Strikers dont score goals

[Llainen]

ANyone else having trouble with theyre striker/strikers dont scoring no matter what? I have top strikers with my Shakhtar team and i have 20+ shots every game with 10+ hitting the target but no matter how big the chance the strikers wont score. Wingers, CM´s etc scores but not the strikers. I have tried several tacitcs and the results are good but the strikers are immune to put the ball in the back of the net. Any tips?

[KlaaZ]

What are their statistics like, how are you playing and how far into the season are you? Managing Ajax, Dolberg is doing pretty much fine, bagged 23 in 30 appearances across all competitions. 

[Llainen]

Im in April have 6 league matches to go. Borja having 5 goals in 22 matches, Moraes 4 goals in 20 matches, Brenner 1 goal in 13 matches. Playing up front with 2 strikers.. I love strikers in FM so i always tries to make/find a 2 striker tactic but this year its a bit sad.. Borja and Moraes who are my best strikers are playing target man and adwanced forward. 

[HUNT3R]

Tactics forum please. Give as much detail of your system, how you wanted it to play and exactly what issues you have.

[Weller1980]

I sort of agree with this.... I think strikers miss too many 1 on 1 situations from through balls, but don't worry they score plenty from set pieces and corners still....

I've attached a good example of Sturridge missing two CCC from through balls on 29th and 65th. I'm seeing more through balls but strikers don't score enough of them. Still too many goals from set pieces and crosses. Its disappointing! 

Ive posted this example in a thread in the ME section

Liverpool v Tottenham.pkm

[XaW]

You should consider though, that in the real world strikers in 1 on 1 situations score about 1 in 3 on average. Isn't that right, @Svenc? I know I have read your excellent posts about this.

[the_gaffa]

I'm struggling to get my strikers scoring too.

My teams have generally performing well but the strikers have been awful... they just don't seem to get involved in the match. I've tried a number of different roles and formations but I haven't been able to get much out of them at all.

[eye-switcher]

Firmino pressing forward in gegenpressing system scored 12 across all competions for me.

Surez  complete forward in a tiki-taka variant have scored 10 goals in February , all competions.

Both tactics have the "work the ball into the box" set up, still they never get the ball and are completley lethargic when the ball is close to them in the penalty area.

[iAlwaysWin]

Lone striker, 4231 formation and advanced striker role.

imageupload

[Llainen]

55 minutes ago, iAlwaysWin said:

Lone striker, 4231 formation and advanced striker role.

imageupload

WOW! Do you have any special instruction for Morata? And what role have you given your wings and central midfielders?

[iAlwaysWin]

13 minutes ago, Llainen said:

WOW! Do you have any special instruction for Morata? And what role have you given your wings and central midfielders?

just the default advanced striker role, hazard inside foward one side, cristian pavon winger attack on other side, fekir advanced playmaker in behind him , i also have work ball into box selected.

[wardog]

I agree with origional post. Virtually all my goals come from corners free kicks and penalties. Regardless of the 3-6 clear cut chances i create per game in normal play none of them will go in. 

[Svenc]

13 hours ago, XaW said:

You should consider though, that in the real world strikers in 1 on 1 situations score about 1 in 3 on average. Isn't that right, @Svenc? I know I have read your excellent posts about this.

Not merely that, if misses happen in a single game, rather than spread out over weeks, it triggers  overreactions too (which may be a more pressing concern as to FM). I've personally never had a "huge" issue with 1vs1s; but then I don't perceive a penalty as an almost certain goal either -- and that penalty is a much easier "One on one" for typically. Anybody betting on big time otherwise in real footie would lose tons of money long-term... no matter who that forward is. We had polls in the past that pretty much revealed players would expect to see one on ones converted at borderline penalty rates (~7-8/10). That's pretty wild. Can't blame them though. It's how football is presented on television. And even in specialist print media. It's not coincidence that even FIFa players report about the issue at hand regularly. And that despite the fact that Fifa by definition sees less misses than FM.
https://fifaforums.easports.com/en/discussion/314660/anybody-else-missing-an-incredible-amount-of-one-v-ones

Just this morning I've read an article on Kicker.de, Germany's "premium" football magazine, about Leverkusen's curious record from the penalty spot in the past three years. Whilst the article was right in pointing out that Leverkusen during that time basically missed half their penalties in the Bundesliga (9 out of 18 or so) -- it started out with using a term that is just completely hogwash. In German there is a term that basically translates to "100% chance" (which apparently, a penalty is) -- and it's being used everywhere. I reckon it's not quite the same as the English "Sitter", but it's nonense all the same. Even the most casual of writer may realize that this particular "100% chance", the penalty, curiously tends to be missed/not converted about 25-30% of the time.

