either Xabi Prieto or Canales (slow players) escaping even multiple times a game is not. The centre backs and full backs especially are totally hopeless as they cannot position themselves and then close down when it's too late and by that open up spaces behind them. 

Statistically for example Canales is too involved in the games: close to hundred pass attempts in an attacking midfielder position and also the SSs are summing something between 60-80. Pardo has had usually something between 100-130.  And at the same time the centre backs are barely touching the ball. 

https://www.whoscored.com/Regions/206/Tournaments/4/Seasons/6436/Stages/13955/PlayerStatistics/Spain-La-Liga-2016-2017

Here's the real life statistic for La Liga. N'Zonzi summing up the highest number with 77.4 per game.

Same rules also apply on crossing: defensive positioning being the main issue and leading to excessive amount of crosses played in and also crossing being a too certain source for chances and goals.

If the defensive positioning is something like this then it's no surprise that teams can pass the ball freely and wingers can easily beat full backs because the full backs allow them to accelerate freely before (or if deciding at all to) engaging.  

[Svenc]

@ElPayaso

Yup, that's feeding into the weak areas covered two pages back, and pretty much the shape how the most efficient exploit tactics look on this. This shouldn't be that easy, but the central areas have been severely weakened on FM2017. Flood the centre, and defenders are dragged everywhere. As to why that was covered, you have detailed it too. They don't at all have an issue with scoring or general conversion though, unless the AI drops deep and stuffs that area with players usually, breaking any kind of scoring records in the process... even mid-table to bad teams seem to average 3 goals per match with this, cue in the additional miracle results (8-0, 11-1, etc.). It seems even more pronounced if the AI plays a back three and oft doesn't have a proper protection in front of it. It's the biggest bug bear I have too, but outside of avoiding to play like that, no choice atm. Highly doubt that this isn't acknowledged though. Which can be both good and bad. Good for anybody who wants this to play out more and more like footie. Bad for all the guys reporting in a couple months how FM 2018 may have broken their "perfectly valid tactics".

The most interesting in that thread is naturally somebody downloading "exploit" tactics on a forum reknown for publishing engine breakers -- only to report them!! Must be fairly new to all of this. It's a good example of how that kind always highlights issues that may be always there lingering, affecting anybody in one way or other anyhow, but by specifically targeting them making them stick out like the guy dressed pretty in pink at your familiy's funeral, rather than them getting overlooked or flagged minor issue in the initial testing.

Edited May 7, 2017 by Svenc

[Guest El Payaso]

I think that this is a great example about the issue that we've been discussing. Everyone who hasn't tried it can get the idea of how devastating slow build ups through the middle are. And by linking this I mean no offense whatsoever towards the uploader.

Also this tells a sad story about the tactics system when you see the team selection. A player like Tiote should not perform well in a playmaker role as he has no qualities whatsoever to play it but the game doesn't seem to produce these "this role is too much to handle for this player" kind of situations. I would hope that in future it would be possible (and more likely)  to have unsuccessful players such as for example Januzaj has been this season for Sunderland or more notably Gaitan for Atletico. Both players have abilities but lacking something makes then unsuccessful in a role that is really easy to make successful on FM. 

[Svenc]

14 hours ago, El Payaso said:

Also this tells a sad story about the tactics system when you see the team selection. A player like Tiote should not perform well in a playmaker role as he has no qualities whatsoever to play it but the game doesn't seem to produce these "this role is too much to handle for this player" kind of situations.

Not a defensive of this, but partly it's a conceptional thing, it would be likely easy to introduce something such as a genuine "role" gelling itself and a harsh penalty if a player would play here (under the hood, historically at least, every role is a player given sets of instructions). The game simplifies much, I'd argue it starts right with the transfers, but tactical gelling naturally too... basically you put a training slider on tactic preparation for a couple weaks, play a couple matches. What all of this comes down to if how deeply a sim game you want this to be, and you may get different answers on that -- the sheer existence and popularity of download tactics tells its own story on that. But if you watch, Tiotes mostly not much under pressure anyway, which is due to the compactness or lack thereof the ME produces, this would have been little different before FM 2017 (personally I oft man marked the deepest opposition midfielder due to this, in particular playing 4-4-2ish). Can also be seen on the video clip I posted two, three pages pack, the deepest guy tends to be free to recycle. Plus with a set-up like that where a marauding centre five midfield wreaks havoc via overloading (easily) (6:50, 18:30 -- CB steps up -- d-line is no more etc.), he doesn't really need to provide much of anything tbf.  Which naturally, is what makes those things so effective as of now. Too effective, as you said. Fully agreed.

