Football Manager 2018 *Official* Feedback Thread

[roykela]

Just to be clear. I'm not saying there aren't issues. There are definitely issues.
But i haven't seen any major issues i haven't been able to correct myself, by using tactical and player instructions, combined with player duties and roles. Add to that, player PPMs and which player is playing with which teammate etc.
And i am no tactical guru at all. I'm quite rubbish on the tactical side.

I do have goal variety. Pretty much the same as themadsheep2001. Even a backheel, although i don't think that was an intended shot
 

[themadsheep2001]

2 minutes ago, roykela said:

Just to be clear. I'm not saying there aren't issues. There are definitely issues.
But i haven't seen any major issues i haven't been able to correct myself, by using tactical and player instructions, combined with player duties and roles. Add to that, player PPMs and which player is playing with which teammate etc.
And i am no tactical guru at all. I'm quite rubbish on the tactical side.

I do have goal variety. Pretty much the same as themadsheep2001. Even a backheel, although i don't think that was an intended shot
 

Yeah, certainly not saying there are no issues, or no areas to improve. But goal variety and accuracy isn't really an issue in my saves

[aditya]

Have only tested the demo for a few days.

I can only say ME is still an issue but can't deny that there definitely is improvements.

A quick visit to FMSCOUT and I am pleased that 'strikerless tactics' are no longer popular. It shows that the MEis not as bad as it was in previous versions

 

Edited April 2, 2018 by aditya

[gerith]

How the heck do I use TAM in MLS?? I know how it's used in the real world, but can't find a use in FM18 MLS save with the Whitecaps.

[jujigatame]

I just don't get how people can say there aren't issues with shooting accuracy.  The amount of wild, badly missed shots is far beyond anything you'd see IRL.  It isn't a tactic-specific issue, just about every AI-managed club I faced in a 5-season career exhibited the same behavior.

I don't think I even saw 10 DFKs test the keeper in 5 full seasons, for and against my club combined.

[themadsheep2001]

6 hours ago, jujigatame said:

I just don't get how people can say there aren't issues with shooting accuracy.  The amount of wild, badly missed shots is far beyond anything you'd see IRL.  It isn't a tactic-specific issue, just about every AI-managed club I faced in a 5-season career exhibited the same behavior.

I don't think I even saw 10 DFKs test the keeper in 5 full seasons, for and against my club combined.

Because we're not seeing it. You keep saying it's wildly beyond. I assume you have numbers for your shots in game to compare against shots in real life to back it up. 

I can back up my strikers. In game Lukaku is currently converting at 25% of all shots (20 goals in all comps by December), which is not only considerably higher than his real life counterpart (17%) but it's better than Salah (22%). In fact, converting at 1/4 is excellent, higher than that on a long term level is extraordinary (real life Ronaldo and Messi do not convert at those levels)

[kensteidel]

6 hours ago, jujigatame said:

I just don't get how people can say there aren't issues with shooting accuracy.  The amount of wild, badly missed shots is far beyond anything you'd see IRL.  It isn't a tactic-specific issue, just about every AI-managed club I faced in a 5-season career exhibited the same behavior.

I don't think I even saw 10 DFKs test the keeper in 5 full seasons, for and against my club combined.

Well, some people will focus only on the shots on goal statistic, which doesn't fully illustrate the issue here. I dare say that they seem to aim for the corner flag more often than their real life counterparts, even though the shots on goal ratio might be better. Someone with more pedagogical patience than me can probably explain the difference between a shot just outside the goal and a shot that almost hits the corner flag. 

[roykela]

6 hours ago, jujigatame said:

I just don't get how people can say there aren't issues with shooting accuracy.  The amount of wild, badly missed shots is far beyond anything you'd see IRL.  It isn't a tactic-specific issue, just about every AI-managed club I faced in a 5-season career exhibited the same behavior.

I don't think I even saw 10 DFKs test the keeper in 5 full seasons, for and against my club combined.

Have i seen it happen? Absolutely. But certainly not by a wild amount far beyond real life.
In my 14-season career i really haven't seen something that resembles far beyond real life. Neither from my teams nor the AI.

In my game i haven't seen anything out of the ordinary with DFKs. Some goals. Some saves. Some hit the bar or the post. Some are blocked. Some are missed completely.
For clarity's sake, i'm talking about both my teams and the AI.