Whether FM is "accurate", doubt it. Hard to tell. However it's likely not as off as public perception of football oft is. SI may or may not misinterpret data suggesting how much more likely a cross field ball is considered to handicap the keeper vs. a narrow, central through ball though. From a crossfield assist, the ball has to change direction massively in an instant to at all go on target (simple physics). In the latter case, not at all. The keeper can typically decently anticipate. However, that doesn't necessarily mean it's easyish to score from crossfield balls -- let alone turning them into attempts that regularly at all go on target, in particularly with the first touch, first time. Probably linked this example before -- but as it stands, I'd take any such assist over the typically through ball leading to a one on one almost any time. That it doesn't even register as a CCC is another story of flawed FM data entirelly.
 

 

Edited November 2, 2018 by Svenc

[jamesshipman87]

ive found this to be the case too, also if you watch dr benjy on youtube hes 2 saves going and hes struggled to score with strikers.i dont know if its the realisum of football they have put in this years FM compaired to previous FM's where your strikers would score 20+ goals every season.but i remember last years fm strikers wouldnt score when it first released then they did updates on match engine to fix it.

[phd_angel]

Agreed. Everybody in my team is scoring, except the strikers (and the goalkeeper). I've been adding extra sessions of Chance Conversion, but results are yet to be seen.

[Xeewaj Q.]

On 02/11/2018 at 00:24, Llainen said:

ANyone else having trouble with theyre striker/strikers dont scoring no matter what? I have top strikers with my Shakhtar team and i have 20+ shots every game with 10+ hitting the target but no matter how big the chance the strikers wont score. Wingers, CM´s etc scores but not the strikers. I have tried several tacitcs and the results are good but the strikers are immune to put the ball in the back of the net. Any tips?

Don't use Advanced Forward/Attack. Use Complete/Pressing Forward/Support. They'll score a lot.

Well, PSG is not the best proof, but I don't have anything better ATM for FM19. Shakhtar should feel in Ukrainian League like PSG in Ligue 1 anyway.

P.S. advertisement: try my tactics - strikers and everyone else will score a lot.

[Boomer Ang]

Mine are scoring a lot, using my own tactic.

[RTHerringbone]

Yeah, this definitely is not an issue. With the right setup you can get a goal-a-game, you just need to spend a while watching matches with a reasonable level of detail to understand where space is / isn't, and where any supply issues are.

Although it has been too short a period of time to be definitive, I've had Alcacer at Dortmund banging goals in freely from open play. Interestingly a number of his assists are coming from AP (S) Gotze in the AMC position, which I've also read as being "broken" in the main feedback thread.

[Weller1980]

8 minutes ago, RTHerringbone said:

Yeah, this definitely is not an issue. With the right setup you can get a goal-a-game, you just need to spend a while watching matches with a reasonable level of detail to understand where space is / isn't, and where any supply issues are.

Although it has been too short a period of time to be definitive, I've had Alcacer at Dortmund banging goals in freely from open play. Interestingly a number of his assists are coming from AP (S) Gotze in the AMC position, which I've also read as being "broken" in the main feedback thread.

So are you happy with your strikers conversation rate in 1 v 1 situitations?

I can now create nice through balls but my strikers regulatory miss ccc from said through balls. The strikers however score plenty from crosses and set pieces.

Edited November 3, 2018 by Weller1980

[RTHerringbone]

1 minute ago, Weller1980 said:

So are you happy with your strikers conversation rate in 1 v 1 situitations? I can now create nice through balls but my strikers regulatory miss ccc. The strikers however score plenty from crosses and set pieces.

Yes. I don't create huge numbers of shots but always 60%+ are on target or blocked (mostly on target) and so this means I'm getting ~10 shots on goal per match and I'm scoring 1-3 goals.

