Let's be honest, is anyone going to bother with FM19?

[Federico]

2 ore fa, westy8chimp ha scritto:

build em up, then knock em down!

Also called "bipolarism"

[Federico]

16 ore fa, westy8chimp ha scritto:

My concern is all the jibber jabber and uproar about it will make them attempt to fix it... Which could end up making other aspects of the ME worse. Are they going to make cbs that much better to cope with 3 pacey strikers? Well how good are the defenders going to be against the 99% of us who use 1 or 2 strikers? Cbs overpowered? Ai managers playing 6 at the back so we can just dominate possession in the middle of the park?

But I expect CBs to be more effective and reactive than this edition anyway. At the moment marking in the box is not existant and you keep seeing them running backwards for meters before turning themselves up to finally chase the forward running towards yet another 1v1.

That he'll miss, because numbers must stay on par.

A matter of balance as you said. The ways you can reach that balance are many, but in my opinion that one taken recently is the shorter and not the better.

[theballstopshere]

16 hours ago, themadsheep2001 said:

Being core doesn't mean improving it is easy, or quick. For example one of things that balances development in the AI is the processing power of computers playing the game. FM players sit towards the lower end of the pc power spectrum. How do you balance that when significantly upping minimum system requirements would cut out swathes of your game base? It's a difficult call and I think soon they may have to make some hard decisions around that 

to be honest, i don't really care if improving AI (a vital component of the game) is easy or quick. fans pay good money for a game that touts itself as the best in football simulation but it's clear to many that this aspect has been a massive letdown for years. 

its like a brand that keeps saying it has the best camera (but not in reality) and then when questioned about it, comes back with a "it will take a long time for it to be improved".

really? sounds ridiculous now?

making a smartphone is not easy but it's not my fault if the company claims to have the best phone but yet unable to even do basic stuff properly.

and i don't care if they tell me that making a smartphone is tough.

if the game cannot live up to its hyperbole please stop with the claims. 

fans buy football manager simply because they want to experience what a real football manager experiences, but to see the most basic cock-ups in match engine, game play, AI... with non current tactics is really awful and not excusable for a game that has been around for what, 20years?

if a part of the fan base will be lost due to enhanced system requirement why did SI not make steady, incremental improvements to the AI over what, the past 10 years? this way, fans will have time to slowly improve their computer systems.

now it looks like SI wants to make a quantum leap in AI, which will result in higher system requirement, which also means that a part of the fan base might be lost. 

and they are worried about it.

but who is to be blamed for this, honestly?

fans have been beating the drum over the years asking for improvements in AI, tactics, match realism... but a lot of this have been ignored or fcuked up by other new features that run counter towards it. 

it's either SI bite the bullet now and go for a massive improvement (and enhanced system requirement) or risk having a game that's broken in a lot of fundamental parts and laden with loads of fluff. 

it's time to to cut the roots of the problem.

or continue letting a monster grow out of hand?

heck, even if the new game (with enhanced match engine, AI, tactics, realism...) will take two seasons to develop I will say go for it. skip one season and big on the next one. 

 

[westy8chimp]

4 minutes ago, Federico said:

But I expect CBs to be more effective and reactive than this edition anyway

Certainly... in terms of under the hood AND I'd love to see more defence TI, PI, PPM introduced, so that the manager has more ways of making his style unique to him.

It'd be bad, and im sure they don't work that way, if they started Dev with a problem like the '3 strikers' and try to build around blocking that. In doing so just makes more orthodox 442s etc harder... and Knap will create a 1-4-5 formation on day 1 that breaks the ME anyway.

[Neotropolis]

3 minutes ago, theballstopshere said:

to be honest, i don't really care if improving AI (a vital component of the game) is easy or quick.

It's ignorance like this that really doesn't help. SI are constantly improving the game but none of it will be seen until FM19 because FM18's development cycle has ended. 

5 minutes ago, theballstopshere said:

heck, even if the new game (with enhanced match engine, AI, tactics, realism...) will take two seasons to develop I will say go for it. skip one season and big on the next one. 

So you're asking a company whose only real source of income is this game, to miss out on a year of income to develop a 'better' game. Yeah, that's not going to happen.

