Football Manager 2020 Feedback Thread

[Kev Gee]

 Another great ME example....

[Kev Gee]

And this brilliant piece of shambolicness....

Keeper.... No I can't be bothered to pick it up mate...

 

 

[La Grande Inter]

This thread I admit is just blowing of steam before putting FM20 on hold for a while.

Played with Bari since release and had much fun, then the december patches and I no longer could score no mather what. Started a new game with Sevillia and got a 0W-5D-5L.
So I ran several preseasons with PSG and quarter season with Real madrid using default tactics and still can't score. the wingers and strikers average a 6.3 grade.

Bale have 0 Goals and 1 ass in 5 games.
Hazard in 10 games 0 goal and 4 ass.
Benzema 2 goal and 1 assist..
The AMC is leading the scoring by 5 followed by kroos and a bunch of defenders with 2.

Back to FM19 for a few months I guess.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[noikeee]

5 hours ago, themadsheep2001 said:

1v1s (also defined as big chances) in real life are missed... a lot (average 19% conversion). The main issue is that a) the game is too liberal with what it calls a big chances and b) they don't happen as often in real life (average 3 times a game)

These low numbers of conversion IRL are often quoted here, but what exactly counts as a one-on-one for those stats?

Because I suspect the kind of one-on-ones we often get in FM - ball booted over the top, striker picks it up, takes some 3 or 4 touches running with it at pace heading into goal, taking all that time to think about he's gonna do to dummy the keeper - is a pretty specific and pretty damn lethal kind of chance IRL. Do those stats include other kind of more difficult one-on-ones, such as a loose ball in the area that puts a striker clear but he only has a split-second to execute it and hit it with his first touch?

[noikeee]

In fact it often feels like it's the other way around in FM, if it's a split second first touch mid-height volley, the striker is more accurate than if he has time to prepare the shot. Been that way for quite a few FMs now.

Edited December 22, 2019 by noikeee

[themadsheep2001]

52 minutes ago, noikeee said:

These low numbers of conversion IRL are often quoted here, but what exactly counts as a one-on-one for those stats?

Because I suspect the kind of one-on-ones we often get in FM - ball booted over the top, striker picks it up, takes some 3 or 4 touches running with it at pace heading into goal, taking all that time to think about he's gonna do to dummy the keeper - is a pretty specific and pretty damn lethal kind of chance IRL. Do those stats include other kind of more difficult one-on-ones, such as a loose ball in the area that puts a striker clear but he only has a split-second to execute it and hit it with his first touch?

They aren't low. Punditry and highlights has skewed perception massively. @Svenc had an excellent shot map. Below is the definition. It wouldn't count your last example as a striker would be under high pressure. People anecdotally say they have a high conversion, but shot analysis and stats don't really back that up. Of course you will have variations between teams and players. But the idea they are converted as a lethal regular chance isn't particularly true. The most lethal kind of 1 v 1 is the penalty if I recall correctly. And that's 75.8% last time I looked. 

Definition: A situation where a player should reasonably be expected to score, usually in a one on one scenario or from very close range when the ball has a clear path to goal and there is low to moderate pressure on the shooter. Penalties are always considered big chances.

[Svenc]

59 minutes ago, noikeee said:

In fact it often feels like it's the other way around in FM, if it's a split second first touch mid-height volley, the striker is more accurate than if he has time to prepare the shot. Been that way for quite a few FMs now.

1vs1 rank anywhere between 1-4ish (even from central positions) and 1 in2ish attempts typically, for an average of 1 in 3. It depends. That said you could be on to something here too. Balls volleyed on target give the keeper far less of a chance to react. The number of touches in general are a major factor in any finishing study (other factors include the distance and angles towards goal influenced also by keeper position + the distance towards the nearest Defender nearby). 

However, naturally, a volley on target is difficult to pull off. It may be too easy as to FM, which also may influence  the oft voiced perception that goals would be so oftenly scored from crosses/crossfield balls. A finish off a crossfield ball tends to change direction of the ball in an instant (in particular if volleyed), or else the ball would fly miles off the target, further handicaping the keeper. Your average one on one doesn't do this, the keeper is typically in the advantage most of the time.