That overall conversion rate sounds too high TBH but remember that a CCC isn't a guaranteed goal. Has always been a stat in FM that I've ignored. I'd say that my conversion of cutbacks is higher than bona-fide one-on-ones but again it doesn't feel too out of whack to me.

I get a nice number of goals like Neymar scored last night which wasn't exactly a one-on-one, but was a striker running onto a throughball. 

[Svenc]

1 hour ago, RTHerringbone said:

 

That overall conversion rate sounds too high TBH but remember that a CCC isn't a guaranteed goal. Has always been a stat in FM that I've ignored. I'd say that my conversion of cutbacks is higher than bona-fide one-on-ones but again it doesn't feel too out of whack to me.

 

And it absolutely should be, if both go on target -- and if FM aims to be a simulation game, mind. I've yet go get a personal taste of FM19. But would be interesting if players who get their forwards to roughly average a goal per game's profile would look like. In particular, as to the average number of attempts they get, e.g. the screen showing their amount of shots. IRL, there is no forward whatsover who consistentyl, ever season, closes in on the goal per match average without also not having at least 4+ attempts per match average. This is because outside of penalty and tap-ins and the like, the forward is simply in the disadvantage. Scoring chances that are better chances than getting heads upon rolling a coin, roughly, are very rare. Football is an ultra low scoring sports for absolutely reason.

IAlawaysWin has pretty much argued in a prior post that similar to Kane at Spurs (5 average per match, like 30%+ of all their attempts and even moreso the ones within the box from open play); he's set up MOrata to be the focal point of attacks, for instance. Something the AI managers, traditioinally, has also never done (and not because you couldn't do it). Would be very interesting if he could post the shot stats under "reports" in the linked profile also.

I think it would be awesome if the game could introduce feedback like this in future iterations, though. Like showing the shot locations, blocks, saves misses (red) and goals (green) in a player's profile. Also whilst making that oft vital distinction as to open play attempts vs set pieces, naturally.

The above was CR7 last season from between September to January, La liga, btw. The account was strangely suspended, but somebody had actually bothered to put all the shots in sequence into a video on YouTube -- it was pretty glorious, like football video of the year material. And perhaps crucially not that much off how you'd experience something like that in-game (heavily compressed with one match after another and highlight after highlight rolling in). That if, it it were at all possible mind.

Edited November 3, 2018 by Svenc

[wardog]

2 hours ago, RTHerringbone said:

Yes. I don't create huge numbers of shots but always 60%+ are on target or blocked (mostly on target) and so this means I'm getting ~10 shots on goal per match and I'm scoring 1-3 goals.

That overall conversion rate sounds too high TBH but remember that a CCC isn't a guaranteed goal. Has always been a stat in FM that I've ignored. I'd say that my conversion of cutbacks is higher than bona-fide one-on-ones but again it doesn't feel too out of whack to me.

I get a nice number of goals like Neymar scored last night which wasn't exactly a one-on-one, but was a striker running onto a throughball. 

Id disagree with this. 

Ive had 4 saves now, 3 during beta and my main save ive started since full release. 

During that time ive been at Bayern where Lewandowski did ok but took time to hit stride think maybe 15 goals for the season, probably about acceptable for him given he also missed start of season. 

Livi is a hard one. 

and Hibs I had Kamberi - he also took pens, and Shankland who took pens if he played. between them at time of full release and save ending in March they had 20 goals. Given that half of these goals were pens, and i created upwards of 3 clear cut chances per game doesn't sit right. 

 

My new main save is with Rangers. 5 league games in and Morelos doesn't have a single domestic goal - hes not on pens so doesn't have that to boost him up. Now I was playing a 4231 but a friend recommended going 4141 from his save he had good success and i thought I would try it. Sample size of this is low, as 2 games since switching. Since the switch though my right winger has scored 2 hat tricks. This combats the space issue. As clearly the space is there. I have screenshots of where Morelos is shooting (he hasnt scored since second leg of europa league first qualifier we play - 8 games ago) consistently getting into space, he isnt the most composed striker in game so this could be a factor, but for a striker with 16 finishing, 16 off the ball and good anticipation you'd expect more than 0 goals from 8 games especially when you look and see that in every single one hes getting 2/3 very good chances. Im not saying a clear cut chance should always be a goal, far from it. But that conversion rate on a lethal striker in real life and one who has almost all the stats, and certainly should be capable in the spfl with these stats. While the right winger has 6 goals in 2 games. 

