Why this might be the end for me and FM

[thomas166]

Ive played FM since the '13 version and have greatly enjoyed my short time with the game. I've liked most of the changes that have happened over the past 5 years, even if I didn't agree with them at first. When the black stars were intorduced I didn't like them, but I understand them more now and actualy prefer them. There are various other changes which have been implemented which I've grown to accept and like.

However, there's something about this year's edition which I can't get on with. In every previous version, I've managed to cobble together a tactic with some degree of success, not always immediately but after a couple of saves I'll have figured something out. This year, I can't find anything. I've tried a multitude of different setups, I've followed the advice on the forums, I've been using Cleon's posession thread to deepen my understanding of the game and I still can't get anything going. I've had CL sides struggling to get off the bottom of the table, I've had little celebrations when I've reached a point where my points are higher than my games played.

I think this year's game has done something I haven't noticed before, it's becoming unplayable without a considerable understanding of how the tactical systems within the game work. Something that's especially punishing given the lack of information provided in game.  I used to look to the game as something that was fun and relaxing, that I could switch off (mostly) for, but its gotten to a point where I feel like I'm trying harder to win one single match than I am at work (I do have a basic job but hey). It's almost as if I'm having to study to be able to access any form of enjoyment from the game. Now I know other games have elements that punish you for not fully understanding how aspects work, but I've never had to study like I have for this. 

Now I'm not saying that any old tactics should work, there obviously has to be a degree of the tactic making sense for it to work in game. In previous games, I feel like there were a number of tactics that combined with the right instructions could work with any team. This year, it seems like the game has shifted to a more restricted group of succesful tactics which takes away the ability to play the way you want to as such. Maybe I am going about it in completely the wrong way, but to be so poor tactically across so many saves doesnt sound that way to me.

[KlaaZ]

The game is not restricting you to a few tactics, but it is indeed impossible to make a given tactic work with any team because you'll always be depending on the players (and their specific qualities) at your disposal and the way your opponents play. You could always head over to the tactics forum, make a thread with your tactic and what you see going wrong and people will be sure to help you. But yes, plug and play is pretty much dead (although I've been playing the same tactic for the past 1,5 seasons and am still doing remarkably well).

[Soninho]

Many players have felt like this in every version of FM.. It was this way for me on FM16, and only managed one save where I was as succesfull as I had set the goal. Also the only save where my tactics worked the way I intended and I could tweak them as I wanted with good results..

Still enjoying fm but it's pushing my patience in many of the ways you describe..

I went to t&t forum for advice and it led me somewhat in the right direction. Good luck to you..!

[dieu]

Try watching Rashidis Bust the net youtube channel. 

You will find a lot of useful tips and tricks there.

[sporadicsmiles]

4 hours ago, thomas166 said:

This year, I can't find anything. I've tried a multitude of different setups

If you are using many different systems, chopping and changing frequently, and playing a tactic without any clear concept of why, do you really expect it to work? 

4 hours ago, thomas166 said:

Now I know other games have elements that punish you for not fully understanding how aspects work, but I've never had to study like I have for this. 

It is mostly a little bit of common sense. I get the feeling you are overthinking things here. I will elaborate on that.

 

4 hours ago, thomas166 said:

I feel like there were a number of tactics that combined with the right instructions could work with any team. This year, it seems like the game has shifted to a more restricted group of succesful tactics which takes away the ability to play the way you want to as such

Like I said before, there is no reason there should be a tactic which works with every club. You need to have the right players to play in a certain way. Stoke after the promotion could not play like Barcelona of the same era, for example. No matter how much Pulis could have wanted to play Tiki Taka, he could never have done it with those players. The same works for FM. If you want to base play around a winger, you need a good winger. If you want an advanced playmaker pulling strings, and creating chances, you need a good player to play there. Such examples are infinite, and the moral of the story is to play how you can play.

On the over complicating things. Do not go too deeply into things to start. You need an idea for how you want to play, a shape that fits your players, and then watch games. Are you playing as you like? If not, make (a limited number) of changes and see if it improves. My current tactic uses only 2 TIs, and I have won 3 premier league titles in a row. Why? I watched the game, I changed what individual players did until they did what I wanted. I had a lot of teething problems along the way, including not being able to win away to save my life. I played with how to counter the other team as well as focusing on how to enforce my own way. It takes patience, but it is rewarding. The other thing to remember is that sometimes the AI is just going to counter you effectively and have a good game. You will lose, and you have to learn from it. That means analysing what other teams do, and working out how to counter it. An example, I noticed I struggle against teams who press me high up the pitch and use attacking wing backs. After some playing around (and a lot of defeats against good teams), I worked out if I bypass my midfield, have wide players in the space the fullbacks have vacated, I could counter reasonably well. It does not always work, but we are in the game. I will probably improve more.

The second thing people do not really consider is the players you buy. Do not focus on CA and PA, focus on the attributes. If a player has attributes to succeed, then he is a good player regardless of CA or PA. For example, I have a left winger who is probably one of the best players in his position in the world on form. His CA is 143 (as is his PA). He works well in my team because of his high work rate, teamwork, determination (something my players require as I like my front players to close down), He is also quick, with good first touch, excellent crossing, and is a natural left footed winger. He is a key member of my team, and I do have better players than him if you look at their entire attribute set en masse. The moral here is not just to sign the best players you can, but to sign the right player for how you want to play.