[CFuller]

6 minutes ago, theballstopshere said:

to be honest, i don't really care if improving AI (a vital component of the game) is easy or quick. fans pay good money for a game that touts itself as the best in football simulation but it's clear to many that this aspect has been a massive letdown for years. 

 its like a brand that keeps saying it has the best camera (but not in reality) and then when questioned about it, comes back with a "it will take a long time for it to be improved".

 really? sounds ridiculous now?

Is there a computer program anywhere that simulates football anything like as realistically as Football Manager does? If there is, then I haven't found it.

The match engine could be improved significantly in some areas, yes, and it will never be absolutely perfect, but it's still miles ahead of the nearest competitor (whatever that is).

[Neotropolis]

4 minutes ago, CFuller said:

Is there a computer program anywhere that simulates football anything like as realistically as Football Manager does? If there is, then I haven't found it.

The match engine could be improved significantly in some areas, yes, and it will never be absolutely perfect, but it's still miles ahead of the nearest competitor (whatever that is).

There just isn't a competitor to this game. Nothing comes close.

[XaW]

14 minutes ago, theballstopshere said:

its like a brand that keeps saying it has the best camera (but not in reality) and then when questioned about it, comes back with a "it will take a long time for it to be improved".

Please explain this analogy a bit for me? "not in reality"? So what is the best football simulation around?

I don't think anyone thinks the current ME/AI is perfect, but it's the best I've seen or played. Since you obviously seem to think it's not I'd like to know what football simulation game have a better ME/AI?

[theballstopshere]

9 minutes ago, Neotropolis said:

It's ignorance like this that really doesn't help. SI are constantly improving the game but none of it will be seen until FM19 because FM18's development cycle has ended. 

So you're asking a company whose only real source of income is this game, to miss out on a year of income to develop a 'better' game. Yeah, that's not going to happen.

i did not phrase it properly. what i meant to say is that SI should not be crying over how tough it is to enhance what basically is the "bread and butter" of their game. if it's about adding new fancy features that are tough to implement, yeah i get that. but to me, it is excusable for them to be crying over the most basic element of the game. 

I don't think them skipping a year will happen. but i am not sure what else they can do to iron out deeply embedded issues. 

[Neotropolis]

1 minute ago, theballstopshere said:

i did not phrase it properly. what i meant to say is that SI should not be crying over how tough it is to enhance what basically is the "bread and butter" of their game. if it's about adding new fancy features that are tough to implement, yeah i get that. but to me, it is excusable for them to be crying over the most basic element of the game. 

I don't think them skipping a year will happen. but i am not sure what else they can do to iron out deeply embedded issues. 

But they're not crying about it. Yes it's tough to do and I can almost guarantee that they are looking into the fixes. As I've said many, many times, we won't know what the fixes are until FM19 comes out.

We don't know what goes on inside SI. Chances are, they are making the fixes, but they may not implement them as it has caused worse issues than that of the one their fixing. I don't know about you, but I'd rather have one bad element over three or more. 

[forameuss]

Nothing shoots down a point more than trying to talk about development like you know what you're talking about, while simultaneously making it very clear you don't know what you're talking about.  No wonder SI devs don't participate any more.

[themadsheep2001]

In addition to the above replies, it really should be pointed out that they have been making slow steady improvements in the AI each year, or at least trying . 

[Neil Brock]

To be honest this thread has been an interesting read. Fair enough it's a bit of a clickbait title from the OP, but these kinds of threads often generate interesting discussion. Although I did spot one car analogy in there as well   

We get that Football Manager can make people feel very passionate and we love the fact people choose to do so on these forums and across various other social channels. FM and SI have changed an inordinate amount over the years and unfortunately part of this means there is less SI dev involvement here. Part of that is because we're no longer a  dozen 20-somethings with no partners (and maybe no social life!) squeezed into a tiny office - things have definitely changed. But that doesn't mean the devs don't read so many of the comments which are posted. 

Just right now, at 11am on a Monday there are at least 7 SI devs browsing these forums. And bear in mind we've got loads of work to do at the moment with coding, testing and the numerous other things which go into game development! But we care about our community and we care about making a game that is always an improvement on the last. But we know we can't please everyone. 