[themadsheep2001]

3 minutes ago, kensteidel said:

Well, some people will focus only on the shots on goal statistic, which doesn't fully illustrate the issue here. I dare say that they seem to aim for the corner flag more often than their real life counterparts, even though the shots on goal ratio might be better. Someone with more pedagogical patience than me can probably explain the difference between a shot just outside the goal and a shot that almost hits the corner flag. 

He still hasn't fully illustrated the issue himself. How many more are missing badly compared to real life? 10, 15, 60%? Where are the numbers?

No one has said there are no issues, or no areas to improve, but we have few few actual number comparisons

 

[jujigatame]

People have really seen no issues with DFKs?  I recall reading a stat that said that IRL, about 25% of DFKs test the keeper, and about 5% are scored.  In my FM18 career these numbers were much closer to 5% and 2%.

Overall conversion rates may very well be realistic, but statistically, poor shooting accuracy could be masked by a higher percentage of shots coming from short range.  I have no way of collecting this data, but I'm very confident that if you were to measure the number of shots missing the goal by over 10 yards, the amount in FM would vastly exceed the amount IRL.

[themadsheep2001]

17 minutes ago, jujigatame said:

People have really seen no issues with DFKs?  I recall reading a stat that said that IRL, about 25% of DFKs test the keeper, and about 5% are scored.  In my FM18 career these numbers were much closer to 5% and 2%.

Overall conversion rates may very well be realistic, but statistically, poor shooting accuracy could be masked by a higher percentage of shots coming from short range.  I have no way of collecting this data, but I'm very confident that if you were to measure the number of shots missing the goal by over 10 yards, the amount in FM would vastly exceed the amount IRL.

Given as you state, overall conversion rates are realistic, so far there's no evidence to suggest many of the shots that do wildly miss ( and we dont even have numbers on these) should be doing anything other than potentially missing more closely, which would make the misses more asthetically pleasing, but is less of an issue in scheme of the match engine

The only other way to be to qualitatively look at each individual wild shot and check the physics

[jujigatame]

I don't think your conclusion is necessarily supported.  If shooting accuracy is poor, it will affect long shots more than short shots.  This isn't just a matter of aesthetics, it's a matter of balance.  It means that having dangerous shooters firing away from the edge of the box will be an unrealistically ineffectual tactic, while tactics that produce short-range shots (like long balls, wide play, and crossing) will be unrealistically effective.

[forameuss]

39 minutes ago, jujigatame said:

People have really seen no issues with DFKs?  I recall reading a stat that said that IRL, about 25% of DFKs test the keeper, and about 5% are scored.  In my FM18 career these numbers were much closer to 5% and 2%.

Overall conversion rates may very well be realistic, but statistically, poor shooting accuracy could be masked by a higher percentage of shots coming from short range.  I have no way of collecting this data, but I'm very confident that if you were to measure the number of shots missing the goal by over 10 yards, the amount in FM would vastly exceed the amount IRL.

But crucially, SI do.  Which means they either have collected the data - like they do with a lot of aspects of the ME - and deem it to be OK, or they haven't, and are either looking into how to balance things, or require more examples to aid their search and allow them to be able to determine whether all looks good or not.

[jujigatame]

I mean, we know the ME is a delicate balancing act, and it's never going to be as simple as "just making shooting 10% more accurate" or whatever.  Back in FM16 (I think that was the year) people complained that crossing was OP, and SI said that they couldn't quickly correct the issue because it would lead to other imbalances, and I suspect the same is true here.  ME changes have to be holistic or you just end up with the fix being worse than the initial problem.

[themadsheep2001]

42 minutes ago, jujigatame said:

I don't think your conclusion is necessarily supported.  If shooting accuracy is poor, it will affect long shots more than short shots.  This isn't just a matter of aesthetics, it's a matter of balance.  It means that having dangerous shooters firing away from the edge of the box will be an unrealistically ineffectual tactic, while tactics that produce short-range shots (like long balls, wide play, and crossing) will be unrealistically effective.

That would completely depend on how shooting accuracy is impacted, if indeed it is impacted. Impossible to say one would be impacted more than the other without knowing how.

How many long shots are missing that should be scored, or hitting the target?