I do realise that the things I have said to you here are all kinda proving your point that you cannot just play and win, as in some previous versions. You definitely do have to put in a little work to have success (I disagree you have to be an expert in tactics, because I am certainly no Cleon or Rashidi). If that is not for you, then I guess I cannot convince you otherwise. I just hope I can inspire you to get back into the game. I do hope you manage to rediscover your enjoyment.

[jujigatame]

I actually think the importance of tactics is somewhat overstated. As long as your tactic is reasonably balanced, i think the quality, fitness, and morale of your players is the most important thing.

I also think the effect of luck tends to be understated. Any time you start a game, theres a non-trivial chance you will lose. Theres a tendency anytime a few games in a row go badly to blame tactics. Sometimes its just bad luck and if you replayed the same games over again with the same tactics youd win them all.

[cns180784]

34 minutes ago, sporadicsmiles said:

If you are using many different systems, chopping and changing frequently, and playing a tactic without any clear concept of why, do you really expect it to work? 

It is mostly a little bit of common sense. I get the feeling you are overthinking things here. I will elaborate on that.

 

Like I said before, there is no reason there should be a tactic which works with every club. You need to have the right players to play in a certain way. Stoke after the promotion could not play like Barcelona of the same era, for example. No matter how much Pulis could have wanted to play Tiki Taka, he could never have done it with those players. The same works for FM. If you want to base play around a winger, you need a good winger. If you want an advanced playmaker pulling strings, and creating chances, you need a good player to play there. Such examples are infinite, and the moral of the story is to play how you can play.

On the over complicating things. Do not go too deeply into things to start. You need an idea for how you want to play, a shape that fits your players, and then watch games. Are you playing as you like? If not, make (a limited number) of changes and see if it improves. My current tactic uses only 2 TIs, and I have won 3 premier league titles in a row. Why? I watched the game, I changed what individual players did until they did what I wanted. I had a lot of teething problems along the way, including not being able to win away to save my life. I played with how to counter the other team as well as focusing on how to enforce my own way. It takes patience, but it is rewarding. The other thing to remember is that sometimes the AI is just going to counter you effectively and have a good game. You will lose, and you have to learn from it. That means analysing what other teams do, and working out how to counter it. An example, I noticed I struggle against teams who press me high up the pitch and use attacking wing backs. After some playing around (and a lot of defeats against good teams), I worked out if I bypass my midfield, have wide players in the space the fullbacks have vacated, I could counter reasonably well. It does not always work, but we are in the game. I will probably improve more.

The second thing people do not really consider is the players you buy. Do not focus on CA and PA, focus on the attributes. If a player has attributes to succeed, then he is a good player regardless of CA or PA. For example, I have a left winger who is probably one of the best players in his position in the world on form. His CA is 143 (as is his PA). He works well in my team because of his high work rate, teamwork, determination (something my players require as I like my front players to close down), He is also quick, with good first touch, excellent crossing, and is a natural left footed winger. He is a key member of my team, and I do have better players than him if you look at their entire attribute set en masse. The moral here is not just to sign the best players you can, but to sign the right player for how you want to play.

I do realise that the things I have said to you here are all kinda proving your point that you cannot just play and win, as in some previous versions. You definitely do have to put in a little work to have success (I disagree you have to be an expert in tactics, because I am certainly no Cleon or Rashidi). If that is not for you, then I guess I cannot convince you otherwise. I just hope I can inspire you to get back into the game. I do hope you manage to rediscover your enjoyment.

100% agree with this and i can see how you won those premier league titles, who did you win them with and did you win then straight away with three on the bounce? i'm like you in that i watch my games and see where things are going wrong and right and look to make little tweaks here and there as the game is progressing. In my save i'm doing i was sacked by Villa after 25 games and looking back now i have a better idea of what i should have done. I got offered the vacant Notts County job in League 2 and have yet to lose in 9 games i've managed them for, 6 wins and 3 draws taking them from 6 points off relegation to 5 points off the playoffs and its very rewarding. I always go over the opposition scout report and check out data analysis to help me decide how best to play. 

With Notts County i started off playing a narrow flat 433 mostly playing on the counter with a structured shape. I then signed a quality attacking mid who was at an amateur Italian club so signed him on a free without paying compensation (was a great find). This was all down to an Italian scout that i signed and he recommended this guy in his first report when i signed him. I then changed to a 4231 wide and looking at my team strengths, with first touch being one of them (which the AM i signed improved even more on) i decided to play a shorter passing game playing higher up the pitch with a fluid team shape. The boards expectations were a mid table finish but i want the playoffs and with the form we're in and being only 5 points off the playoffs with 11 games left, its easily possible.

[rinso]

When you start a game, what setup do you go for, and what leagues? Do you go for things you're familiar with? Try going out of the comfort zone and trying something new, where you dont have such a clear idea of who the winner should be.

I have one formation that i have used with 2 setups, home n away, from the start of the game and im now into 2033 still managing the same club, Dartford, but we are challenging for the PL title... 

I'd also ask if you have tried FMT? its a lot less in depth... 

[cns180784]

2 hours ago, rinso said:

When you start a game, what setup do you go for, and what leagues? Do you go for things you're familiar with? Try going out of the comfort zone and trying something new, where you dont have such a clear idea of who the winner should be.

I have one formation that i have used with 2 setups, home n away, from the start of the game and im now into 2033 still managing the same club, Dartford, but we are challenging for the PL title... 

I'd also ask if you have tried FMT? its a lot less in depth... 

Dartford challenging for the PL title lol. The game is the most realistic of any Football Manager game you can get but still...not 100% realistic lol.