The front three tactic (like the strikerless one which was mentioned last year) is in some ways a continuation of Diablo many moons ago. Slightly more unconventional tactics which for whatever reason can overpower the somewhat limited (in the sense they don't have the intelligence open to a human) AI. We've made the AI much more tactically complex over the years. FWIW, try playing strikerless or three up front online against a human manager and see how you get on. But as we often say on here, we're trying to make the most realistic representation of football in the gaming sphere but with the match engine it's the ultimate balancing act. Every tiny change can potentially have massive knock-ons elsewhere. There are always options of restriction when things like this happen. How many clubs can you think of who actually play three out and out strikers (as opposed to a 'front three' better represented by AML, ST, AMR)?  But we'd never want to arbitrarily restrict the user, same with strikerless. But it's a balancing act. And an extremely complex one at that. 

Someone earlier in the thread said that FM12 was the pinnacle as far as they're concerned. Each to their own of course, but for me at that point I know that there was next to no collision detection in the ME - players could literally run through other players - and tactically the AI was much more limited. But everyone is entitled to like what they like and we'll try the best we can to please as many people whilst making the most realistic simulation of football management that we can. 

Just if you provide feedback, please try and keep it constructive. The more constructive you are, the more chance that the right person will be able to read it and make the types of changes you want. If you just say "I hate this game" it may well be slightly therapeutic for you, but we have absolutely no way of knowing why you think that and whether there's anything we can do to even try to change that opinion. 

[Baodan]

I like how a lot of people here bash on the OP and then proceed to agree with some of his points. I also like that some of the people here don't understand why a passionate fan of the series, would waste time writing a post about not buying the next version of the game he likes, when the answer is clearly because he cares.

I especially like how much of a cesspool these forum posts can be.

[themadsheep2001]

1 minute ago, Baodan said:

I like how a lot of people here bash the OP and the  proceed to agree with some of his points. I also like that some of the people here don't understand why a passionate fan of the series, would waste time writing a post about him not buying a game, when the answer is clearly because he cares.

I especially like how much of a cesspool these forum posts are.

Everyone who posts on here cares. Otherwise they wouldn't post here. Being passionate doesn't mean you get to rant. Still got to be clear, and constructive. 

It's not what you say, but how you say it. 

[Baodan]

7 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

Everyone who posts on here cares. Otherwise they wouldn't post here. Being passionate doesn't mean you get to rant. Still got to be clear, and constructive. 

It's not what you say, but how you say it. 

He elaborated on some of his points and I think he did a well enough job of that the second time around. Surely any fan of the series can agree with most of what he's saying, even if they might feel a bit defensive over a perceived "attack" on one of their beloved games.

I'll most likely be buying the next version but the series really does have a lot of problems.

[westy8chimp]

16 minutes ago, Neil Brock said:

Just right now, at 11am on a Monday there are at least 7 SI devs browsing these forums. And bear in mind we've got loads of work to do at the moment with coding, testing and the numerous other things which go into game development!

get back to work, dossers!

[themadsheep2001]

2 minutes ago, Baodan said:

He elaborated on some of his points and I think he did a well enough job of that the second time around. Surely any fan of the series can agree with most of what he's saying, even if they might feel a bit defensive over a perceived "attack" on one of their beloved games.

I'll most likely be buying the next version but the series really does have a lot of problems.

He was much better second time round. Which all goes back to the how you say it. Clear constructive and polite, and you'll always get a good reaction, not least of all from SI. But writing like the opening post never goes does well, and sales pretty close to the rules. And ultimate we're all fans, but we won't always have the same view points and agreements. That said we've got a decent discussion in the end. And that's always good. 

[SuperShaka]

Hey Brock, get back in my youth squad

 

I'll not get the game straight away simply because just got 18. My last one before this was 15 which lasted me 4 years lol

[llDracoll]

I pre-purchased FM19 the day it was announced so yeah, I care. Granted, it's helped with how inexplicably cheap it is here in Argentina (675 AR$, which is around a pathetic 20 USD, and this was before a sharp devaluation, so it's technically barely over 18 USD now), but I'd have pre-purchased it anyways.

I understand that 3 striker tactics are overpowered, maybe on the extent of Diablo in CM03/04 but the game has had broken tactics/set pieces in pretty much every iteration (most infamously the corner trick) so "3 strikers" is not going to be a game killer at all.