[themadsheep2001]

59 minutes ago, forameuss said:

But crucially, SI do.  Which means they either have collected the data - like they do with a lot of aspects of the ME - and deem it to be OK, or they haven't, and are either looking into how to balance things, or require more examples to aid their search and allow them to be able to determine whether all looks good or not.

Long shots taken on goal are annoying to collect, though the number of goals is easier.

I've seen the real life figures, and they are very low in terms of conversion rates.

Worked mine out, converting at 6% of shots. United in real life top the table at 7%. The average is 3%

So its not really skewing numbers. But closer misses would at the very least be more asthetically pleasing, and improving the physics model is never a bad thing

[rdbayly]

It doesn't seem to matter which thread I browse, the probability of the discussion reverting to the quality and quantity of shots from distance ends up at 100%. I don't recall such a persistent debate on this issue from previous releases; so I have to believe that a subtle tweak to the TC inputs has produced these ME outputs. It also means that the vast majority of users who are experiencing this problem (including me) have no idea how to fix it. I've trawled the tactics forums and tested the advice to no avail.

Any tactics pitch / analysis tool screenshots from the great and the good who are not experiencing this problem would be most welcomed, because I don't see the discussion progressing beyond "The game is broken v it's your tactics".

 

[themadsheep2001]

5 minutes ago, rdbayly said:

It doesn't seem to matter which thread I browse, the probability of the discussion reverting to the quality and quantity of shots from distance ends up at 100%. I don't recall such a persistent debate on this issue from previous releases; so I have to believe that a subtle tweak to the TC inputs has produced these ME outputs. It also means that the vast majority of users who are experiencing this problem (including me) have no idea how to fix it. I've trawled the tactics forums and tested the advice to no avail.

Any tactics pitch / analysis tool screenshots from the great and the good who are not experiencing this problem would be most welcomed, because I don't see the discussion progressing beyond "The game is broken v it's your tactics".

 

People just fixate on a certain issue every year. There's been no subtle tweak, so lets not let that become misinformation. Also we shouldn't conflate quality and quantity of long shots as one issue.

As for avoid lots of long shots; regardless of formation, my style is about creating and exploiting space with passing or running options. Player tendencies aside, if I'm resorting to long shots, it means my players options have been restricted and my approach is failing

[rdbayly]

12 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

There's been no subtle tweak

Can I just clarify what you mean by this? No changes to the ME code from prior releases, or have I misinterpreted?

[themadsheep2001]

3 minutes ago, rdbayly said:

Can I just clarify what you mean by this? No changes to the ME code from prior releases, or have I misinterpreted?

You have misinterpreted. There's been no subtle tweaks to the TC inputs

[rdbayly]

3 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

You have misinterpreted. There's been no subtle tweaks to the TC inputs

I'll try again then. What about the if there has been a change in way my tactical instructions are interpreted by the ME code in this year's release? is that feasible?

I'm only labouring the point as my tactical approach since the the introduction of the TC has been entirely consistent, and it's only on FM18 I've personally encountered the major issue around long shot selection / accuracy.

[themadsheep2001]

7 minutes ago, rdbayly said:

I'll try again then. What about the if there has been a change in way my tactical instructions are interpreted by the ME code in this year's release? is that feasible?

I'm only labouring the point as my tactical approach since the the introduction of the TC has been entirely consistent, and it's only on FM18 I've personally encountered the major issue around long shot selection / accuracy.

No, because that wouldn't make sense from a programming perspective. Such potential changes to accuracy or anything like that would exist in the match engine not the TC

[Rashidi]

3 hours ago, rdbayly said:

It doesn't seem to matter which thread I browse, the probability of the discussion reverting to the quality and quantity of shots from distance ends up at 100%. I don't recall such a persistent debate on this issue from previous releases; so I have to believe that a subtle tweak to the TC inputs has produced these ME outputs. It also means that the vast majority of users who are experiencing this problem (including me) have no idea how to fix it. I've trawled the tactics forums and tested the advice to no avail.

Any tactics pitch / analysis tool screenshots from the great and the good who are not experiencing this problem would be most welcomed, because I don't see the discussion progressing beyond "The game is broken v it's your tactics".

 

I am toying with the idea of doing a thread like this. Starting with my experience is probably best and when I have the time I will do the thread. 