Not that Tiote's much involved here apparently thus. You're bang on, but it's not something I'd personally call partucilar slow build-ups (by FM standards).  The guy's instructions don't seem to much allow for it, the obviously d'l tactics on this (seems to provide those himself) tends to push the CM strata up rather quickly via his exploit the middle TIs etc., opening a gigantic amount of space pretty early in the moves behind it and the defenders, which is also how he concedes the space so easily against Celtic in the last match.  Early interception, and they can break forward. If anybody is ever wondering from where that "game is rigged" posts/reviews so popular originate from, oft based on the genuine experience opponents regularly find it easier to score, here it is. In particular that there are spells where the AI conversely neither pushes its backs up an inch, nor any of its central midfielders, plus doesn't universally play such highly aggressive lines like that, where every through ball to a forward can see him goal-side, but sit deep. 9/10 downloads tend to be as positionally superaggressive if not moreso than any AI opponent on this game at best is when being totally desperate to score.  Naturally they're being advertised "plug&play", that is they're not being used for the last ten desperate minutes, but every single minute of a season with any team no matter how poor. On that part at least this were a quite silly ME if that wouldn't lead to easier ways goal-side, but others tend to disagree.

Edited May 8, 2017 by Svenc

[Preveza]

Hoping the developers are seeing all this and use it to make huge strides forward in the ME next year, and for the years to come.

[Bigpapa42]

Thanks. Meant to reply sooner. I did check and the price on the players Transfer screen wasn't low. Weird that the German club in question kept bidding lower thru the window. I didn't keep the a save from before, but its a relatively similar issue to what I ran into with a save in Colombia and uploaded that one.

Think its extra annoying because I accept that I'm going to lose players abroad and will sell if the offer is reasonable. But being offered below half of what you paid a year before is not exactly reasonable. I can understand the player not caring about that, but the buying club should have some logic.

[Guest El Payaso]

One funny thing that I noticed yesterday is that I was ranting about same issues already seven years ago and still am. Maybe this time with a little bit better English and more constructive. 

It's funny how similar my points still are, had completely forgotten that. 

- Lack of pressure on the ball especially when you are high up the pitch. Mainly this is down to bad positioning which means that the pressure will always be late and only opening the defenses up more.

- Defensive minded midfielders not being represented well. For example BWMs are just collecting cards because they need to foul and fouling is once again down to bad positioning and badly timed closing down which leads them to be forced to go for sliding challenges. My theory and this again has been the case for years. 

- Defensive players making mistakes on marking, missing interceptions and missing headers while attacking players are not unable to make the right runs (Jordon Ibe for example in real life, hindered by poor football intelligence and he's not the only one) or able to make bad first touches or even miss kick the ball. 

And please, a lot more scenarios like this. AI keeping firmer hold of their key players and key players opting to stay when there are no concerns in their current clubs.

[aditya]

The fact that the top 10 tactics in FM17 (the mega tactic test) are all strikerless tactic (5-2-3) shows that the game is more about exploiting ME. 

[Preveza]

6 hours ago, aditya said:

The fact that the top 10 tactics in FM17 (the mega tactic test) are all strikerless tactic (5-2-3) shows that the game is more about exploiting ME. 

Exactly this. Hence why I prefer to use my own. Defeats the purpose of using tactics which exploit the match engine. Goes to show the ME needs heaps and heaps of work. 

[Str0aK]

Can I load a previously created manager when starting a new game or do I have to make a new one each time? Not seeing the option to load a manager.

[aditya]

8 hours ago, Str0aK said:

Can I load a previously created manager when starting a new game or do I have to make a new one each time? Not seeing the option to load a manager.

of course you can. But their history of success would obviously be erased since you cant go in the future and claim you win EPL in 2018

[Str0aK]

18 hours ago, aditya said:

of course you can. But their history of success would obviously be erased since you cant go in the future and claim you win EPL in 2018

Yeah of course but I'm not even seeing this option when I go to create a new game.