Besides, FM is not a competitive game at all, so you're not exactly at a disadvantage if you choose to not use 3 strikers/corner trick/Diablo/any other broken tactic in your game... unless you are a leaderboard freak (and that's where you encounter even worse cheaters) or you play online with someone that merely likes to use 3 strikers.

[forameuss]

On the Diablo/3Horsestrikers stuff, I wouldn't say they're comparable beyond both exploiting the ME.  3 striker formations have applications in real life, whereas Diablo was another thing entirely.  That was the shining, perfect example of those who test the boundaries of the ME to find where it creaks.  There was very little chance of someone using that one accidentally, which sets it apart from other similar ME "holes".

[wayne'o]

To be fair a game as complexed as FM will always have faults, certain people will like some features and dislike other features etc,   FM will lose the odd player here and there but will gain new players too..

If I had the current FM game available to me when I was 18 I’d be ecstatic, the management games I played back then were pants compared to FM.. 

It’s only going to cost £40 max so if you like football manager games buy it, play it and enjoy it. If not save your £40 and put it towards some counselling sessions to get over how bad you think the game is 😜😜

[OlivierL]

Loved FM18 (don't like the scouting setup) .. no crashes, no problems ! played most hours since FM14 (because before i had more time..)

[jaysdailydose]

9 hours ago, XaW said:

I've already pre-ordered. Now, I'm usually one of the "don't pre-order!" people, but FM have a sweet spot in my gaming heart. I've played thousands of hours of this game in it's various editions since the early 90's and I have most editions either on Steam or a physical copy. FM is one of the few games I buy that I actually play enough to get good value for my money, it's also a game I never tire of (the game itself, I do tire of certain saves, but then I always start a new one shortly after). According to Steam I currently have 1150 hours on FM18, and I still play it daily, if I can. For me this means that I'm buying it no matter, and unless this disappoints me a lot, I'll continue to do so in the future.

It's this, for me.  No other game brings me as much entertainment, year after year.  I got this game on sale this year, and I've paid a little over $0.02 per hour for my enjoyment of it.  (I'm just over 650 hours in, with buying LATE)

Granted, I got it on sale. If I'd paid full-price, I'd be spending around $0.07 per hour this year.  So, today, on American Labor Day, I'll be spending about 8 hours playing.  Since I got it on sale, I'll have paid SIXTEEN CENTS for my enjoyment today.  That's not even two returnable aluminum cans.

I don't see the FM franchise ever getting to a point where it isn't worth the money we all put in, for how much we all play.  I bought LATE, LATE, LATEEEEEEEEEEE and will still get over 1,000 hours of enjoyment out of this iteration.  And have yet to see most of these bugs anyone talks about...  

I'll tell you what, though... I *do* see some things that could be improved, and probably quite easily... but those things will likely get pushed to the side for things like "we have to fix three striker formations" or "we need to add audio commentary" (even though there was a great mod for it for years.)  

[Tony Wright 747]

6 hours ago, Neotropolis said:

There just isn't a competitor to this game. Nothing comes close.

This is very true, and I have said before I am not sure if that fact benefits the game.  Is there any other game where there is not any competition to push it to inovate.

[themadsheep2001]

8 minutes ago, Tony Wright 747 said:

This is very true, and I have said before I am not sure if that fact benefits the game.  Is there any other game where there is not any competition to push it to inovate.

If you actually look at the games industry as a whole , competition isn't largely driving innovation, it's driven monetisation more than anything . We really need to step away from this idea that competition always leads innovation. 

[Tony Wright 747]

5 hours ago, Neil Brock said:

To be honest this thread has been an interesting read. Fair enough it's a bit of a clickbait title from the OP, but these kinds of threads often generate interesting discussion. Although I did spot one car analogy in there as well   

We get that Football Manager can make people feel very passionate and we love the fact people choose to do so on these forums and across various other social channels. FM and SI have changed an inordinate amount over the years and unfortunately part of this means there is less SI dev involvement here. Part of that is because we're no longer a  dozen 20-somethings with no partners (and maybe no social life!) squeezed into a tiny office - things have definitely changed. But that doesn't mean the devs don't read so many of the comments which are posted. 