In my championship season with Kingstonian I started with one tactic but found that while I was scoring goals I was also conceding a lot so I delved deeper.

i found out that despite me winning something was off. I had noticed that creating good chances was the issue. So I delved deeper. I chalked off all chances which were a product of set piece plays and focused entirely on good chances inside the box. Here things would have to be more analytical. Venturing into each game I started analysing the number of good chances inside the box.

A good chance would be any attempt where a player had time to take the shot from a position where it would be easier to score inside the box. That player would need to do this without pressure. So a volley was out and a header under pressure. I would have to review each chance via 3D. I quickly found out that despite winning more matches at the start my ratio of good chances to SOT was abysmal. In other words I was lucky. For 6 games I had something like 1 good chance inside a box. In one match I produced 23 shots and 0 were good.

Naturally I had to assess this vs the formation I played as well. I noticed that most of those formations were defensive in orientation. They usually never played with attacking  duties or roles like WB in the defensive third.

So I sought to approach these kind of matches differently. For every game that used a defensive setup I would need to control the midfield more effectively and get more players involved in transitions on the flanks where I expected to create most of my chances. I knew the most important source was my W, however we weren’t creating space for him. A quick change to duties behind him brought players closer to him. Now against defensive sides we now started playing slightly differently.

We also started making better chances inside the box, we went from 0 to averaging 3 per game. Time now to focus on keeping a stable strike partnership. I had messed with my strikers, trying different ones in a vain hope of scoring, but it wasn’t their fault.

We even produced one game where ALL our shots were from inside the box. So against attacking sides I had one strategy where we struck hard on counters and against defensively minded sides we had more in support. I think an upcoming episode of the Kingstonian Diaries will show me starting this analysis which I kept doing for around 20 games. I hope I have the time to do a separate blog/video but me and @Cleon have covered such topics over the last few years in our blogs and on the forums. The issue here is the amount of work that needs to go into it.

Another way of doing it is simply just checking CCC in the game it’s not the best but go to each ccc and analyse how it happened and try and see how you can make it happen consistently. My method ignores CCC because I am very much a control freak. 

There are some games where we produce ****** long shots but these aren’t an issue for me because we create so many good chances simply by using Moses.

[oulzac]

Why is it that every HoYD offers contracts to every single player. How is it that after so many iterations the AI behind this hasn't been updated to a point where they don't offer contracts to half star potential players? Its little maddening when every single year the HoYD signs every single kid that comes through.

[Bigpapa42]

So how often does a player need to play to stay happy? 

Rhetorical question, as I know there are a ton of factors. But I have a 17 year old who recently got a new contract as a Rotation player. He's played in 3 of the last 4 league matches. 3 in a row, with one match subbed off late. He sits for one match  and he's become unhappy, demanding more first team football. That seems a bit abrupt to become unhappy. 

[jc1]

My biggest gripe so far is players with excellent long shot stats shooting from around 18 yards out and missing the target by 5-10 yards all too regularly, it's just getting ridiculous now and makes playing the game very frustrating. In turn a striker who is very consistent and good composure either gets 8+ one game and low 6's in another because he can't hit a barn door during a game.

[fm2020.smith]

not been playing this for a good few weeks so i saw a few updates had happened and thought i would see whats changed if anything. shame to see the players still lchasing the ball like headless chickens and not defending properly. still same goals being conceded starts with 5 def against 2 att. ends with 3 def against 8 attack as your players just stand arounf and follow the ball so we get the cross then goal scenario so so many times. rarely does the computer score any other goal. shame that si consider this a finished game now 

[forameuss]

49 minutes ago, jamessmith010101 said:

not been playing this for a good few weeks so i saw a few updates had happened and thought i would see whats changed if anything. shame to see the players still lchasing the ball like headless chickens and not defending properly. still same goals being conceded starts with 5 def against 2 att. ends with 3 def against 8 attack as your players just stand arounf and follow the ball so we get the cross then goal scenario so so many times. rarely does the computer score any other goal. shame that si consider this a finished game now 

Not sure why you expected anything like that to change when nothing changed in the Match Engine through those updates.

And despite being a suitably withering end to your post, I doubt SI ever consider the game "finished". 