[Guest El Payaso]

I've uploaded a couple of videos to YouTube of me playing with Real Sociedad. I doubt that I'm anywhere near an entertaining but on this video I have captioned a few defensive issues that are minor details but ones that I don't like. So if you watch it out, then you should turn on the captions that are in English, not Finnish. And this is not an aim to get followers or views to my video but I think that it is an easy way to show these issues by showing them in gameplay. By any means my aim is not to become big name on YouTube.

[Deisler26]

I'd like the goalies to be more stringently marked.

Jordan Pickford on my save has pushed three crosses into the net this season and not had any of them marked down as a mistake. Constant 6.9 ratings means that I can't find him for poor play.

It's not just this save. You see goalies making mistakes all the time, missing crosses or being Timmy Chocolate Wrists, yet still finish with a 6.9. 

Conversely, I've had an opposition goalie save 10 shots, including double saves, the lot. He's finished the game as 6.8. So when I praise him for the reason we lost, their entire outfield is at 7.0 or higher.

Edited June 1, 2017 by Deisler26

[Thorqemada]

After having played some serious Seasons this is my Wishlist for FM2018 or future FM in general::

 

Working flawless Manager Editor and/or Option to disable all faces and play with black silhouettes only!

Save game after every Match!

Save CaC Trikot-Designs!

Name Stadium (cool that a new Stadium has the Club colours!  though naming is missing!)!

More acurate game display per 3D Match engine while keeping it viusally appealing!

Adding of German 4th Legues and getting an official licence for Germany!

Less short post Goals!

Less stop the Ball for the Opposition (bcs a Throw In is less dangerous than losing the Ball immediately)!

A little more Goals from Free Kicks and Corners!

Tone down morale a little!

No phasing Ball/Players!

A real 3D Match engine...if possible...

 

So far FM2017 is quite a step forward from FM2016 and belongs to the Top-Two FMs i have played in my gaming history.

Thx.

[Guest El Payaso]

7 hours ago, Deisler26 said:

I'd like the goalies to be more stringently marked.

Jordan Pickford on my save has pushed three crosses into the net this season and not had any of them marked down as a mistake. Constant 6.9 ratings means that I can't find him for poor play.

It's not just this save. You see goalies making mistakes all the time, missing crosses or being Timmy Chocolate Wrists, yet still finish with a 6.9. 

Conversely, I've had an opposition goalie save 10 shots, including double saves, the lot. He's finished the game as 6.8. So when I praise him for the reason we lost, their entire outfield is at 7.0 or higher.

It's not only the goalies that this applies to. Generally it would be cool if there was a possibility to see bigger differences in the stats generally depending on the style of plays, quality of the players and how the players fit to the system. 

For example to get your BWM to be the best performer also based on the ratings (Kante) or to example in your system to see your right back doing well while the left back for some reason struggles (lack of quality or not fitting to the style of play). 

Goalkeepers are one of the major issues I would say as you don't see enough difference in the end product if you compare for example Courtois and Begovic. 

[johnhughthom]

I would be interested in other users (or SI's) opinions on a situation I have in my current save, and whether it could be considered a bug.

As Rangers, I bought Marco Asensio at the start of season three for £12m (I know, he was transfer listed and I thought "why not?" not expecting to get him as a lot of other clubs were listed under Major Interest, nobody else bid and he came!), now pre-season of season four and he wants to leave as Roma are interested. So I promise to sell him if the right bid is made, Roma come in and we agree a fee of £15m up front, £2.5m after 50 appearances and £1m if they win the CL. It takes him a week to agree terms, and in the meantime they have bought someone else, so I get the message they can't currently afford the transfer fee and want to delay a week. My experience of this has always been it's a never ending cycle of delay a week until transfer window then transfer cancelled, so I refuse. Asensio is furious, I've failed the promise to sell him.

So, is this a bug? I agreed a fee, buying team couldn't follow through, surely I'm under no obligation to wait. At least I should have the option of telling him Roma couldn't meet their obligations, or that it's his own fault for fannying about to sign for this team he really wants to join.

Edited June 2, 2017 by johnhughthom

[Guest]

I'd put that in the bin marked bug due to limited functionality.

[FrazT]

I'd agree with Barside- the game code's inability to recognise non- standard situations in relation to broken promises is poor.