[rinso]

2 minutes ago, cns180784 said:

Dartford challenging for the PL title lol. The game is the most realistic of any Football Manager game you can get but still...not 100% realistic lol.

In 2033 how do you know what is realistic? If you do, please tell me some winning lottery numbers...

[cns180784]

59 minutes ago, rinso said:

In 2033 how do you know what is realistic? If you do, please tell me some winning lottery numbers...

Fair enough i didnt realize it was in 2033. Still Datford who have existed since 1888 have never even got into the Football League so for you to get them to the PL is monumental. How long did it take?

[Svenc]

7 hours ago, jujigatame said:

I actually think the importance of tactics is somewhat overstated. As long as your tactic is reasonably balanced, i think the quality, fitness, and morale of your players is the most important thing.

I also think the effect of luck tends to be understated. Any time you start a game, theres a non-trivial chance you will lose. Theres a tendency anytime a few games in a row go badly to blame tactics. Sometimes its just bad luck and if you replayed the same games over again with the same tactics youd win them all.

Top drawer this. This would only ever change if SI wouldn't try to sim football, a team sports where the most common win margins are by plus one to two goals from 90 minutes matches. One of the problems is that in parts due to missing/lacking feedback, players oft can't pinpoint if something was influenced by tactics in the first place. Apart of random chance, the fixture list already influences runs. This goes down to the most basic level. What, very simply put, does a tactical plan help with? That is apart of trying to play into a team's strength and hiding its weaknesses. Depending on the balance, it a) forces the opponent to have little to poor attempts less likely to be converted by denying space and b) creates attacking space for a bigger chance of your team to convert. Unfortunately a lot of the stats and match report feedback is just missing out on half the stuff, and on a subjective level players are oft awful at estimating how decent a shot was (partly fueled by lack of real-life football data knowledge, which is tried to be mirrored in-game, partly by the influence of Fifa on the perception. Partly, naturally also due to limited visuals. Add to this bad theory, including that AI would "crack" tactics, and presto.

There's two exceptions:

- a download tactics that exploits AI/ME -- player quality doesn't matter much, to generalize, historically you'll have a team full of Thomas Müllers appearing into unmarked spaces even if they aren't Thomas Müller; they're released on any version and see you win leagues to competing for the top spots with poor sides by not contributing overly much
- to a much lesser extent, your decision making being that superior to AI that you have a significant edge they can't compete against on basic levels (i.e. some few tactical mods - my argument is and has always been that you won't need half the knowledge "taught" in the tactical forums to outperform AI). Won't make you win the EPL by picking WBA first season and hitting continue though. This approach will additionally require a steady learning experience, rather than granting instant gratification, which is the crux of the matter and one of the root causes why FM's player base has pretty much always been split into two camps roughly on the "tactics" front
 

[State Machine]

7 hours ago, jujigatame said:

I actually think the importance of tactics is somewhat overstated. As long as your tactic is reasonably balanced, i think the quality, fitness, and morale of your players is the most important thing.

I also think the effect of luck tends to be understated. Any time you start a game, theres a non-trivial chance you will lose. Theres a tendency anytime a few games in a row go badly to blame tactics. Sometimes its just bad luck and if you replayed the same games over again with the same tactics youd win them all.

As do I...

This is my first post on the forum. I'm a yank, so football is not natural to me... Meaning my analysis will not be based on a lifetime of deep immersion in the rl game...

I played FM09 and FM12 a lot. I've just recently bought FM17, and am playing it obsessively. I've observed (in FM09, FM12, FM17) that team morale is the most critical factor in the game. That it is there is a "deus ex machina" factor - the higher team morale, the more likely a positive result will occur regardless of anything (tactics, talent, etc.), and the lower the team morale, the more likely a negative result will occur regardless of anything. I generally define "luck" as one's current team morale. This is a great abstraction since it seems to simulate that winning begets more winning and losing begets more losing - matching the real life performance of champions, or over/under performing teams.

But, it is maddening as a player, if you are aware of it... Press conferences, player interactions, etc, team talks, become an exercise in maintaining/raising team morale.

All that said, to the OP's original point. I''ve become more and more sophisticated tactically by making simple adjustments (ie random experiments) that have helped. As OP mentions FM17 seems more "restrictive" - perhaps, but I've made several adjustments over 1/2 of my first season (as Blackburn in Championship) that have worked quite nicely. I have an excellent defensive team that is mostly incompetent offensively, but I've sorted roles (and Retain Possession has helped enormously), to make my side edge many games...

Cheers,

State

[Svenc]

1 hour ago, State Machine said:

I played FM09 and FM12 a lot. I've just recently bought FM17, and am playing it obsessively. I've observed (in FM09, FM12, FM17) that team morale is the most critical factor in the game. That it is there is a "deus ex machina" factor - the higher team morale, the more likely a positive result will occur regardless of anything (tactics, talent, etc.)

Which is true and prob how it should be, however concerning morale being the "most critical" factor bit:

Try it again by having all your players on a defend duty who stay behind the ball in possession, except for a lone forward who is on attack, and have the other guys belting the ball to him. Or when fielding the jumping reach 5 guy as a lone Target Men with lots of float crosses encouraged to him. Those may be a bit obvious but there is a reason why there is so much rage posts venting about why the bottom table AI has it so easy to score against players, with their poor forwards not having scored in 10 matches finding the net. The game isn't as reductionist that it's primarily about a) b) c). The realistic order is like this, provided what jujigatame has said is covered (that "balance"): 1) player quality 2) tactical decisions/match management 3) man management. Man management rubs off some on a player's ability/motivation, and that ability can decide matches in itself (the more consistently made dribbles from top dribblers being the more obvious). However, the space that would open up or be denied, the positioning etc. that is all primarily tactical. Tactics can make it harder to score for the best of players -- they can make it  easy to score for the bottom worst opponents. "It's your tactics!" has become a knee-jerk response to everything, but oft it's true.