Just right now, at 11am on a Monday there are at least 7 SI devs browsing these forums. And bear in mind we've got loads of work to do at the moment with coding, testing and the numerous other things which go into game development! But we care about our community and we care about making a game that is always an improvement on the last. But we know we can't please everyone. 

The front three tactic (like the strikerless one which was mentioned last year) is in some ways a continuation of Diablo many moons ago. Slightly more unconventional tactics which for whatever reason can overpower the somewhat limited (in the sense they don't have the intelligence open to a human) AI. We've made the AI much more tactically complex over the years. FWIW, try playing strikerless or three up front online against a human manager and see how you get on. But as we often say on here, we're trying to make the most realistic representation of football in the gaming sphere but with the match engine it's the ultimate balancing act. Every tiny change can potentially have massive knock-ons elsewhere. There are always options of restriction when things like this happen. How many clubs can you think of who actually play three out and out strikers (as opposed to a 'front three' better represented by AML, ST, AMR)?  But we'd never want to arbitrarily restrict the user, same with strikerless. But it's a balancing act. And an extremely complex one at that. 

Someone earlier in the thread said that FM12 was the pinnacle as far as they're concerned. Each to their own of course, but for me at that point I know that there was next to no collision detection in the ME - players could literally run through other players - and tactically the AI was much more limited. But everyone is entitled to like what they like and we'll try the best we can to please as many people whilst making the most realistic simulation of football management that we can. 

Just if you provide feedback, please try and keep it constructive. The more constructive you are, the more chance that the right person will be able to read it and make the types of changes you want. If you just say "I hate this game" it may well be slightly therapeutic for you, but we have absolutely no way of knowing why you think that and whether there's anything we can do to even try to change that opinion. 

Excellent post Neil, whilst FM17 and FM18 were not for me I am really enjoying playing FM16, and FM12 when I have less time.  The problem is that as FM has improved and become "closer" to reality, expectations become raised, if you could turn the clock back 15 years or so and introduce recent versions to that market, you would have blown everyone away and I doubt if there would have been many complaints if any.

[Tony Wright 747]

12 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

If you actually look at the games industry as a whole , competition isn't largely driving innovation, it's driven monetisation more than anything . We really need to step away from this idea that competition always leads innovation. 

I think we have had this conversation before and whilst I am not sure that marketing experts would agree that competition does not drive innovation, the point I was trying to make was that FM is in a pretty unique situation where there is no credible competition.

[themadsheep2001]

2 minutes ago, Tony Wright 747 said:

I think we have had this conversation before and whilst I am not sure that marketing experts would agree that competition does not drive innovation, the point I was trying to make was that FM is in a pretty unique situation where there is no credible competition.

I'm not sure it matters what marketing experts would say. Especially when they are not the ones actually working on the projects, they have no idea of what is driving that team. 

Anyone who spends even a moment of time listening to Miles (whether you like him or loathe him) will immediately see that he's intent on each FM being better than the last. Competition is irrelevant in his case.  

I'm pretty sure Neil has spoken before of that self motivation. And I'll take the words of people who know what they are working in and their own mind states, than a guru who is generalising from afar. 

It's simply not a hard and fast rule. 

They had competition, they crushed them, they've kept in going, and the man who leads the studio is still highly driven. That's as much as you can ask for 

[YouReds]

Skipped FM18 as was too engrossed in a long term save, will definitely buy FM19 and then skip FM20 

[theonets]

On 31/08/2018 at 23:06, jaysdailydose said:

This will end well...

You know I don't like 3 up top as well, I think I've told you that so many times now

 

I've never felt the need to actually use it to break the AI though, so it's really irrelevant. I'm guessing it's nice for people to have a cheat tactic to use now and again, when they're going to get sacked and are trying to do a one club save. 

 

I can never understand people who say there's no competition because no one else has a database. It's a bit of a dumb excuse when we can access the same database via the editor, and EA tried to get into it and have a good database but failed badly

[Novem9]

FM18 has a lot of problems, for example 2D Kit's outline still not fixed in ME.
And I wrote the same post few months ago because as all FM-addicted I want the perfect FM.
But then I tried to play FM17 after this, I can't. Because FM18 this is little step to next.