[Tiger666]

As I'm getting further in to my save, I'm noticing a lot of regens with very low jumping reach. I'm getting players with 5'10 height and 5 for jumping for example. Noticing this a lot.

[hkfleming]

On 3/1/2017 at 11:41, Firehouse said:

Why is Alejandro Gomez only valued 900 euros?

You can get him for 1k lol. Big bug. Will post in bug section if I find more of this.

Yeah just got him on my Milan career mode lol

[geniusacamel]

According to http://www.uefa.org/MultimediaFiles/Download/Regulations/uefaorg/Regulations/02/35/87/89/2358789_DOWNLOAD.pdf , the tiebreakers are:

1) Points between/among tied teams.

2) Goal Difference between/among tied teams.

3) Goals Scored between/among tied teams.

4) Away Goals Scored between/among tied teams.

5) Overall Goal Difference.

6) Overall Goals Scored.

7) Overall Away Goals Scored.

8) Overall Wins.

9) Overall Away Wins.

10) Disciplinary Record.

11) Club Coefficient.

However, in the FM 2017 Rules Page, after Overall Goals Scored, it is Club Coefficient. So FM 2017 is missing 7) to 10) in the above list.

[Mitja]

after reading this thread has FM match engine been improved from 16? I must say I'm enjoying FM16 (Touch) like never before. ME was awsome, no Full-Back exploit whatsoever just if you don't use Wing Backs and strange formations like 532, 523,  Striker-less or Diamonds and such. the only major problem was that long passes to strikers and Xabi Alonso like switching flanks passes were too easy to play (without sufficient passing quality or width). but far from game braking. if this was improved together with some long term problems like defending issues, we would have close to perfect ME. well done Paul!!! 

[herne79]

45 minutes ago, Mitja said:

after reading this thread has FM match engine been improved from 16?

imo yes it has.  I'm sure others will say differently.

Best bet - install the free demo through Steam and check it out for yourself .

[KingCanary]

Two major things I'd change in the match engine... 

1- goalkeeper positioning. They are often leaving massive spaces at their near post for really bad looking goals. Also they have a habit of charging out for crosses, almost after the striker has got them. I understand the game is trying to show a keeper misjudging abd coming for a cross he can't get but the animation looks horrible. 

2- defenders distribution. Defenders seem to be in the habit of forgetting defending 101 and happily playing suicidal passes across their own penalty box that the opposition exploits. It's the kind of thing that would get you killed at Sunday League level, professional defenders know to put the ball in the stands rather than aimlessly hump it into the middle of their own box. 

[johnhughthom]

In my current save, midway through season six, as Rangers manager I have won 5 Scottish Premier titles, 4 Scottish Cups and 3 Scottish League Cups. I've reached the knockout stage of the Champion's League for the third time this season (having reached the semi final the previous season). I've gone from a Sunday League rep manager up to three stars and I'm in the clubs favoured personnel list.

I'm earning £230k per annum (with another £75k in competition win bonuses). In comparison Paul Hartley at Celtic is on 900k, Celtic have two League Cups to show for the previous 5 1/2 seasons. Andy Kirk at Hearts is on £388k, they have won nothing in the past 5 1/2 seasons. Gary Locke at Aberdeen is on £250k, they have won nothing in 5 1/2 seasons.

My salary has gone up over the past 5 1/2 seasons from about £120k at the start, and my current deal has 3 1/2 years to run. In an effort to get my wages up to something a bit more realistic I applied for the vacant Newcastle job, and attended an interview. A few days later the board approached me to ask me to stay, so I ask for a new contract. They refuse, I tell them I won't stay without a new contract and they refuse again.

Now, I'm guessing this is a product of starting with Sunday League rep, and the board don't want to sanction trebling somebodies wages (I wouldn't even expect parity with Hartley, £750k would be good enough for me), but it still comes across as silly. Especially in the likely scenario I leave for Newcastle and my replacement gets more money than I would have settled for.

[MBarbaric]

45 minutes ago, johnhughthom said:

In my current save, midway through season six, as Rangers manager I have won 5 Scottish Premier titles, 4 Scottish Cups and 3 Scottish League Cups. I've reached the knockout stage of the Champion's League for the third time this season (having reached the semi final the previous season). I've gone from a Sunday League rep manager up to three stars and I'm in the clubs favoured personnel list.