Si should really have all the data and contactcs they need though. Implementing it all accurately into an engine is another thing, naturally… but of vital importance. I think this is a debate that will go on forever, in general even if the game would one day ever be 100% "accurate". It's an ongoing debate in Football after all, even though in Football the chances of conversion, the generally ball park are well understood by now (which is why the top analysts or bettors can predict future performances pretty decently).

Edited December 22, 2019 by Svenc

[noikeee]

17 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

They aren't low. Punditry and highlights has skewed perception massively. @Svenc had an excellent shot map. Below is the definition. It wouldn't count your last example as a striker would be under high pressure. People anecdotally say they have a high conversion, but shot analysis and stats don't really back that up. Of course you will have variations between teams and players. But the idea they are converted as a lethal regular chance isn't particularly true. The most lethal kind of 1 v 1 is the penalty if I recall correctly. And that's 75.8% last time I looked. 

Definition: A situation where a player should reasonably be expected to score, usually in a one on one scenario or from very close range when the ball has a clear path to goal and there is low to moderate pressure on the shooter. Penalties are always considered big chances.

Think of a world class striker like Mbappe or Cristiano Ronaldo, or maybe even a player a little below their level, but with high technical ability which is the case for most top level forwards in the top half of the top leagues. I'm thinking of a very specific scenario, which is what we get over and over again in FM - they're released on a long ball over the top, have had time to control the ball flawlessly (which apparently every striker manages to do in FM) and go clear ahead of the defender, have time for a few seconds to take a few touches whilst they decide what they're gonna do - place the shot, go round the keeper and shoot, dink it over him, smash it (bad idea, but possible), etc. So I've described basicallly the easiest open play chance you can get on a football pitch, the easiest possible chance apart from a penalty kick.

I wouldn't expect the rate of finishing in these cases to be anywhere near as low as 19%. 19% is only 1 in 5 scored. Surely a top top striker in a chance like this, could get it in the back of the net about 1 in every 2 attempts?

You're telling me 3 in every 4 penalties are scored, but these chances which are the easiest you can get on a football pitch apart from a penalty kick, are 1 in 5? Surely this sounds a bit off?

My other example of a less clear one-on-one isn't "high pressure", at least not from the defenders. Imagine a cross from deep, the defensive line isn't particularly super high but the defender misses the timing for his header and the striker is suddenly clear. But he has less space to run into, otherwise he'll be on top of the keeper. He has to either take a first time shot, or control it with 1 touch and then shoot immediately. This, of course, is much harder to score than the 1-on-1s we get in FM where the striker has had time to control the ball and think clearly about what he's gonna do.

4 minutes ago, Svenc said:

1vs1 rank anywhere between 1-4ish (even from central positions) and 1 in2ish attempts typically, for an average of 1 in 3. It depends. That said you could be on to something here too. Balls volleyed on target give the keeper far less of a chance to react. The number of touches in general are a major factor in any finishing study (other factors include the distance and angles towards goal influenced also by keeper position + the distance towards the nearest Defender nearby). 

However, naturally, a volley on target is difficult to pull off. It may be too easy as to FM, which also may influence  the oft voiced perception that goals would be so oftenly scored from crosses/crossfield balls. A finish off a crossfield ball tends to change direction of the ball in an instant (in particular if volleyed), or else the ball would fly miles off the target, further handicaping the keeper. Your average one on one doesn't do this, the keeper is typically in the advantage most of the time.

Si should really have all the data and contactcs they need though. Implementing it all accurately into an engine is another thing, naturally… but of vital importance.

A volley is definitely very hard for a keeper to save, if the striker hits it well - the sudden change of direction is lethal. This is modelled well in FM. What isn't modelled very well is that first time shots are also very hard to execute, and they don't feel like they're hard to execute in FM.

[bitzu_rock]

17 hours ago, KUBI said:

People are playing the game in many different ways. Some watching the full match, others highlights and there are people who prefer a custom skin which calculate the outcome of a match (instant result). 

Of course, the ME is a core of the game, but also AI is a core and for thousends of people there are other cores in the game. 

SI is trying to adjust and fix all this "cores", but some parts need more time and attention than others.

 

Maybe more developers and QAs should be hired ?