[InterSpurs]

I understand that SI can't reproduce exact stadiums, but the new Tottenham stadium is just poor. No club in the premiership or championship would build a new stadium like that. 

 Please improve your templates, or let us edit the stadiums ourselves. 

It might be a small thing to SI, but to Tottenham fans that have waited so long for a new stadium & to see it reproduced so poorly in FM18, well it nearly put me off playing FM.

[fm2020.smith]

51 minutes ago, forameuss said:

Not sure why you expected anything like that to change when nothing changed in the Match Engine through those updates.

And despite being a suitably withering end to your post, I doubt SI ever consider the game "finished". 

by finished i mean end product. hence why as you said no updates to the me despite there still being problems. its a shame si appear to have a bit of a deaf ear this year to the complaints about the me 

[forameuss]

9 minutes ago, jamessmith010101 said:

by finished i mean end product. hence why as you said no updates to the me despite there still being problems. its a shame si appear to have a bit of a deaf ear this year to the complaints about the me 

Doesn't really matter what you meant.  Saying that SI consider it a finished product is totally wrong, and then you compound it by implying they're not listening.  They will know exactly what is "wrong" with their ME, and what they think needs adjusted.  But just because they know that doesn't mean they have the means to fix it in a timescale you deem appropriate.

[fm2020.smith]

jesus!! and we wander why the forums are quiet nowadays. dont worry i wont offer any criticism. game is perfect as is. all rejoice

[herne79]

3 hours ago, jamessmith010101 said:

not been playing this for a good few weeks so i saw a few updates had happened and thought i would see whats changed if anything. shame to see the players still lchasing the ball like headless chickens and not defending properly. still same goals being conceded starts with 5 def against 2 att. ends with 3 def against 8 attack as your players just stand arounf and follow the ball so we get the cross then goal scenario so so many times. rarely does the computer score any other goal. shame that si consider this a finished game now 

I think many people have found themselves to be disappointed with this year's ME, as indeed they are every year.  SI don't make us privy to their development schedule and so some things we consider "need fixing" aren't changed within timescales which we ourselves deem appropriate.  This can be further compounded by believing a fix should be implemented when often it actually isn't as straight forward as we may hope - every change has an action and a reaction where "fixing" one thing can have knock on effects to breaking others.

Perhaps there is an opportunity for SI to change their communication however that in itself can end up being a poisoned chalice.

In the mean time - and this is not me saying "it's your tactics" - if you head over to the Tactics forum and post your detailed system along with problems you typically see, somebody may give you fresh ideas which might help you relieve at least some of your issues.  It may not of course, but at least you'll be satisfied you've tried every avenue before the long wait for ME change is over.

[fm2020.smith]

yeah i get that, im not one for reading someone elses version of what you should do though so i prefer to look at the tactics and tweak them myself. trouble is the me still does seem to be nearly what we had in beta. reason i said its a shame its now considerd the finished article is ive read loads on here there will be no more changes to the me or the game except for bug fixing, which i thought was a shame to leave the me in its current state. but hey it could just be my tactics who knows 

[Rashidi]

7 minutes ago, jamessmith010101 said:

yeah i get that, im not one for reading someone elses version of what you should do though so i prefer to look at the tactics and tweak them myself. trouble is the me still does seem to be nearly what we had in beta. reason i said its a shame its now considerd the finished article is ive read loads on here there will be no more changes to the me or the game except for bug fixing, which i thought was a shame to leave the me in its current state. but hey it could just be my tactics who knows 

The reason why it’s such a good route to take is because some of the assumptions people may make about the game can be wrong. So it’s not always a bad idea to get another point of view. If bad advice gets bandied about then a mod will step in.

[kensteidel]

3 hours ago, jamessmith010101 said:

by finished i mean end product. hence why as you said no updates to the me despite there still being problems. its a shame si appear to have a bit of a deaf ear this year to the complaints about the me 

If you look through the bug forums, a lot of issues are still being looked at, so don't give up just yet, even though we have traditionally been used to a March patch as the final date to fix issues.

[rdbayly]

After 650 hours of desperately trying to coax a good game out of this year's release, I'm personally calling it a day. For what it's worth, my summary feedback is as follows:

Positives

Genuinely think the medical centre and dynamics have been introduced well at the first time of asking, for which SI should be applauded. The 'Overall Injury Risk' column is now a permanent addition to main squad view, which had remained unchanged for years.