I'm earning £230k per annum (with another £75k in competition win bonuses). In comparison Paul Hartley at Celtic is on 900k, Celtic have two League Cups to show for the previous 5 1/2 seasons. Andy Kirk at Hearts is on £388k, they have won nothing in the past 5 1/2 seasons. Gary Locke at Aberdeen is on £250k, they have won nothing in 5 1/2 seasons.

My salary has gone up over the past 5 1/2 seasons from about £120k at the start, and my current deal has 3 1/2 years to run. In an effort to get my wages up to something a bit more realistic I applied for the vacant Newcastle job, and attended an interview. A few days later the board approached me to ask me to stay, so I ask for a new contract. They refuse, I tell them I won't stay without a new contract and they refuse again.

Now, I'm guessing this is a product of starting with Sunday League rep, and the board don't want to sanction trebling somebodies wages (I wouldn't even expect parity with Hartley, £750k would be good enough for me), but it still comes across as silly. Especially in the likely scenario I leave for Newcastle and my replacement gets more money than I would have settled for.

thought they sorted this... anyway, it is stupi bug present in the game for years now- problem is chairman simply refuses any wage rise after you reach certain pay for the club you are managing. and it has no relation with your starting reputation. 

[johnhughthom]

Took the Newcastle job, bottom of the Premier League with £10m in the bank, negotiated £1.4m per annum, with a £200k bonus if we avoid relegation. Rangers refused to offer a new contract on £230k, with £80m+ in the bank and more Champion's League money to come this season...

[enigmatic]

On 6/3/2017 at 00:10, FrazT said:

I'd agree with Barside- the game code's inability to recognise non- standard situations in relation to broken promises is poor.

That's generous. The game's code's ability to recognise completely standard situations in relation to promises is poor. 

No, I don't think you should be objecting to me not having made good on last month's promise to sign new players in a team meeting SI forces me to call on the first day of the transfer window...

[FrazT]

13 hours ago, johnhughthom said:

In my current save, midway through season six, as Rangers manager I have won 5 Scottish Premier titles, 4 Scottish Cups and 3 Scottish League Cups. I've reached the knockout stage of the Champion's League for the third time this season (having reached the semi final the previous season). I've gone from a Sunday League rep manager up to three stars and I'm in the clubs favoured personnel list.

I'm earning £230k per annum (with another £75k in competition win bonuses). In comparison Paul Hartley at Celtic is on 900k, Celtic have two League Cups to show for the previous 5 1/2 seasons. Andy Kirk at Hearts is on £388k, they have won nothing in the past 5 1/2 seasons. Gary Locke at Aberdeen is on £250k, they have won nothing in 5 1/2 seasons.

My salary has gone up over the past 5 1/2 seasons from about £120k at the start, and my current deal has 3 1/2 years to run. In an effort to get my wages up to something a bit more realistic I applied for the vacant Newcastle job, and attended an interview. A few days later the board approached me to ask me to stay, so I ask for a new contract. They refuse, I tell them I won't stay without a new contract and they refuse again.

Now, I'm guessing this is a product of starting with Sunday League rep, and the board don't want to sanction trebling somebodies wages (I wouldn't even expect parity with Hartley, £750k would be good enough for me), but it still comes across as silly. Especially in the likely scenario I leave for Newcastle and my replacement gets more money than I would have settled for.

I have reported this twice in the Bugs forum and uploaded a save both times- this is seriously flawed and the game will not recognise success and reward the manager accordingly.  In my current save at Rangers, the board want me to sign a 5 year deal at a wage that is 2K per week below what they will allow me to offer a Hot Prospect and approx 15% of what they will allow for a Key player!

[KingCanary]

I'm in a similar situation. I've taken Rotherham to 7th in the Premier League and won the FA Cup, yet am still paid less weekly than every manager in the Championship. I tried to get my wages up to £10k a week (as the manager of the club bottom of the championship is on slightly less) and the board wouldn't go above £7k.

[itsdare]

It's generally agreed that GKs are underrated by the ME and not aptly assessed on their individual performance as _goal_keepers_, but if there's one thing to fix it would be the undue rating punishment they get for their "mistakes". In my observation, practically any situation where they come even a little off their line and concede means an immediate demotion to at least a 6.3 and nothing short of saving a penalty can raise it for the rest of the match. Meanwhile, they can weakly flap all day every day on their line with what should be easy saves and not suffer at all.