 

Infact I've just went and checked all my goalscorers. Since that Morelos goal in the second leg of the first europa qualifiers, I have had 1 goal in total from any of my strikers by the end of September. (spoilers for anyone watchimg my series im sorry) 

[turnip]

 

Alternatively, Strikers can in fact score goals. He's played most of the season as an Advanced Forward alongside a Target Man or False Nine.

[Svenc]

15 minutes ago, turnip said:

18 minutes ago, wardog said:

 he isnt the most composed striker in game so this could be a factor, but for a striker with 16 finishing, 16 off the ball and good anticipation you'd expect more

 

 

Not specific as to FM19: But it's another big time public misperception that there are forwards that would consistently score more because they're much more deadly in front of goal. This is naturally, also caused by how pundits on telly talk about forwards. They're either invincible, like Kahn arguing on German telly to an audience of millions how Griezmann would for sure score like 90% of his one on ones (for sure, Oli). Or they're useless who better should have never shown up, let alone started playing football. There's a difference between forwards on their levels, but clubs spend millions in an attempts to go that small extra percent -- and of fail. This has traditionally applied to FM also, and it shows every year in how some players get above average forwards to score at below average amounts, whilst others get also-runs scoring plenty.
 

 

Edited November 3, 2018 by Svenc

[wardog]

5 minutes ago, Svenc said:

Not specific as to FM19: But it's another big time public misperception that there are forwards that would consistently score more because they're much more deadly in front of goal. This is naturally, also caused by how pundits on telly talk about forwards. They're either invincible, like Kahn arguing on German telly to an audience of millions how Griezmann would for sure score like 90% of his one on ones (for sure, Oli). Or useless. There's a difference between forwards on their levels, but clubs spend millions in an attempts to go that small extra percent -- and of fail. This has traditionally applied to FM also, and it shows every year in how some players get above average forwards to score at below average amounts, whilst others get also-runs scoring plenty.
 

 

Im not saying he should be deadly i think you missing my point. I have 1 goal in 8 games over my strikers. All my strikers are very good strikers at my level. You would expect more. Thats all im saying. Sure strikers can go on droughts, but it seems from talking to others in the community theres similar issues. I highlighted my striker did have a weakness in his stat. But for a team who creates 3 or more clear cut chances per game, mostly falling to a striker. Do you think a return of 1 goal in 8 is right? 

Fwiw not all clear cut chances will have fallen to the striker, but most will have and dont have time to go through them all work out exactly how many. but if we say 8x 3 is 24. knock off a few so say 18 as a rough guess. thats 1 goal in 18 clear cut chances from strikers who are more than competent at this level.

I also checked and the goal I have from my striker came from a corner where someone knocked it down and he had a tap in from under a yard. Thats 0 goals in open play from strikers in 8 games, 

Edited November 3, 2018 by wardog

[RTHerringbone]

2 minutes ago, wardog said:

But for a team who creates 3 or more clear cut chances per game, mostly falling to a striker. Do you think a return of 1 goal in 8 is right? 

Firstly, don't base everything on the CCC stat. Secondly, sure 1 in 8 isn't good, but then there are examples in this thread of strikers with 45-50 goals, so it clearly has to be possible to get a decent return.

[keithfc]

You can have a look on other team's conversion rate. It's only 10%, 11% for the  top team. It is lower than previous FM and real life. The average goal for the top team is always not more than two.

 

All of them exist since the last update of ME. 

 

 

Edited November 3, 2018 by keithfc

[Svenc]

25 minutes ago, wardog said:

Im not saying he should be deadly i think you missing my point. I have 1 goal in 8 games over my strikers. All my strikers are very good strikers at my level. You would expect more. Thats all im saying. Sure strikers can go on droughts, but it seems from talking to others in the community theres similar issues. I highlighted my striker did have a weakness in his stat. But for a team who creates 3 or more clear cut chances per game, mostly falling to a striker. Do you think a return of 1 goal in 8 is right? 