[themadsheep2001]

31 minutes ago, noikeee said:

Think of a world class striker like Mbappe or Cristiano Ronaldo, or maybe even a player a little below their level, but with high technical ability which is the case for most top level forwards in the top half of the top leagues. I'm thinking of a very specific scenario, which is what we get over and over again in FM - they're released on a long ball over the top, have had time to control the ball flawlessly (which apparently every striker manages to do in FM) and go clear ahead of the defender, have time for a few seconds to take a few touches whilst they decide what they're gonna do - place the shot, go round the keeper and shoot, dink it over him, smash it (bad idea, but possible), etc. So I've described basicallly the easiest open play chance you can get on a football pitch, the easiest possible chance apart from a penalty kick.

I wouldn't expect the rate of finishing in these cases to be anywhere near as low as 19%. 19% is only 1 in 5 scored. Surely a top top striker in a chance like this, could get it in the back of the net about 1 in every 2 attempts?

You're telling me 3 in every 4 penalties are scored, but these chances which are the easiest you can get on a football pitch apart from a penalty kick, are 1 in 5? Surely this sounds a bit off?

My other example of a less clear one-on-one isn't "high pressure", at least not from the defenders. Imagine a cross from deep, the defensive line isn't particularly super high but the defender misses the timing for his header and the striker is suddenly clear. But he has less space to run into, otherwise he'll be on top of the keeper. He has to either take a first time shot, or control it with 1 touch and then shoot immediately. This, of course, is much harder to score than the 1-on-1s we get in FM where the striker has had time to control the ball and think clearly about what he's gonna do.

A volley is definitely very hard for a keeper to save, if the striker hits it well - the sudden change of direction is lethal. This is modelled well in FM. What isn't modelled very well is that first time shots are also very hard to execute, and they don't feel like they're hard to execute in FM.

As I said already, the numbers can vary between players and clubs. 19% was the average conversion in the PL last year   . Man city converted at 38%. Get yourself an Opta login and have a look at the numbers yourself, if you're not convinced by Opta own stats 

[Svenc]

38 minutes ago, noikeee said:

A volley is definitely very hard for a keeper to save, if the striker hits it well - the sudden change of direction is lethal. This is modelled well in FM. What isn't modelled very well is that first time shots are also very hard to execute, and they don't feel like they're hard to execute in FM.

Could very well be, that's what I was trying to say. I've got more suspicious like that, for instance Header accuracy off the set piece. Btw, that 1vs1 would be the "easiest chances apart of a Penalty" is a very common misconception. They are certainly amongst the most dramatic, but as the Name gives it away, there is a keeper to beat, and unlike anything from a tap-in, even a lot of cut backs, he's typically fully game (and mostly has an Edge). Unless the keeper is rounded, or lobbed (underused PPMs), or anything, they're not open Goals (oft the keeper isn't even wrong-footed to begin with), which are all easier chances. Not sure what the SI main coders are Looking at These days, but they've voiced similar in the past. 

19% would be far too low for the average 1vs1 (Opta Big Chances aren't purely one on ones), however, as odd that may Sound to some, a 19% Chance of scoring would still be regarded as a "big Chance" by Football analysts. It's basically twice as good a chance as your average Football Chance going by the average shot conversion of ~10%. This is an ultra-low scoring Sports on average for very good reason.

Edited December 22, 2019 by Svenc

[Bakiano]

Where can I change who takes care for youth intake?

[themadsheep2001]

2 minutes ago, Svenc said:

Could very well be, that's what I was trying to say. Btw, that 1vs1 would be the "easiest chances apart of a Penalty" is a very common misconception. They are certainly amongst the most dramatic, but as the Name gives it away, there is a keeper to beat, and unlike anything from a tap-in, even a lot of cut backs, he's typically fully game (and mostly has an Edge). Unless the keeper is rounded, or lobbed (underused PPMs), or anything, they're not open Goals (oft the keeper isn't even wrong-footed to begin with), which are all easier chances. Not sure what the SI main coders are Looking at These days, but they've voiced similar in the past. 

19% would be far too low for the average 1vs1 (Opta Big Chances aren't purely one on ones), however, as odd that may Sound to some, a 19% Chance of scoring would still be regarded as a "big Chance" by Football analysts. It's basically twice as good a chance as your average Football Chance going by the average shot conversion of ~10%. This is an ultra-low scoring Sports on average for very good reason.

It's why I prefer shot map analysis and ultimately xgplots. But FM isn't ready for the latter. 