Injuries feel more realistic. The increased number, but shorter duration of injuries feels more reflective of the modern game. I'd have no problems with slightly more of them to be honest.

Negatives

ME - I want to make it clear that my criticism of the ME is not a result of struggling for success. I have gained promotions, won manager of the year and got relative minnows into Europe. My fundamental problem with the ME is that the aesthetics of the central footballing mechanics are ugly, robotic and repetitive. This includes:

• The prevalence of long balls lumped into channels which defenders at all levels fail to effectively react to
• The ease with which crosses are delivered like laser guided missiles onto the foreheads of 5'9 strikers who physically dominate tall strong defenders
• The lack of physical engagement from the entire defensive line which gives lone forwards the opportunity to bring a long ball down, turn and play in a teammate
• The way that simple passes over short distances are misplaced or ricochet off a player's heels / backside (resulting in a dangerous counter-attack)
• The frequency of shots from the edge of the area missing the target by more than the width of the entire goal - possibly linked to players too often only being capable of shooting in the direction they are facing
• The power of aforementioned long shots being equal to that of a backpass
• Insufficient goalkeeper animations that result in shots 'hitting' the keeper and flying off at angles that defy physics
• Goalkeepers standing motionless on their line as a striker runs on to a through ball and scores from inside the 6 yard box

UI - I do not and will never understand the design choices taken regarding this year's user interface, especially on / during a match. Finding what you want is like peeling the layers of an endless onion compared to last year's game. The horizontal in-match tactics screen is bizarre and at completely at odds with how this information is presented in all other locations. I just don't get it.

Stadia / fans - Without a doubt, one of the biggest retrograde steps in the franchise is laid bare regarding the design of stadiums and the appearance of  crowds. The colour pallets of both are saturated, over-exposed and riddled with monotone browns. There appears to be only 2 variations of fan animation and attire, which when all moving in unison is akin to something seen from an early 1990s game. This may seem a minor detail, but to me it breaks immersion. Compare this to the quality of stadia and fans in FM17 and there is simply no contest.

Regen Faces - Hard to know where to begin here. The best I've got is - imagine if you hold a child's doll over a fire until the face is half melted, then put lego hair and lipstick on it, and hey presto.

Scouting - This was botched from the start in terms of explanation and costs, but is not half as bad as being forced to click through endless players, most of which aren't interested in joining, and whose cards are mostly wasted white space. A chore made even more cumbersome by the buttons jumping about all over the place.

Tactical Briefing - I can't think of a single reason this was added to the game other than to be a placeholder for a more refined feature next year.

 

There's a whole lot more but you've probably lost interest by now. I feel the this release lacked polish out of the blocks. I also experienced countless crashes on both brand new PC and gaming laptop, which has tested my patience to exhaustion.

Despite all this, my love for the series will bring me back for FM19!

Cheers.

[Tony Wright 747]

29 minutes ago, rdbayly said:

After 650 hours of desperately trying to coax a good game out of this year's release, I'm personally calling it a day. For what it's worth, my summary feedback is as follows:

Positives

Genuinely think the medical centre and dynamics have been introduced well at the first time of asking, for which SI should be applauded. The 'Overall Injury Risk' column is now a permanent addition to main squad view, which had remained unchanged for years.

Injuries feel more realistic. The increased number, but shorter duration of injuries feels more reflective of the modern game. I'd have no problems with slightly more of them to be honest.

Negatives

ME - I want to make it clear that my criticism of the ME is not a result of struggling for success. I have gained promotions, won manager of the year and got relative minnows into Europe. My fundamental problem with the ME is that the aesthetics of the central footballing mechanics are ugly, robotic and repetitive. This includes:

• The prevalence of long balls lumped into channels which defenders at all levels fail to effectively react to
• The ease with which crosses are delivered like laser guided missiles onto the foreheads of 5'9 strikers who physically dominate tall strong defenders
• The lack of physical engagement from the entire defensive line which gives lone forwards the opportunity to bring a long ball down, turn and play in a teammate
• The way that simple passes over short distances are misplaced or ricochet off a player's heels / backside (resulting in a dangerous counter-attack)
• The frequency of shots from the edge of the area missing the target by more than the width of the entire goal - possibly linked to players too often only being capable of shooting in the direction they are facing
• The power of aforementioned long shots being equal to that of a backpass
• Insufficient goalkeeper animations that result in shots 'hitting' the keeper and flying off at angles that defy physics
• Goalkeepers standing motionless on their line as a striker runs on to a through ball and scores from inside the 6 yard box