Ultimately I want fast processing at first, because I spent a lot of time to waiting day-loadings. Game playable right now. Not perfect, but feeling deceived.

 

[Svenc]

12 hours ago, Federico said:

But I expect CBs to be more effective and reactive than this edition anyway. At the moment marking in the box is not existant and you keep seeing them running backwards for meters before turning themselves up to finally chase the forward running towards yet another 1v1.

That he'll miss, because numbers must stay on par.

Not how this works, but it'll be interesting if the game were to have proper stats. On many releases, I have the feeling personally they would be quite comparable to football, that is the real one, not the fantasy (or public perception, which is so wildly off it's absurd, but then you can blame sensationalist punditry too). On prior releases, the main coder was pointing out similar though, he considered the keeper to have the edge usually. If you imagine each "chance" on FM as a (weighted) dice roll, you're probably not far off. Under the hood any program is numbers. It's not going to be uncommon if most one on ones are (at very best) 40% chances to see streaks of them missed in a row -- the chances that the next one is going to be scored doesN#t increase, after all (in-game, it may be the opposite, as FM marks frowards missing chances as frustrated or nervous, depending on which).  Speaking of which, that's an area that needs more feedback either way........... can't believe FM is still talking in "shots" and "possession", but that's beating a dead horse. The entire in-game media is build around such.  Until then: generally, overall, players get sides to consistently convert at pretty much fantasy rates (though that's curiously never reported as a possible bug to investigate ! :D)

[tarbanrael]

IT's an interesting read as you can clearly see that people care about FM and where it goes next. I've been playing for nearly 2 decades and for the first time last year skipped fm17. I had reached saturation and after a year away got fm18, as usual in my case, after the March patch had come out. The reason behind buying it so late: 1- family life, work and other PC games mean less time to play so I only ever now go for the 'finished' product (with fm it's always been pretty much the March update, for other games like POE2 this means waiting until bugs have been ironed out somewhat to allow for a good gaming experience) and 2. it turns out it's cheaper by then. Not that I would mind paying the full whack but FM yearly release feels more (to me) like a yearly medium update rather than a totally new experience. And, as people mention in these forums, in other threads, there are some really annoying issues that seem not to be fixed year after year:

- AI managers who use players still injured (orange indicator), or with low match fitness and health, at clubs that have a plethora of other outstanding replacements (Man U, City, Barcelona, Real...). It goes on all the time and is making it easier to do well in leagues and/or cup competitions. Yes managers do that IRL sometimes but not so constantly. I often start matches with all my players at 100% because I rotate whereas the opposing team start with all their players at 80%- by the end of the 90 minutes, it means they will be in the 50%. It could be that sthg needs to be fixed in the game engine to allow for players to play more games, as you see now IRL. In FM, it's near impossible to play players all the time.

- Bringing a club from the lower leagues and getting tremendous success, year after year, and still not being able to build a new stadium (especially in densely populated area such as Leeds, Birmingham ... in the UK where you would have the numbers going to the stadium).

- Player contracts: it could be me but these millennials are damn greedy buggers, aren't they? Asking for new contracts every year when they would have signed a new contract the previous year (sometimes less than 8 months before). This one is new to me since it was not that bad in fm16.

- Buying players: all player values have rocketed. And while it makes sense if you are looking at the EPL market, this does not seem to be reflected IRL for the other leagues (apart from some exceptions like Ronaldo to Juve - which you would be unlikely to pay for in FM as you'd never sell the amount of shirts Juve have been selling since getting him). Probably complex to implement but this should be adapted to the league you play in.

- Selling players: it's easier I find in FM18 than other versions but the AI clubs are so timid, not making any bids for players they have 'wanted' for over 3 years, even when you transfer list them.  I also find the director of football to be completely inadequate. I have an outstanding DOF at Spurs and yet he did not manage to sell a single player I had added to the unwanted list, in 3 years, even when offered for 0 pounds.

 i'll probably skip fm19 and come back for fm20.

 

Oh and the only reason I was on the forum this evening was because my game crashed to desktop. Not using any mods or skins other than default. And this has been happening 5/6 times since I started playing in April. No reason, game freezes in match and then back to the desktop.