[yandex]

6 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

As I said already, the numbers can vary between players and clubs. 19% was the average conversion in the PL last year   . Man city converted at 38%. Get yourself an Opta login and have a look at the numbers yourself, if you're not convinced by Opta own stats 

Average conversion for what? Strikers being completely free on target, running basically without any pressure from defenders almost all the way from the halfway line, at the slightest of angles? Because THOSE are the chances we see on Football Manager 20. Over and over again. Countless times per game. Those sort of chances you hardly ever see in high level football. How many chances have there been in the premier league this year, where a striker runs alone with the ball for 30 yards with only the goalkeeper to beat?

Edited December 22, 2019 by yandex

[amazarashi]

3 horas atrás, La Grande Inter disse:

This thread I admit is just blowing of steam before putting FM20 on hold for a while.

Played with Bari since release and had much fun, then the december patches and I no longer could score no mather what. Started a new game with Sevillia and got a 0W-5D-5L.
So I ran several preseasons with PSG and quarter season with Real madrid using default tactics and still can't score. the wingers and strikers average a 6.3 grade.

Bale have 0 Goals and 1 ass in 5 games.
Hazard in 10 games 0 goal and 4 ass.
Benzema 2 goal and 1 assist..
The AMC is leading the scoring by 5 followed by kroos and a bunch of defenders with 2.

Back to FM19 for a few months I guess.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have the exact same problem.  Before I updated to this latest patch, my striker got 18 goals in the first half of the league and 9 in the group stage of the champions league. Started the game the next day, updated, and he just stopped scoring. 12 games in and he scored 2 more goals, his highest rating was a 7.1 and the lowest a 6.2.

meanwhile, my second choice central mid bagged 8 goals in 11 games.

[themadsheep2001]

2 minutes ago, yandex said:

Average conversion for what? Strikers being completely free on target, running basically without any pressure from defenders almost all the way from the halfway line, at the slightest of angles? Because THOSE are the chances we see on Football Manager 19. Over and over again. Countless times per game. Those sort of chances you hardly ever see in high level football. How many chances have there been in the premier league this year where a striker runs alone with the ball for 30 yards with only the goalkeeper to beat?

They would be counted as an Opta Big Chance, yes. 

As for the number, they need to come right down. Big chances happen on average, 3 times a game  

[Svenc]

1 minute ago, themadsheep2001 said:

It's why I prefer shot map analysis and ultimately xgplots. But FM isn't ready for the latter. 

Doesn't the game calculate it's own  xG anyway? At least post-shot xG, given that there must be calculations going on. You've Always had an Edge if you were roughly able to estimate from experience as well as watching what was more likely a Goal and what wasn't in General. This is of vital importance too if you'd ever sat Deep to spoil and soak up shots. However, if this wouldn't be utilized by the AI, it'd also make the game too easy thus probably… which may actually be a concern.

[yandex]

2 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

They would be counted as an Opta Big Chance, yes. 

Yea, but I bet they are the rarest of "opta big chance", so your data is not reliable - considering these sort of chances are rare to see in real life. I think most "big chances" on opta are created from squared balls or cutbacks from inside the box(which especially Man City excel at). Hilariously, these sort of more common big chances are impossible to re-create in FM as players refuse to square the ball to free players in the box!

Edited December 22, 2019 by yandex

[Svenc]

6 minutes ago, yandex said:

Average conversion for what? Strikers being completely free on target, running basically without any pressure from defenders almost all the way from the halfway line, at the slightest of angles? Because THOSE are the chances we see on Football Manager 19. Over and over again. Countless times per game. Those sort of chances you hardly ever see in high level football. How many chances have there been in the premier league this year where a striker runs alone with the ball for 30 yards with only the goalkeeper to beat?

All true, I forced them tactically Prior the patch, and These Kind were actually converted at 50/50 ratios Long-term over dozens of attempts, perhaps slightly higher. 
This is going in circles, as the frequency as well as the Long balls defending has Long been acknowledged (similar actually conversion, though a cut above 50/50 in that Scenario sounds About Right).

Edited December 22, 2019 by Svenc

[themadsheep2001]

1 minute ago, yandex said:

Yea, but I bet they are the rarest of "opta big chance", so your data is not reliable - considering these sort of chances are rare to see in real life. I think most "big chances" on opta are created from squared balls or cutbacks from inside the box(which especially Man City excel at). Hilariously, these sort of more common big chances are impossible to re-create in FM as players refuse to square the ball to free players in the box!