UI - I do not and will never understand the design choices taken regarding this year's user interface, especially on / during a match. Finding what you want is like peeling the layers of an endless onion compared to last year's game. The horizontal in-match tactics screen is bizarre and at completely at odds with how this information is presented in all other locations. I just don't get it.

Stadia / fans - Without a doubt, one of the biggest retrograde steps in the franchise is laid bare regarding the design of stadiums and the appearance of  crowds. The colour pallets of both are saturated, over-exposed and riddled with monotone browns. There appears to be only 2 variations of fan animation and attire, which when all moving in unison is akin to something seen from an early 1990s game. This may seem a minor detail, but to me it breaks immersion. Compare this to the quality of stadia and fans in FM17 and there is simply no contest.

Regen Faces - Hard to know where to begin here. The best I've got is - imagine if you hold a child's doll over a fire until the face is half melted, then put lego hair and lipstick on it, and hey presto.

Scouting - This was botched from the start in terms of explanation and costs, but is not half as bad as being forced to click through endless players, most of which aren't interested in joining, and whose cards are mostly wasted white space. A chore made even more cumbersome by the buttons jumping about all over the place.

Tactical Briefing - I can't think of a single reason this was added to the game other than to be a placeholder for a more refined feature next year.

 

There's a whole lot more but you've probably lost interest by now. I feel the this release lacked polish out of the blocks. I also experienced countless crashes on both brand new PC and gaming laptop, which has tested my patience to exhaustion.

Despite all this, my love for the series will bring me back for FM19!

Cheers.

Excellent post, pretty much spot on with everything you say.  For me there has to be a huge improvement in FM19 if I am to buy it.

[juspe15]

Could the fans/board be made to understand the quality of opponent players rather than the status of the opposing team? They are mad at me for losing against Tottenham u23 (with Dulwich Hamlet in Checkerade Trophy), when they had multiple international players in their starting eleven. 

Their goalie was Frances 1 goalie, every defender had at least u21 international caps and Sead Kolasinac was featuring as well. A relegation candidate from League One shouldn't be expected to win against a team like that.

[rdbayly]

"Inexcusable defeat, the boss has some explaining to do #IrrelevantSocialMediaFeatureThatNobodyAskedFor 

[Svenc]

On 3.4.2018 at 02:42, Rashidi said:

I quickly found out that despite winning more matches at the start my ratio of good chances to SOT was abysmal. In other words I was lucky. For 6 games I had something like 1 good chance inside a box. In one match I produced 23 shots and 0 were good.

 

All the while the post match report would have confirmed you over and over that you were destined for greatness, as your team had the shot advantage. Because, on FM, the team that had the more attempts was the one "deservedly" winning.

If you've ever approached FM matches with the intention of sitting deep, denying space and soaking up all the numerous worse attempts coming your way, you would have completely contradictory reports in your inbox every week, despite you taking the points over and over again. Where's that data analyst when you actually need him?

In the meantime, never done that before -- but filtering just by the string "miss": The match events file shows the greatest hits collection of the worst punditry cliche's there are, to keep you on the edge, at least.  There's literally dozens of lines just for misses, a few of the copy&pasted highlights.

Edited April 7, 2018 by Svenc

[rdbayly]

@Svenc - and what makes it a million times worse is that for about 90% of those commentaries, it was never a good chance in the first place. Just a spooned shot from an impossible angle into row Z. 

 

And it also results in a 6.2 match rating.

Edited April 7, 2018 by rdbayly

[Svenc]

6 hours ago, rdbayly said:

@Svenc - and what makes it a million times worse is that for about 90% of those commentaries, it was never a good chance in the first place.