That depends on that chance...... which is part of the problem. And it's traditionally a very subjective one..... In actually football analysis, "big chances" start at a goal probability of roughly 1 in 5 (the overall shot conversion in football on all levels is about 1 in 10ish, 10% so a 1 in 5 chance, 20%, is pretty damn good already). That does not translate to scoring one in five. If you've ever rolled a six sided dice, you may realize how long you can go without actually rolling that six. The chance doesn't magically get better just because you have failed to hit that 6 ten times running. The personal profiles of the forwards don't show much, but they show how many attempts a forward has. From my experience, unless you hit upon an "exploit" -- if you doN#t get a forward to *average* roughly 3,5-4+ attempts per match, he won't average a goal per match roughly by the end of the season.

At the more extreme ends of finishing streaks: To me personally FM has never produced the finishing streaks that football produces every season somewhere. They are oft a significantly factor in "big teams" perceived underperformances in the league table, like Ronaldo last term scoring but 4 goals on over 100 shots between September and January (or Dortmund slumping to 18th place in the BL in early 2015, despite having the better chances every other week).  If top teams underperform as to FM, they tend to do so differently. However, if it would, these forums would be an absolutely nightmare for the mods. Perhaps it has all come to happen some in Fm19, tho.

 

18 minutes ago, keithfc said:

You can have a look on other team's conversion rate. It's only 10%, 11% for the  top team. It is lower than previous FM and real life. The average goal for the top team is always not more than two.

All of them exist since the last update of ME.

 

That would be most curious indeed. Traditionally, the AI produced seasonal shot conversion rates between 5% (unrealistically ultra defensive teams barely working moves by not advancing players and having most of its shots from set pieces or isolated forwards forced to shoot, etc.) and ~16% (similar to Man City's conversion last term). A change that rubs off on the basic shot conversion this much looks pretty significant. That naturally would be symptoms. As to the causes -- SI have never deliberately made forwards miss reasonably big time chances to keep scorelines "realistic". Quite the contrary, once it was agreed upon that some chances tend to be too ofently missed (or vice versa) they stepped in. Once upon a time there was even an issue with a specific type of on one one, acknowledged by the ME's then main coder... and eventually, adressed some. The challenge may lie in a) providing them examples and b) convincing them that it's just all wrong though. Speaking about ultra defensive AI, still as much of a thing as in the Beta? Even moreso? This has always rubbed off on shot conversions / goals right there (and could be tested in the editor by making all AI managers prefer ultra attacking formations, attributes etc.)

Edited November 3, 2018 by Svenc

[Piperita]

I am playing a counter based defensive 4141 (the old definition). In 7 games since the update I have 6 striker goals while playing one up front (and four more when going two up front). 

With my current squad my forwards are pretty different and it shows with their way of playing. 

• Allagui is close to what I want. Runs into spaces and is ice cold. However, he is nigh unusable when the tempo is out.
• Diamantakos also runs into spaces but fails to finish. On the flipside, he is absolutely bonkers when it comes to helping his teammates.
• Veerman is super at standing right and spraying balls to the flanks from deep down. 

Allagui has awesome composure while Diamantakos has not. Allagui is worse almost everywhere but his composure makes him still a great pick who shines when going against bigger teams. Diamantakos meanwhile plays when I play against smaller teams as he helps the midfield. Veerman is a slow beast who has the stat to do simple, right. He won't do the big moves but he knows that and plays accordingly. Of course with him up front he won't be a Poacher.

Like I said in the feedback thread, I think(!) that mentals and motivation play a way bigger role now which makes some seemingly strong strikers suck and some weaker ones play above their technical stats. I almost sold Allagui from the beginning but he outplayed expectations whereas Diamantakos underplayed (but has most upside). Something similar happened at other teams and positions. Let's just say my 'Let the U19 fill the midfield' is way, way worse than before.

[Llainen]

3 hours ago, RTHerringbone said:

Yeah, this definitely is not an issue. With the right setup you can get a goal-a-game, you just need to spend a while watching matches with a reasonable level of detail to understand where space is / isn't, and where any supply issues are.

Although it has been too short a period of time to be definitive, I've had Alcacer at Dortmund banging goals in freely from open play. Interestingly a number of his assists are coming from AP (S) Gotze in the AMC position, which I've also read as being "broken" in the main feedback thread.