There is another factor in man management, which is the focus of the players (all of which less in your face if you don't watch assistant feedback in particular). Giving loads of pats on the back, same as winning, has the mood flying in the dressing room, but can also lead to complacency. This is directly from the horses mouth: Even with poor morale throughout, a much better team would still be considered strong favorites (can't find the post anymore). Traditionally, the way "morale" can be seen as like the deciding factor, same as talks, is if you either haven't found coherent ways yet to shift the odds some otherwise -- or because you're never doing it to begin with (plug'n'play tactic players tended to report back with that kind of feedback). In the same vein, some of the tactical mods will argue with you that it is a close to zero-factor, because their match reading/decisions is that superior to AI that it doesn't affect them much. In that sense your subjective experience is totally genuine and not in doubt, but it's not how the game is necessarily set up. :-)
 

[thomas166]

Didn't expect such a response

I've done an abundance of saves with BMG, Lazio, Barcelona, PSG, Southampton, Coventry, a few random teams. I've tried about 3 different saves in particular with BMG (predicted 6th place finish) each lasting a season, using different tactics on each one and tweaking them as we go. But every save is the same, pre season everythings going swimmingly and then we hit the league fixtures and every time they just collapse. I agree morale and what not play a factor, I've used the in game editor to put these to their max for 5 or 6 games in a row and I'll maybe win one. Two out of the three first seasons I've been relegated, and the other one we were two places above relegation.

I've tried using the tactics forum and the last couple of times I've tried it's just been ignored which is annoying. I still regularly read other threads on there to pick up little bits and pieces but I still feel like I'm fighting a losing battle on this edition

[sirgiorgio]

The reason why I like FM17 so much is that it is quite easy to "understand" the ME... It took me a couple of false starts (make it 10 ) but I finally realized that what you watch on the screen actually means something. That's a huge step forward compared to the last 3 or 4 editions.

I always liked to play with "control" mentality, close down more, tighter marking. But I noticed that most of the goals I conceded came from:

1. Long range passes / killer balls / balls over the top / call-em-what-you-will. I removed close down more and tighter marking, but it made things worse, if possible, so I went to "standard" mentality (whatever it means...);

2. Possession lost because one of my player decided to dribble past every opponent on the pitch. I went with "dribble less".

3. Possession lost because one of my player decided to pass the ball to an invisible teammate. I went with "shorter passing".

Now, how am I going to score goals with a standard mentality, dribble less and shorter passing? With higher tempo!

Now I am defensively solid and I score enough goals to win matches. 

If something doesn't go as planned I can either blame my players (that's why the God of Football created subs) or simply change some role/duty: from fullback to wingback, from support to attack, and so on. I don't win every match because it's impossible to do so, but my teams play exactly how I want them to play, and they overperform to say the least. The formation (442, 4231, 433...) is almost irrelevant, as long as you keep the right combinations (for instance, an attacking fullback and an inside forward).

[Dr. Hook]

4 hours ago, thomas166 said:

I've tried using the tactics forum and the last couple of times I've tried it's just been ignored which is annoying.

Come on now, be honest here. You posted a thread on how to save your season and got several responses, as have your posts in the art of possession thread. It's fine if you didn't feel like you were helped any, but to say you were ignored is not right.

[Wavelberry]

I'm surprised that you're finding the Art of Possession not working for you as I've used it a lot and got it working up and down the pyramid (with a few tweaks positionally). It's still a very sound tactic (but you have to make sure you have some attacking outlets).

[s1111]

4 hours ago, thomas166 said:

Didn't expect such a response

I've done an abundance of saves with BMG, Lazio, Barcelona, PSG, Southampton, Coventry, a few random teams. I've tried about 3 different saves in particular with BMG (predicted 6th place finish) each lasting a season, using different tactics on each one and tweaking them as we go. But every save is the same, pre season everythings going swimmingly and then we hit the league fixtures and every time they just collapse. I agree morale and what not play a factor, I've used the in game editor to put these to their max for 5 or 6 games in a row and I'll maybe win one. Two out of the three first seasons I've been relegated, and the other one we were two places above relegation.

I've tried using the tactics forum and the last couple of times I've tried it's just been ignored which is annoying. I still regularly read other threads on there to pick up little bits and pieces but I still feel like I'm fighting a losing battle on this edition

To be brutally honest that BMG tactic I can see in that thread, which plays as a 4-2-4 with no holding midfielder, trying to play possession, highly structured, close down much more etc, just looks like a complete mess of different ideas with no coherent logic behind it all. It's so crazily open it must gift 5 or 6 or more clear chances a game, then you're trying to keep possession when you've completely vacated central midfield.

It's clear you've tried to copy some of the elements of Cleon's Art of Possession but missed the most basic fact that Cleon uses a formation that suits that style of play, while you've tried to crowbar in an ultra attacking shape into a style that requires numbers in central midfield to hold on to the ball.

Then the 4-2-3-1 at the top of the thread, you've got a neat technical central midfield with two playmakers, but the rest of your attacking plan centres around direct passing, early crosses with 2 Wingers towards a lone striker with 7 jumping 9 heading. And defensively you use an attacking formation, but on Counter mentality, then add much more closing down! 