To an extent sadly surprisingly accurate (at modeling what it's trying to model), though. It's exactly the kind of reception that sets the bar for discussion such as this (there's even a FM reference in there! ), where situations from play and pace in which guys take the ball on their weak foot and have increasingly smaller angles to aim for are seriously argued to be "easier  than a penalty". (And that actually WAS a pretty good chance, mind!) You could question though what place simulating over the top TV commentary has in a football management game. If it's meant to be a spoof, amazing, and that library of cliche is impressive! Naturally it's primarily meant to ape the TV/radio experience footie fans are used to. Still can't see Arsene giving a fuss about one of his ex players on TV going "gotta hit the target" at every 2nd attempt,  as he knows that they didn't manage to do that themselves, and seem to be suffering of selective memory. There seem regular feature requests to highlight the commentary further by recording voices -- fully on FIFA-style -- in particular considering FM's heavily compressed nature on match highlight viewings, can you imagine what that would do?

Edited April 7, 2018 by Svenc

[iolodavanki]

I always play with "continue game timeout" which basically means the game will continue after a set amounts of seconds. This is really handy when doing other things on your computer. However, it would be super appreciated if cup draws and group stage draws were considered "must confirm" news items so that I do not always miss them. I find draws really exciting and in my current save (Roma&Italy) I just missed the World Cup group stage draw and the last 16 Champions League draw. Would it be possible to get the options to tick in preferences how we rate certain news items?

Another news item that is not considered important and subsequently I fail to respond to is when I have a sending off and want to discipline the player. I just see on the screen that I have chosen to not discipline the player, which in FM can have a pretty significant influence on morale in the team as a whole.

[Rashidi]

3 hours ago, Svenc said:

To an extent sadly surprisingly accurate (at modeling what it's trying to model), though. It's exactly the kind of reception that sets the bar for discussion such as this (there's even a FM reference in there! ), where situations from play and pace in which guys take the ball on their weak foot and have increasingly smaller angles to aim for are seriously argued to be "easier  than a penalty". (And that actually WAS a pretty good chance, mind!) You could question though what place simulating over the top TV commentary has in a football management game. If it's meant to be a spoof, amazing, and that library of cliche is impressive! Naturally it's primarily meant to ape the TV/radio experience footie fans are used to. Still can't see Arsene giving a fuss about one of his ex players on TV going "gotta hit the target" at every 2nd attempt,  as he knows that they didn't manage to do that themselves, and seem to be suffering of selective memory. There seem regular feature requests to highlight the commentary further by recording voices -- fully on FIFA-style -- in particular considering FM's heavily compressed nature on match highlight viewings, can you imagine what that would do?

Makes me smile this, if this is a simulation shouldn’t it simulate the poor commentary we get in real life too?

[Vinnie BBQ]

Hey,

 

Anyone else not being able to hold his own teamtalks anymore? The black box where my teamtalk options/choices should be is empty.  (See screenshots below)

Can only let my assistant manager hold teamtalks. Can only pick individual players to give a talk to when I sub them in at halftime.

 

[rdbayly]

5 hours ago, Svenc said:

Still can't see Arsene giving a fuss about one of his ex players on TV going "gotta hit the target"

Although it's ok if Henry calls out a striker for not moving the ball on to his stronger foot and opening his body out for a side foot finish.

[johnhughthom]

2 hours ago, Vinnie BBQ said:

Hey,

 

Anyone else not being able to hold his own teamtalks anymore? The black box where my teamtalk options/choices should be is empty.  (See screenshots below)

Can only let my assistant manager hold teamtalks. Can only pick individual players to give a talk to when I sub them in at halftime.

 

Have you checked your staff responsibilities? You may have set your ass man to take team talks.

[Vinnie BBQ]

3 minutes ago, johnhughthom said:

Have you checked your staff responsibilities? You may have set your ass man to take team talks.

Thanks for the reply. Have just checked staff responsibilities but it had my own name behind teamtalks. Shame, after I read your reply I really thought that had to be it.

[roykela]

2 hours ago, Vinnie BBQ said:

Hey,

 

Anyone else not being able to hold his own teamtalks anymore? The black box where my teamtalk options/choices should be is empty.  (See screenshots below)

Can only let my assistant manager hold teamtalks. Can only pick individual players to give a talk to when I sub them in at halftime.

 

If you're using a custom skin then that might be the problem, if the skin hasn't been updated after the latest big update.
The teamtalk screen changed a tiny bit.