I dont agree, there is nothing wrong with the tactic and its not the tactics fault that Borja/Moraes/Brenner dont score one open goals from a cross, 1v1 with the keeper etc. The chances are being created like crazy, so cant blame the tactic here. Let say at the Arsenal vs Liverpool match today Liverpool has 10 shots on target, 5 of them are Firmino missing on open goal and 1v1 with the keeper, i dont think Liverpool fans or Klopp would blame the tactic for not scoring.. 

[Svenc]

10 minutes ago, Llainen said:

Let say at the Arsenal vs Liverpool match today Liverpool has 10 shots on target, 5 of them are Firmino missing on open goal and 1v1 with the keeper, i dont think Liverpool fans or Klopp would blame the tactic for not scoring.. 

They may overreact and misinterpret though.
 

Don't suscribe to such channels, btw. Whilst this is a hilarious vid indeed -- they will turn you into FM Rage Quitter in less than no time. 

Edited November 3, 2018 by Svenc

[RTHerringbone]

9 minutes ago, Llainen said:

I dont agree, there is nothing wrong with the tactic and its not the tactics fault that Borja/Moraes/Brenner dont score one open goals from a cross, 1v1 with the keeper etc.

Well maybe there's a perception gap between what I expect and what you expect. Others have provided images in this thread of strikers scoring 25-50 goals a season. Those are good numbers and provide some evidence that strikers do score goals in FM19.

I've used variants of 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 so far with Dortmund, Rangers, Santos and River Plate and the striker is always the main scorer, and I create tactics which produce "sensible" numbers of shots and crosses, so I'm afraid I can't agree with the title of this thread.

[Svenc]

1 minute ago, RTHerringbone said:

Well maybe there's a perception gap between what I expect and what you expect. Others have provided images in this thread of strikers scoring 25-50 goals a season. Those are good numbers and provide some evidence that strikers do score goals in FM19.

I've used variants of 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 so far with Dortmund, Rangers, Santos and River Plate and the striker is always the main scorer, and I create tactics which produce "sensible" numbers of shots and crosses, so I'm afraid I can't agree with the title of this thread.

Can you show his profile screen under report->stats which displays how many shots those forward have? Naturally,  best to be compared to somebody who's forwards regularly don't....

[Mitja]

imo if AI strikers don't score enough then there's an issue if they do that's up to human tactical setup etc. if human can get their strikers to score a lot that doesn't say much about realism.

[keithfc]

21 hours ago, iAlwaysWin said:

Lone striker, 4231 formation and advanced striker role.

imageupload

goals are come from current ME or before updated ME?

[iAlwaysWin]

10 minutes ago, keithfc said:

goals are come from current ME or before updated ME?

19.1

[Etebaer]

I have started a CaC Team recently playing a 2 striker Setup and after 6 Competition Matches they have 6 and 3 Goals each and a midfielder has 2 Goals, the other Players not more than one if any.

Most assist come from my AP, CMr and WBr.

[keithfc]

Success in first season is not difficult. The most difficult your striker  score continuously season to season. It is so frustrating that all teams are parking bus after you success in first season, than your striker will score less.

[MBarbaric]

2 ore fa, RTHerringbone ha scritto:

 Others have provided images in this thread of strikers scoring 25-50 goals a season. Those are good numbers and provide some evidence that strikers do score goals in FM19.

 

 

the problem with this is that it doesn't really say anything. it is as valid as people complaining their strikers score zero goals in 10 matches.  that is purely quantitative analysis where you pick numbers and make conclusions. for all we know, all these goals might come from penalties/set pieces...

to make any worthwhile conclusion, one would need to watch each positional attack (excluding set pieces/counter attacks... as these are entirely different things) in order to really understand why/how certain player scores.

my impression (not an analysis) for years has been that in (positional attacks), there is a significant lack of off the ball movement hindering combination play that makes the ME significantly over-reliant on wide play. this also influences the performances of possession based teams.

As I understand, new FM has significantly improved the defensive phase this year. This may expose the wide play as OP again and we might be seeing the return of "crossing simulator". It might be really important to watch which downloaded tactics are most popular to get an insight into new ME weakness in order to sort this out as, finally, the defensive phase appears to be brought to a decent level.