The game isn't hard, you just have to apply some basic footballing logic and understand that you need a coherent plan, that each part of a tactic (formation, mentality, roles, duties, shape, instructions etc) works in partnership with the other parts to construct that plan, and that you need players that suit the job you are asking them to do.

[State Machine]

21 hours ago, Svenc said:

There is another factor in man management, which is the focus of the players (all of which less in your face if you don't watch assistant feedback in particular). Giving loads of pats on the back, same as winning, has the mood flying in the dressing room, but can also lead to complacency. This is directly from the horses mouth: Even with poor morale throughout, a much better team would still be considered strong favorites (can't find the post anymore). Traditionally, the way "morale" can be seen as like the deciding factor, same as talks, is if you either haven't found coherent ways yet to shift the odds some otherwise -- or because you're never doing it to begin with (plug'n'play tactic players tended to report back with that kind of feedback). In the same vein, some of the tactical mods will argue with you that it is a close to zero-factor, because their match reading/decisions is that superior to AI that it doesn't affect them much. In that sense your subjective experience is totally genuine and not in doubt, but it's not how the game is necessarily set up. :-)
 

I'll highlight this bit. In FM09 and FM12 I ran several teams for decades and never had complacency issues. While being highly complimentary to my players... No matter, and just an aside. (and btw premature in my FM17 experience where players are complaining about hearing the same talks over and over again - so I do some variation and challenge them - oops, two bad losses in a row :D)

I have a general question about man-management that I'll leave for some other time.

To you and S111 and others... I form my team based on abilities, not star ratings. Though I use the star ratings as tie-breakers and such. I create tactics that are mostly generalized - I observe how things work, and make changes - some that are counter-intuitive like using Control for defense. OP seems to be trying to get "magic" instantly - for him I'll relate that some of my more offensive powerhouse teams have had mostly defensive tactics...

Cheers,

State

[Jibby123]

It is what it is. The game is well established and I've loved it since old Championship Manager days before they changed franchise. It does keep getting better, and this version is probably the least needing 'patches' I can remember from any version.

BUT.....the business model of releasing a new version every 12 month and then charging full price imvho is not worth the £/$'s for what extra you get on the previous year's version. Especially as you can get community led transfer updates etc (or do them yourself in the editor).

SI the publisher have made it clear that they can't/won't get away from that annual release business plan but £20-30+ for an annual update is down to you whether it's worth it. For me it's not. Maybe buy it every 2-3 years to see real bang for your buck in improvements?

Tactics wise it's more complex than ever and if I were a new player to the game I am not sure I'd cope. It's a massive (and brutal) steep learning curve as it's so in-depth. And sometimes things can go wrong for your team without knowing why unless you're deeply in to the game. There's a balance of realism or fun, and again that's for you to decide. One person's poison is another's pleasure etc.

[thomas166]

To be clear, I meant no disrespect to the people on the forums who have offered advice, and it's not the forums that I have a problem with, they've greatly helped my understanding of the game. I guess its just the frustration of feeling that everything I'm trying isn't working, whether I go simple or complex. I'll porbably give the demo a go next year and see how that goes.

[Cougar2010]

25 minutes ago, Jibby123 said:

BUT.....the business model of releasing a new version every 12 month and then charging full price imvho is not worth the £/$'s for what extra you get on the previous year's version. Especially as you can get community led transfer updates etc (or do them yourself in the editor).

SI the publisher have made it clear that they can't/won't get away from that annual release business plan but £20-30+ for an annual update is down to you whether it's worth it. For me it's not. Maybe buy it every 2-3 years to see real bang for your buck in improvements?
 

Yet again another post referring to the price of FM.

This seems to be a recurring complaint atm and while I understand the basic issue of paying for something when you have something else that is similar we are talking about £20-£35 a year here (Maybe more in other countries).

Overall though its such an insignificant amount compared to other things you spend money on that it seems to be blown out of proportion.

To put it into perspective its 3-4 hours of work at minimum wage in the UK, 2 hours work at the average wage, 6-10 pints of beer, a meal for two, a trip to the cinema for two.  Basically its often less than the cost of one night out but gives you many more nights of enjoyment.

 

Hmmm that sounds harsh on you Jibby, wasn't intended to be totally directed at you and I respect your choice to buy it every few years

 

[Jibby123]

1 minute ago, Cougar2010 said:

Yet again another post referring to the price of FM.

This seems to be a recurring complaint atm and while I understand the basic issue of paying for something when you have something else that is similar we are talking about £20-£35 a year here (Maybe more in other countries).

Overall though its such an insignificant amount compared to other things you spend money on that it seems to be blown out of proportion.

To put it into perspective its 3-4 hours of work at minimum wage in the UK, 2 hours work at the average wage, 6-10 pints of beer, a meal for two, a trip to the cinema for two.  Basically its often less than the cost of one night out but gives you many more nights of enjoyment.

 

Hmmm that sounds harsh on you Jibby, wasn't intended to be totally directed at you and I respect your choice to buy it every few years

 

Fair point. Price per hour of fun is good value. When considered sinking an outlay per pint over the year. I am just not sure you couldn't step in to FM15 and get just as much fun to not justify spending £50-60 since it was released 2 years ago.

That's no bad thing maybe. Victim of their (SI's) own success? It's a personal choice I guess.