[ParanoidBuddha]

I just hope this year they remember to add the possibility to score with Freekicks

[llDracoll]

10 hours ago, forameuss said:

On the Diablo/3Horsestrikers stuff, I wouldn't say they're comparable beyond both exploiting the ME.  3 striker formations have applications in real life, whereas Diablo was another thing entirely.  That was the shining, perfect example of those who test the boundaries of the ME to find where it creaks.  There was very little chance of someone using that one accidentally, which sets it apart from other similar ME "holes".

3-striker formations having applications in real life... well, they do have some, but it's actually a very uncommon formation nowadays. Neil does raise a point in that AML-STC-AMR is far and away the most common implementation of a 3-striker formation at this point in football, whereas STC-STC-STC is something you don't see often.

Using 3 actual strikers is closer to Diablo than you think.

[forameuss]

5 hours ago, llDracoll said:

3-striker formations having applications in real life... well, they do have some, but it's actually a very uncommon formation nowadays. Neil does raise a point in that AML-STC-AMR is far and away the most common implementation of a 3-striker formation at this point in football, whereas STC-STC-STC is something you don't see often.

Using 3 actual strikers is closer to Diablo than you think.

I didn't say it was common, but it's a valid formation to use.  Which would make it more likely to be used than someone taking their central midfielder aside and advising him to "dae the diablo".  

[RBKalle]

6 ore fa, llDracoll ha scritto:

3-striker formations having applications in real life... well, they do have some, but it's actually a very uncommon formation nowadays. Neil does raise a point in that AML-STC-AMR is far and away the most common implementation of a 3-striker formation at this point in football, whereas STC-STC-STC is something you don't see often.

Using 3 actual strikers is closer to Diablo than you think.

I disagree, at least from a "regular user" standpoint.

And it also partly boils down to how TC represents formations.

If you want to play with three strikers, you only have two choices: 3 Cfs relatively close to eachother, AML, CF, AMR with the two AMs looking waaay too wide. Or you can move them one "square" deeper, but there you have a x-x-2-1 formation.

So, depending on what kind of strikers you want to play, 3 CFs doesn't sound like an outlandish idea at all. Actually it's much more sensible, ON THE TC, than you may think.

I've stumbled across it a few days into FM18's life cycle, and it wasn't a choice I made because I wanted to push the ME, but because to me it looked like a decent formation (plain old 4-3-3 narrow).

Again, the way the game "translates" its code into a visual representation is confusing.

[themadsheep2001]

31 minutes ago, RBKalle said:

I disagree, at least from a "regular user" standpoint.

And it also partly boils down to how TC represents formations.

If you want to play with three strikers, you only have two choices: 3 Cfs relatively close to eachother, AML, CF, AMR with the two AMs looking waaay too wide. Or you can move them one "square" deeper, but there you have a x-x-2-1 formation.

So, depending on what kind of strikers you want to play, 3 CFs doesn't sound like an outlandish idea at all. Actually it's much more sensible, ON THE TC, than you may think.

I've stumbled across it a few days into FM18's life cycle, and it wasn't a choice I made because I wanted to push the ME, but because to me it looked like a decent formation (plain old 4-3-3 narrow).

Again, the way the game "translates" its code into a visual representation is confusing.

It's not a much more sensible option, on the TC at all, nor would it be in real life. It's also not your only choice of three, as you can ask your wide players to sit narrow, stay wide or get further forward too. If people want to use 3 out and out CFs, that's one thing. The idea that's it's common or anywhere near realistic in contemporary football doesn't stack up. And there's no way you'd emulate zemans 4-3-3 with 3 out and out CF, because his wide players played high, started out and then attacking for overloads. 

[theonets]

There's actually a very great way to play with three players almost as strikers, but not with the game breaking 3 strikers.

 

A few things though. 3 strikers is not an autowin even against AI, you will still lose games because 3 strikers means that you're either weakening your flanks or your midfield, and it's usually the flanks where the FB's have to defend against an attacking fullback and a winger. Granted, you'll be getting loads of chances but it can be a massacre too.