 

[russell9]

Same here, everyone in my team score goals except the strikers even when my team won by large margin. Tried 4231, 442 and all kind of playing styles and different team but the strikers still impotent. Does not happen to me during beta.
 

[RandomGuy.]

Found that a lone striker plays better with Support duty, but that's maybe just the teams I've used.

I find strikers missing as many chances as previous saves, but feels harder to get them a clear chance. Can be annoying when they miss, but realistically, strikers at certain levels do need two or three chances a game to score. 

Top level strikers should be clinical though. Might be worth experimenting with Juve and Ronaldo, he seems deadly on all my saves so far so should be relatively easy to get scoring.

[Svenc]

1 hour ago, MBarbaric said:

to make any worthwhile conclusion, one would need to watch each positional attack (excluding set pieces/counter attacks... as these are entirely different things) in order to really understand why/how certain player scores.

On a repeat here too, but my impression here is that SI don't monitor how many attempts come about by set piece play vs open play specifically -- and how it compares to actual football. My belief is that the amount of set piece attempts is significantly higher than in football -- naturally moreso if one team shuts up shop / keeps armies of players behind the ball from its own positional open play attacks (which defensive AI traditionally does). This belief is also backed up a bit by soak test data which used to be posted in the public forums until a few years back.

Whilst there was much data in there we have no access to -- there was no distinction between this whatsoever. There's two kinds of things to be balanced here. How positional/open play is defended, vs how set pieces are defended either way. Both will result into shots.... plus, to simplify, additionally set pieces typically come about if the defending team (more or less easily)  gets a foot into every open play move. Either to deflect a shot for a corner. To foul a player for a free kick. Or to clear things for a throw. Traditionally players trying to maximimze their possession stats for the sake of maxing out their possession numbres had a significant issue here in particular... this goes years back. Measures that make it easy to keep the ball aren't necessarily measures that (positionally) stretch defenses... They'd keep on arguing how they would create attempts from close range, but if you watched, it was primarily that header from a cross off a set piece into a fully packed box -- mostly not converted. As to FM 19, there are reports about set pieces being perceived as being a bit more "deadly" in general, though. Hopefully not too much, imo.

Edited November 3, 2018 by Svenc

[MBarbaric]

56 minuti fa, Svenc ha scritto:

On a repeat here too, but my impression here is that SI don't monitor how many attempts come about by set piece play vs open play specifically -- and how it compares to actual football. My belief is that the amount of set piece attempts is significantly higher than in football -- naturally moreso if one team shuts up shop / keeps armies of players behind the ball from its own positional open play attacks (which defensive AI traditionally does). This belief is also backed up a bit by soak test data which used to be posted in the public forums until a few years back.

Whilst there was much data in there we have no access to -- there was no distinction between this whatsoever. There's two kinds of things to be balanced here. How positional/open play is defended, vs how set pieces are defended either way. Both will result into shots.... plus, to simplify, additionally set pieces typically come about if the defending team (more or less easily)  gets a foot into every open play move. Either to deflect a shot for a corner. To foul a player for a free kick. Or to clear things for a throw. Traditionally players trying to maximimze their possession stats for the sake of maxing out their possession numbres had a significant issue here in particular... this goes years back. Measures that make it easy to keep the ball aren't necessarily measures that (positionally) stretch defenses... They'd keep on arguing how they would create attempts from close range, but if you watched, it was primarily that header from a cross off a set piece into a fully packed box -- mostly not converted. As to FM 19, there are reports about set pieces being perceived as being a bit more "deadly" in general, though. Hopefully not too much, imo.

there was a significant flaw within set pieces in fm 16 (don't know about 19). basically, most teams (on default) attacked with 7 players in the box which is 40% more than what is usually used in real  this left the attacking team with only 2 players at the back and nobody on the edge of the box creating a ton of counter attacks, shots, crosses that normally wouldn't happen. would be interesting to see the default setting in fm19. 

don't know how SI compares stats but I doubt they simply compare ME stats v real stats and ending there. Not only it would be wrong in principle, their stats are often not comparable to real stats (i.e. crosses counting in game crosses, cut back passes and crosses from set pieces). nobody in football lumps all these together and would really be surprised if SI did.