 

[heisenburglar]

This happens to me pretty much every FM, usually because I'm just trying to import a tactic from last years, but what usually saves it for me is either

a) Remove all tactical instructions and just set to the formation I want and then turn up the highlight frequency and tweak based on what I see.

or b) read some of the "bloggier" posts on the tactics forum on the formation I want to use and try and understand their success. In my current game I'm using a modified version of the Thames Ironworks (I think Herne?) but it's pointless to just transplant it as Birmingham City don't have their players. There's usually some good analysis on what the shouts do in their system and you can cheery pick the shouts and roles that do/don't suit your style.

Hope you get something to work, it's worth the time when it does (as I'm sure we're all familiar with )

[westy8chimp]

On ‎10‎/‎03‎/‎2017 at 23:16, jujigatame said:

I also think the effect of luck tends to be understated. Any time you start a game, theres a non-trivial chance you will lose. Theres a tendency anytime a few games in a row go badly to blame tactics. Sometimes its just bad luck and if you replayed the same games over again with the same tactics youd win them all.

As you say you can play the same game, with the same tactics and turn a 2-0 defeat into a 4-0 win.

When my brother and I play a network game... perhaps 4 or 5 times a season we will have a crash. We save weekly, so the most we lose is 1 or 2 matches each. Now to make the game as fair as possible we try to replay those games and get the same result (win lose or draw... not the scoreline). If you won 4-0 ... you have to accept winning 1-0 when we reload... as long as you don't also suffer a long term injury etc.

The thing is we've spent up to 2 hours just replaying 1 game each to try and get the same result. That can be 30 odd attempts at it...

That to me says the formula for luck % is quite high in relation to everything else that goes into the ME calculations. One of the biggest selling points now is the number of decisions per second the ME can make... but maybe it's also becoming detrimental.

If I've created a team of superstars and my tactic is sound and balanced... I don't particularly like that I can win 4-0 one time.. reload the game, play again and lose. Never mind getting the same scoreline..

[HUNT3R]

That's quite far off the mark. No two matches are the same. In addition, you may not change anything, but the AI still does, so that alone makes matches different.

[westy8chimp]

it's exactly on the mark. we've done it.. I know that once you start the game it can all change. But in principle it shouldn't change so often. Lets say the pre game variables .. my players, their attributes, their form, my tactic etc... everything pre-game... im better. I'm Paris with a great squad in form with a balanced tactic. I win 4-0...

Reload where the save it just before kick off.. the AI lineup same 11, same tactic ... so everything pre game is identical.

I may lose that game. Now yes stuff will happen during the game which change it's course. So I wouldn't expect same score line or even same result every time... but if all the pre game variables are heavily in my favour ... I would expect to win say 7/10 reloads... or 8/10 .. but I can load it 10 times and get a real mish mash of results and scores.

[HUNT3R]

19 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

it's exactly on the mark. we've done it.. I know that once you start the game it can all change. But in principle it shouldn't change so often. Lets say the pre game variables .. my players, their attributes, their form, my tactic etc... everything pre-game... im better. I'm Paris with a great squad in form with a balanced tactic. I win 4-0...

Reload where the save it just before kick off.. the AI lineup same 11, same tactic ... so everything pre game is identical.

I may lose that game. Now yes stuff will happen during the game which change it's course. So I wouldn't expect same score line or even same result every time... but if all the pre game variables are heavily in my favour ... I would expect to win say 7/10 reloads... or 8/10 .. but I can load it 10 times and get a real mish mash of results and scores.

You'll need many, many attempts to draw any sort of conclusion just based on a single match. Your point about the network game was a poor one as there were far too many variables to make any judgement.

4 matches, each being a different match each time it is played, each with different tactics that we don't know how open they are and with 4 AI managers who will make changes based on how the game goes.

You can maybe make a fairly decent comparison up to half-time, because not too much will change, but after that, there will be subs made and tactics changed definitely.

[gerry58]

So this could be the 'end' for FM because you don't know how to win? LOL

[eriktous]

58 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

The thing is we've spent up to 2 hours just replaying 1 game each to try and get the same result. That can be 30 odd attempts at it...

 

40 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

Reload where the save it just before kick off.. the AI lineup same 11, same tactic ... so everything pre game is identical.

I may lose that game. Now yes stuff will happen during the game which change it's course. So I wouldn't expect same score line or even same result every time... but if all the pre game variables are heavily in my favour ... I would expect to win say 7/10 reloads... or 8/10 .. but I can load it 10 times and get a real mish mash of results and scores.

Just looking at the small sample size in this one specific case, shouldn't the conclusion be that you were only expected to win that particular game 2 or 3 times out of ten instead of the other way around, and you got lucky initially by getting one of the less likely results?

[westy8chimp]

2 minutes ago, eriktous said:

 

Just looking at the small sample size in this one specific case, shouldn't the conclusion be that you were only expected to win that particular game 2 or 3 times out of ten instead of the other way around, and you got lucky initially by getting one of the less likely results?

no we network with the best teams so we are always challenging each other in most amount of cups possible. We've tried starting lower down... but a few seasons in you can be playing in different leagues and cups so basically becomes two very slow single player games.

It's more like we both win our game and we are top 2 fighting it out and every point matters... we save before kick off every Saturday because of the crashes we get ... so if we both win... we would reload until we both win again. I would accept all the in game variables and the % chance variables making it so the result and scoreline changes... but my feeling is it's a little too much.

i.e. yes my striker may score a hatrick first time round and play a 10 ... then the next time miss a few early chances, lose confidence and play a 5. And that corner where the AI hit the post... maybe they score in first 5 mins. BUT... there are a lot of pre game variables that should lead to me wining 70+% of the time... or are we saying in game luck outweighs your players and tactics?

if we miss two games... we would obviously just save after we get the correct results from the first game... so the sample is just 2 matches ... not 4.