[KingCanary]

On 06/07/2017 at 12:45, KingCanary said:

I'm in a similar situation. I've taken Rotherham to 7th in the Premier League and won the FA Cup, yet am still paid less weekly than every manager in the Championship. I tried to get my wages up to £10k a week (as the manager of the club bottom of the championship is on slightly less) and the board wouldn't go above £7k.

To add another silly wrinkle, I've been offered the Spain job for £100k a week. So more than 10x my club wage for significantly less work. 

[Harpoon76]

How are mistakes defined and given against a player?

This goal I conceded was mentioned in the post-match press conference as a horrible mistake by my RB (being outjumped by a taller, stronger player is a mistake?)

Yet my CB who makes an absolute horlicks here rates 7.1 with no mistakes?

 

[Harpoon76]

Player / squad interaction becomes a bit tiresome in a longer save.  For instance:

My star striker.  Top scorer in the PL last season, Golden Boot for Europe, more awards than he can fit on his mantelpiece:

Every transfer window, Man Utd (and the rest) come sniffing and he wants to join The Special One

I refuse (currently 2nd in the PL, so damned if I'm selling my best player) and you can bet your last fiver the squad will be knocking on my door.

<Knock, knock>

"Hello lads, I wonder what you lot want?"

"I should let Rogers leave?  Well given the rest of you struggle to hit a cow's arse with a banjo, we'd be worse off without him"

"I'm right?  Of course I am, now *** off back to training".

Every window the rest of the squad need reminding we'd be worse off without him. 

Would be nice to see this improved - perhaps the rest of the squad would grow bored of Rogers moaning and the captain tells him to get on with playing.

Finally, once the transfer windows has passed, Man Utd lose interest for a bit so I get a news story staying Rogers is happy to stay.  When that happened 3 months ago, I offered a new 5 year contract which he took - so even less incentive to let him leave 3 months later!

[HUNT3R]

I don't have that issue at all. If I refuse (and I do, more than once, every window), the squad seems to accept my decision without wanting to speak to me. Could it be your reputation?

[enigmatic]

Suspect there's a trigger involving the bidding club having a high enough reputation for the other players to aspire to play at that level one day. Had a player complain about me not offering him out to an interested club and the squad ignored it; same player complained the following year with a better club interested and the squad supported him (and backed down). He shut up and decided he liked me and my club after a second successive promotion though

I do think the player complaints has been sensibly toned down a little from FM16

Edited August 2, 2017 by enigmatic

[Svenc]

Breaking the records / finishing on FM.

 

Something different, though connected to the last couple pages of this thread in a sense. Recently was having a chat with somebody who argued that if "finishing" on this were more efficient, he'd have his forwards (a slight cut below the world class) scoring at least 1 goal per match on average. These stats are always going to fluctuate, but my argument was that this was always going to be more difficult, as he played a multiple forward set-up, which meant the bulk of finishes will be pretty much shared in between the forwards. Reason for doing is thus: In football almost every player who consistently averages a goal plus per match or thereabouts also averages a high amount of attempts. Ronaldo consistently averages 6-7, Messi 5+, Higuian a few seasons back when he was at Napoli and scored his 36 out of 38 FM  likewise with averaging 5 attempts per match (to put that into perspective: The most consistent Bundesliga forwards Lewandowski/Aubameyang averaged about 4 in the more recent season, none of which falling in that bracket.

To anybody following stats outside of FM that may not be hugely surprising, as long-term the finishing rates of better forwards are pretty much in between converting 1 in 5 to 1 in 4 shots or thereabouts, with only a few standout seasons (The "Hunter" Huntelaar at Schalke in a one-off season never reached prior and thereafter converting almost at 1 in 3), Kane looks similar the last season), whereas popular perception oft is that the difference between forwards must be like huge here (the same goes for scoring "streaks", which can be fairly random for just about anybody, unless of course you are Ronaldo and average 7 attempts of which it is expected you score a few. In FM you can flick that kind of feedback on manually, and currently, unsurprisingly at anything below 3.x shots a match you wouldn't even need to start from my experience (outside of exploiting a few ME defensive holes perhaps which mean every shot will be in loads of space). This also brought back memories of previous community experiments of "showing the AI how to make Messi Messiyish) on prior editions. Unlike AI, we have all the capabilities to completely tune the play in a way that makes most finishes fall to one guy, and I wasn't surprised to find out if you do the Maths here, Messi too averaged 6 attempts per game.