[Svenc]

23 minutes ago, MBarbaric said:

there was a significant flaw within set pieces in fm 16 (don't know about 19). basically, most teams (on default) attacked with 7 players in the box which is 40% more than what is usually used in real  this left the attacking team with only 2 players at the back and nobody on the edge of the box creating a ton of counter attacks, shots, crosses that normally wouldn't happen. would be interesting to see the default setting in fm19. 

Oh yeah, one of the reasons you could "FM" the AI (as the FM community puts is when you have few shots but score more)... I think on the most aggressive they kept but one player back (well plus the keeper naturally). The ME is never balanced purely on a statistically level, afaik, but it's a benchmark. Some of the best bug reporters tend to go far beyond, see also wwfan's former analysis of the aforementioned one on one issue of non-angled through balls -- in a follow-up post to Paul Collyer's. This wasn't merely opinion, it was backed up by research afaik.
 

 

[LordCurlyton]

Just my 2 cents:  it seems from my playing experience that Year 2 is the real benchmark year for whether a striker is worth it for whatever system you are running.  Whether its 4-2-3-1, 4-4-2, 4-3-3, whatever I've fancied, strikers always seem to get out of the gate a bit slower than the rest of the team.  Even then, its not entirely worthless as really good strikers might not show up for a few games but if they are a big match kind of guy, suddenly bags a brace against worthy opposition.  Sometimes they make up for a lack of goals by assisting a goal or starting a run that leads to a goal.  If I can watch a highlight and point to the striker as the instigator or finisher of the run of play that gave me a goal, I'm perfectly fine living through feast and famine times. 

However, if by Year 2 I'm not able to depend on them for a goal every two games or either a goal or assist every game (averaged out over the course of the whole season), then they either get dropped to backup or moved on to try someone else.  If I have someone who averages more than 1 point per game I will give them an arm and a leg to stay around.  But then I also reward loyalty and not complaining in-game, so there is that.  I think its just as important that the AI is "scared" of your strikers and thus devotes what appears to me to be extra resources to limiting them, which is why I will see wingers or midfielders picking up the slack when famine hits my striker corps.

One final thing for those having issues getting a striker to score:  are you using all the interactions available to try and motivate them, and are you actually benching them for a few games to fire them up?  That's always worked wonders for me if you have a backup striker who can ably step in (and you should).

[wardog]

I think its fair for me to post here again. At the recommended by on of my youtube subs, I switch from 4231 to 4141 - was unconvinced taking my playmaker out and replacing with a cdm was a great idea for adding goals but seen a huge shift. Goals are aflow. Still seeing a fair amount coming from non-striker options but for whatever reason now the striker is now finding more space and also being more clinical. 

[NotSoSpecialOneFm]

Yeah Iv'e noticed this massively, strikers with top draw finishing couldnt hit a barn door. 

 

also noticed teams absolutely refuse to cross a ball unless they are literally on the byline about to see a goal kick. changed all the crossing options, playing with out and out and wingers instructed to stay wide and cross and they just cant resist running inside or laying short balls to edge of area, where weaker strikers just get murdered.

 

Glad I'm not the only one. 

[MrPompey]

the issue is the definition of a clear cut CHANCE. We arent talking about a 1 yard tap in but merely a decent goal scoring opportunity.

What FM AI has not yet mastered in my opinion is runs and late runs into boxes and some passes into space for forwards to run on to. There are too many to feet or requiring players to back track slightly. That said I have seen some passes into space for attacking players to run on to. There is always bias in football. Read a write up from different team papers on their view of a particular match. As FM manager's of teams we will have the same bias

I agree with some of the earlier posts, TV will focus on certain elements, you really need to watch matches at near ground level to understand what a clear cut chance is and in truth how difficult it is

However the way to highlight this is with defect reports and PKMs to evidence them with also an eye to real life conversions and statistics.

A final word is how often do manager's play different tactics per game and adjust mid game. Playing the same tactic home and away may not be enough

[Purple Bane]

Advanced forward in a 4231. I have no real point, just throwing my considerable oar in. Lacabackup for a rotation example:

 

[NotSoSpecialOneFm]

similar finishing stats to auba (slightly inferior granted) but these stats....

 

I'm just bitter cause the twitch community had to watch his shooting!!!