 

That said, has anyone tried a front three with two AMC's and a striker? It works very, very much like that Cavani Napoli team that was mentioned a little while back, if you tinker with the AMC roles. I don't use it much because it's way too attacking for my tastes, and doesn't allow as much control of possession as a 4-3-3 which I prefer, but it can be lethal late on when you're a goal behind. It's one of the reasons why I never lose a game 1-0 unless they score in the 91st minute or something, because I switch to something that's ridiculously attacking that either gets me the goal from the kickoff or I concede the second I lose the ball

[forameuss]

I tried a 3-4-3 with Calcio Como, because as always I was top heavy with forwards.  It was very good going forward (probably benefiting from weaknesses in the ME), but absolutely dog toss at the back.  Games were quite entertaining as you followed up wonderful link-up play between the three forwards, with suddenly being 1-on-5 at the back.  Terrific stuff.

[fm2020.smith]

im too addcited to the game to not buy it to be fair. i hope they get some good additions into this one as 18 did feel a little bit like an update. especially hearing that the me hasnt changed in years and they are just recycling the old one each year and trying to bolt on a few new bits here and there. i think there are lots of improvements to be made on 18. scouting. tactics. transfer market. ai managers. ai in general. more youth squads like under 17s national teams. better training. more options to compare teams and managers. create more dynamic relationships with other managers and staff and players not just silly media conversations thatn get repetitive.

[HUNT3R]

3 minutes ago, jamessmith010101 said:

especially hearing that the me hasnt changed in years and they are just recycling the old one each year and trying to bolt on a few new bits here and there.

The ME has almost 3,000,000 lines of code alone. You can't expect it to change regularly. Every year sees changes and upgrades. We've in the last few years started to see a lot more drifting and better lateral play, arced jumps and arced runs being added to the ME (I don't know how many have noticed this?) to make it even more realistic than what we had before. Other sections get re-written to make future/long-term goals possible. There's never ever a time when nothing is done as they have a dedicated team for the ME.

 

[fm2020.smith]

i read though its the same one from 09 !! can you imagin if battlefront used the same 3d engine year after year.    i think though when your paying for something its not unruley to expect drastic changes every year and leaps forward. dont get me wrong i still love the game always will. but its good for people to have a moan and give feedback positive or negative. moaning and feedback its what keeps developer looking to innovate and give a better experiance for the customer each year

[HUNT3R]

5 minutes ago, jamessmith010101 said:

i read though its the same one from 09 !! can you imagin if battlefront used the same 3d engine year after year.    i think though when your paying for something its not unruley to expect drastic changes every year and leaps forward. dont get me wrong i still love the game always will. but its good for people to have a moan and give feedback positive or negative. moaning and feedback its what keeps developer looking to innovate and give a better experiance for the customer each year

I'm sure the ME is even older than that.

I assume you mean Battlefield? If so, Battlefield has been using the Frostbite engine since Bad Company (that I can find) in 2008. Battlefield 4 (from 2013) has been using the same Frostbite 3.0 engine as the latest.

The ME keeps being built on, getting re-writes etc so it's not "the same" ever. There was a huge re-write between FM11 and FM13. As I also said, every year there are changes and improvements.

[fm2020.smith]

i heard they are working on a completely new one might be ready for 20 or 21 is that right ?

[HUNT3R]

54 minutes ago, jamessmith010101 said:

i heard they are working on a completely new one might be ready for 20 or 21 is that right ?

Not sure who we're talking about, but I have no idea.

[fm2020.smith]

think someone said ages ago there was a new engine on the way. on the forums 

[craiigman]

I generally prefer the odd year games 11,13,15,17. Not sure why as I think 12 and 16 have been mentioned a fair bit about being favourites. I’ve generally just got more play time on the odd years. 

Played a lot of 18, but not long term save, longest is just starting season 3.

I’ll buy 19, should it run on my MacBook. But as last couple years, I’ll grab it from Amazon a month after release for £20. 

I don’t like that pre-purchase is available so early with no features released. Also as predicted the Switch version coming out this year, even though FM18 Switch released for £35 just a few months ago.. 

[HUNT3R]

32 minutes ago, jamessmith010101 said:

think someone said ages ago there was a new engine on the way. on the forums 

I'd be very surprised if anyone at SI mentioned it. We don't even know anything (apart from the announcement) about FM19 yet, nevermind versions after that. I'd say if it was posted, it's most likely just speculation at best.