Would be pretty interesting what such stats look like for anybody who expects his forwards to consistently break the records, and how SI try to tune this -- the total numbers from my experience of fluctuate in between iterations.

Edited August 2, 2017 by Svenc

[Adam Dunbar]

Not sure about the way the ref blows his whistle for a corner.

I think for a chance on goal (like this example) the moment is taken away because the ref blows his whistle the instant the ball crosses the line for a corner.  It feels a bit urrgh.

Does the ref even blow his whistle for a corner irl - doesn't he just point to the corner flag ?  It seems to make the action a bit "flat"

Gyirmót v Szolnok.pkm     62.07

Edited August 5, 2017 by Adam Dunbar

[Scotty Walds]

A referee will sometimes blow for a corner if it's a contentious one.

[Svenc]

Better statistics, final match reports that make sense.

Seen Miles more recent "dismissing" the idea of there being more refined stats, such as Expected Goals. Guys suggested to him assessing shots individually was mainly done to predict future performance, which is one part but not all of it.
 

Quote

When a soccer player takes a shot, there are only two possible results. The ball goes in, and the team gets a goal, or it does not go in, and the team gets nothing. But some shots are better than others. The xG statistic awards credit for how good a shot was, regardless of whether it winds up in the net. For example, a shot from very near the goal might go in about 50 percent of the time, so it would be worth 0.5 of an xG point. A speculative shot from far out might be worth only 0.1 of a point.

FM on a statistical level is purely based on volumes. The same goes for match reports. If a side has lots of shots for no goals, it's pointed out as being "wasteful" in the post match feedback, even if those shots are meh throughout. Whilst this may successfully mimic all the bad football punditry in the world and Charles Reep would approve of it,  the engine clearly doesn't work like that. Finishing research seems be taken into account. How factors such as the shot location influence the likelihood of a goal. The pressure on the player. The pace. Or how central through balls typically see the keeper in a significant edge over the forward as the angle of the assist doesn't handicap him. All the while a crossed ball from wider position does exactly that. And yet the game stats act in such a way, with the subjective stats in there border lining on the fairly useless. You've never needed a single CCC on this to score 4, as the gap between your average CCC and your average SOT isn't that big. Unlike CCCs, ExpG are actually used in football, by actual managers. There clearly is some hierarchy targeted in-game, and it's more refined than what the stats show, which draw everything equal.

If this or similar technically isn't doable, the very least that absolutely needs introducing is some benchmarks as to the stats that are there, and some added basic numbers. In-match display the counters/breaks conceded by a side. Make a distinction between shots from play (e.g. a defense actually successfully stretched) and set piece. As much as FM may have helped to pioneer football data ten, fifteen years ago, it's behind the curve significantly, and it's limited use what's in there. In particular as on FM you traditionally can "dominate" every kind of stat you can whilst barely ever hugely challenging a defense. Cue in the 15 pressured headers on target from 20 corners and 40 throw-ins for "but" one goal. Or the 5 "CCC"s, all of which from a ball which sees the keeper edging it significantly, and thus but one at best goal -- as may be expected. And that's not much changed.

Read more about those here (and take on the quiz!): http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/40699431

Edited August 15, 2017 by Svenc

[Adam Dunbar]

imo GK positioning needs to improve in FM2018

Gks move backwards towards line just before striker shoots (the opposite of making themselves big/narrowing angle):

Kaposvár v Gyirmót.pkm   85:28  -  as through ball played GK goes back and in the end make the save on his own line

Workington v Gainsborough.pkm  61:24  -  GK moves backwards before shot is taken       70:53  -  doesn't narrow, moves backwards

 

I think one of the areas where animation is poor in 3D view is dribbling.  Players are seen to just walk past opponents atm and imo this defo needs a makeover

 

When the commentary says "There is a coming together" between 2 players, I'd like to see the coming together shown in 3d view - not sure its shown atm.

 

Nothing to back this up but generally in recent years of FM the linesman flags/whistle blows too late in offside decisions - just a feeling.