[westy8chimp]

if you remember in CM days and early FMs networking was quite difficult... we used to download Hamachi and play through that but crash frequently... it was never an issue.. because the game was fairly easy.. you build a great squad and tactic and you will win 90% of your games... so if we had to reload it was a minor issue ... maybe 1-5 attempts max

now it can take a whole session (1-2 hrs, 1-20... or even 30 attempts) just to replicate one scenario (2 matches).

it's not a major criticism just an observation that maybe not enough weight these days to what you do as a manager all the time up to kick off.

The match should be a result of all the work you do building up to the match. Of course you need to observe and tweak...and luck will play a part ...

But you have studied the opponents players and tactics, you've highlighted their weaknesses and strengths and made sure your tactic is appropriate ... you've got better players ... they've trained well, on form motivated for the game ...

Step out on the field... you dominate the ball... creating chances left right and centre... 1-0 up... AI attack... you adjust... hit them hard and fast 2-0... now they are deflated, don't know if they are coming or going... you hit them again and again 3-0 4-0 ... HT you are happy they are deflated... second half peters out they contain you control FT 4-0 happy days... adulation congratula *CRASH*

reload...

you have studied the opponents players and tactics, you've highlighted their weaknesses and strengths and made sure your tactic is appropriate ... you've got better players ... they've trained well, on form motivated for the game ...

Step out on the field... you dominate the ball... creating chances left right and centre ... striker is clean through ... oh no he hits the post, AI counter and score 0-1. Now they shut up shop, delighted to hang on for 80 mins ... you attack, up the tempo, they hit again 2-0. HT you get stuck into the team aggressively! early reaction from the lads 1-2 ... but the equaliser just won't come... you go to overload ... they score 1 more just to rub it in FT 1-3

Fine... let's try again ... and it's just completely different scores and results and between us we cant both win our game, at the same time, for over an hour ... in that time you've seen 4-0, 1-3, 2-2, 2-0, 7-1, 0-0, 3-1, 0-2 etc etc ...

 

[herne79]

I think we're a little off the original topic here, but in terms of reloading games to get the same (or similar) result:- instead of focusing on the same set up pre-match, what are you doing during a match to get the same result?

Focus on adapting during a match (if needed) and you can practically eliminate this so-called "luck" element, and it won't take you 2 hours either.

[sirgiorgio]

I've done my share of reloading so I'm not criticizing anyone, but in my experience "bad luck" or inconsistent results are mostly the effect of unbalanced tactics. For instance, a set-up that works wonders if you score early goals, but fails miserably when you don't. Attacking tactics are designed to score a lot of goals, but that works for the opponents, too... Ditto for devensive tactics: I pat my back because I haven't conceded in three matches, but what happens when I'm down 1-0 and I don't have a plan B? I may reload the match until I get the result that I want, but that won't solve the problem in the long run.

Unfortunately, you have almost no control over the AI, and sometimes their tactics are ridicously unbalanced, in one way or the other. I do my best trying to exploit their weaknesses, but it's not always easy when you don't even know what their strenghts are! 

Once upon a time I modified the DB to have "realistic" tactics for each and every team in the league I was playing... it didn't last long: one manager was sacked, and there came the newly-appointed genius playing 343 narrow! or 433 narrow! or 541 with fullbacks! I literally shiver when I think about 451 flat!

[Svenc]

Re: "Randomness". Ever heard about punditry going through matches post-match and thinking, well if they would have converted this, this could have been a totally different game. Ever doing the same with your buds. If they didn't get that peno here, they would have probably been out of the tie. How did that ten minutes mental collapse come about in that Brazil-Ger match, didn't Brazil start that match with having some half-decent attacks themselves. As reloads are technically re-runs from kick-off, I see it like that. Every opportunity that is there, that's basically under the hood a weighted dice roll. Obviously some opportunity has a higher likelyhood of getting converted, some less so, and if this were realistic, attempts that have a significant chance of conversion above 50% would be ultra rare (most one on ones fall clearly beneath that). Bit of a difference between a tap-in into an empty goal and a shot from yards out. Player attributes et all would factor into this some, but data analysis suggests less so than the type of chance (which is one of the reason why in football too there's always bad teams really struggling having some of the best conversion stats -- fewer chances, but a higher percentage being in space/on the break). However whilst the gap is fairly large, there is a chance of conversion/missing on anything. I lost a match in the fifth tier where the team conceded 3 dfks once.

As a goal triggers a tactical change almost every time for AI managers, who can go from sitting half their team behind the ball to doing the polar opposite, it speaks to reason that the run of play shifts things quite a bit. Whether that is too random is for anybody to discuss. However, in real football you'd appreciate all of the above, and the game would fail if it would work fundamentally different to it. We have to take the word for it that the tactics was reasonably balanced too, as you might face a different situation when the opposition takes the lead than what you face when your own side does. Is it balanced enough that it creates enough movement even against AI that takes that lead and just sits back in the oft extreme ways it does, increasing the likelyhood to get back into things. Is it balanced enough to recognize when that possible formation switch at HT suddenly plays into direct weaknesses of yours. Is the root cause for the randomness caused by tactics in the first place! We also have to take the word that " creating chances left right and centre ...  " before the opening is finally found or isn't is genuine and not only based on the game's simple and flawed and missing stats, and perception playing its tricks (see my observation about FM players and their relative judgment of shots in my first post). The general thing here is that one side manages matches either way, and if you can't do that properly, everything is far more random. In that reload scenario, if you would have the better side, and enjoy regularly flukes, rather than seeing it winning most of the time, there is something seriously going on.

This has been the case in FM 2007, and should be the case on here. Unfortunately, ME niggles may naturally always play well into it, but they'd be visible, and (mostly) manageable. I've done reloads myself in the past couple years, and in parts due to ME niggles, to me personally FM is to a degree more predictable than football by wide, wide margins. Of course RL football doesn't deal in reloads... but I doubt you could start a season as a manager going into this and going like, right I want to get at least 6, 7 0-0 draws out of the first 10 matches for the giggles and be able to actually do it every time (without reloading anything). Or going half a season without conceding a goal past the 75 mark as you give the AI some of its own medicine and sit half your team behind the ball upon taking leads. And that's just my basic FM end of things. How about Rashidi having beat random chance on prior editions entirelly, going hundreds of matches unbeaten. That's down to his being not that bad at what he does. But it is likewise something to do with the game and AI being more predictable than football for hella sure! To me that would be a weakness, as I enjoy the "sim" aspect of FM, the ambiguity, and uncertainty that makes sane men pray to the Football Gods before kick-off and make them spending money on horribly mis-matches in the first couple FA Cup rounds as maybe they'd be eye-witnesses of something special. For others, that would be a blessing, and is exactly what they are looking for, which also causes a rift in FM's player base.

 

 

On 12.3.2017 at 06:12, State Machine said:

I'll highlight this bit. In FM09 and FM12 I ran several teams for decades and never had complacency issues. While being highly complimentary to my players... No matter, and just an aside. (and btw premature in my FM17 experience where players are complaining about hearing the same talks over and over again - so I do some variation and challenge them - oops, two bad losses in a row :D)

 

If you praise and give them constant pats on the back, there is complacency though, which can rub off. Just something worth keeping in mind. I.e. Praising a 1-0 against the bottom of table is something else to winning 4-0 at the top team's own ground. :-)

[State Machine]

9 hours ago, Svenc said:

If you praise and give them constant pats on the back, there is complacency though, which can rub off. Just something worth keeping in mind. I.e. Praising a 1-0 against the bottom of table is something else to winning 4-0 at the top team's own ground. :-)

Restricting myself to FM17, and being "modest" in my team talks, my greatest event of the season as Blackburn in Championship so far is to decisively  lose to 24th place Barnsley after running 7 games without a loss (5 wins against top table sides).

 

15 hours ago, herne79 said:

I think we're a little off the original topic here, but in terms of reloading games to get the same (or similar) result:- instead of focusing on the same set up pre-match, what are you doing during a match to get the same result?

Focus on adapting during a match (if needed) and you can practically eliminate this so-called "luck" element, and it won't take you 2 hours either.

OT, I generally play a conservative tactic - slightly attacking or defending. In match, if things are not going well, I might go to the extremes of attacking or defending, depending on the need. With predictable results... I do have a very good defensive team with little offense, but excellent corner and free kick takers make a great difference...

OP seems to want to create reasonable tactics that are successful without going into the details of tactics. My thought is you can play your players generically (tactic-wise) and probably do well within their skills - or you can upgrade your players...

[FootballTrainer]

I think the tactics screen is good already but just needs a couple of more twitches to it since it´s one of the most important parts in winning matches for your team as manager. The only thing I have noticed is that your tactics get picked up on by AI teams very quick and that leads you to needing to change tactics all the time. It´s obvious that in FM the more you change tactics the better, but that´s because i manage smaller teams i am saying that. 

[dieu]

3 minutes ago, FootballTrainer said:

I think the tactics screen is good already but just needs a couple of more twitches to it since it´s one of the most important parts in winning matches for your team as manager. The only thing I have noticed is that your tactics get picked up on by AI teams very quick and that leads you to needing to change tactics all the time. It´s obvious that in FM the more you change tactics the better, but that´s because i manage smaller teams i am saying that. 

Sorry, but the bolded part is incorrect. The AI does not learn your tactic.

[sirgiorgio]

59 minutes ago, FootballTrainer said:

I think the tactics screen is good already but just needs a couple of more twitches to it since it´s one of the most important parts in winning matches for your team as manager. The only thing I have noticed is that your tactics get picked up on by AI teams very quick and that leads you to needing to change tactics all the time. It´s obvious that in FM the more you change tactics the better, but that´s because i manage smaller teams i am saying that. 

I don't know about that. It does take a lot of micro-managing, which is, IMO, realistic, challenging and fun. The fact that you don't have to go 541 contain to keep a 1-0 at home and 145 overload to score late goals is good news.  The team's shape and behaviour can be dramatically changed (for better or worse) with a couple of clicks.

If you feel the AI has "picked up" your tactics, it's probably because they respect you more (or less! depending on your results) than they did at the start of the game/season.

And let's not forget tactical familiarity (it's the same for you and the AI), complacency/nervousness, fitness, fatigue, injuries... Sometimes AI teams underperform simply because their best players are out injured. Of course, they recover just in time to score against our teams. 

At the cost of sounding like a broken record, I believe that the main "tactical" problem is that some AI managers tend to be a bit too extreme in their choices: too conservative, too aggressive, too defensive in the first half and too attacking in the second half, two (or even three!) half-time subs, players underperfoming or tired or injured that won't be subbed and so on.