Actually not that rare, as shot maps will tell you (sven do you have your shots map to hand?)

[noikeee]

31 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

As I said already, the numbers can vary between players and clubs. 19% was the average conversion in the PL last year   . Man city converted at 38%. Get yourself an Opta login and have a look at the numbers yourself, if you're not convinced by Opta own stats 

I believe Opta stats. I'm not saying you're making up fantasy numbers. What I'm questioning is what kind of chances are included for calculating those stats and what aren't. There's a huge grey area on what counts as a "one-on-one" and what doesn't. I'd have to retrospectively watch a whole Premier League season chance by chance to be able to compare.

[FrazT]

1 hour ago, Bakiano said:

Where can I change who takes care for youth intake?

Staff- Responsibilities

[Johnny Ace]

12 minutes ago, FrazT said:

Staff- Responsibilities

Yeah, I thought that but can't see it 

[Bakiano]

19 minutes ago, FrazT said:

Staff- Responsibilities

We cant find it. Is it youth development information?

[Jibby123]

19 minutes ago, Bakiano said:

We cant find it. Is it youth development information?

I haven't got game loaded up at the moment but try "Development Centre" and then top left corner should be a drop down?
 

No it's Responsibilities > Staff > Transfer and Contracts Responsibilities > Provides Youth Development Info > Delegate to. 

Edited December 22, 2019 by Jibby123

[Johnny Ace]

11 minutes ago, Jibby123 said:

I haven't got game loaded up at the moment but try "Development Centre" and then top left corner should be a drop down?
 

No it's Responsibilities > Staff > Transfer and Contracts Responsibilities > Provides Youth Development Info > Delegate to. 

Ah, I thought that on the Quick tactical questions thread but wasn't 100% 

Yep, that's the one, I just changed it 

[rdbayly]

90 pages of this thread, and nearly all of them are punctuated with someone bleating about missed 1 v 1s, countered by @Svenc replying with a link or monologue about statistical likelihood of similar chances being converted in real life.

The definition of insanity is using real life statistics to counter or explain what is going on in this utterly ridiculous interpretation of football FM20 presents to us. 

In the real world, big chance data comes from an almost infinite variety of patterns and circumstances. In FM, we are shown the SAME BIG CHANCE over and over and over and over and over and over - and nearly all of them missed - even by the world's best.

I've started a new save on FM17 with an updated database. The narrow exploit is a mess, I know that. But sticking to my preferred wide formations, I don't suffer from it (and can sort of counter the AI when they switch to narrow, but not always). In the last 20 or 30 goals scored both for and against, no 2 are alike. For me, that is VITAL for a football simulation. 

  

Edited December 22, 2019 by rdbayly

[KUBI]

I'm managing most of the time in lower and lowest leagues and the variety of goals seems to be a lot better than what I read here. 

So do we have a first world problem/bug here? Do other people managing semi-pro teams also encounter less issues like one on one's?

Could be helpful for investigating the issue. 

[rdbayly]

5 minutes ago, KUBI said:

I'm managing most of the time in lower and lowest leagues and the variety of goal seems to be a lot better than what I read here. 

So do we have a first world problem/bug here? Do other people managing semi-pro teams also encounter less issues like one on one's?

Could be helpful for investigating the issue. 

From what I've seen, I completely agree with this. Some of the most zealous defenders of this year's ME tend to favour managing in the lower leagues or lower rep countries.

Some of the most entertaining and varied football I've seen this year has been in custom lower league databases.

Edited December 22, 2019 by rdbayly

[Toonrock]

22 hours ago, lloyd1990 said:

Please Consider:

1. An annual database update would be a good move with a new FM game every 2-3 years so they get the ME right. I believe this year's FM was released later than in previous FM editions - once again this ME feels rushed/unfinished. In previous FM games SI stop support after the update in March which covers the Winter transfer update to focus on the next FM so I do hope more focus and time is given to the FM21 ME to get it to a level where you can see the tactics and playing style you want to implement. My only issue with FM20 is the ME. Everything else seems better than previous FM editions, especially the addition of the Development Centre which I love. However, due to the current ME I will be going back to FM17 until the update is released. 
2. Please also consider adding interim manager/head coach and permanent head coach job opportunities that we as players can apply for - head coach role could then be negotiated with the club's board to role of manager when renewing a contract based on job performance and the club's vision. Would add another element of realism and career progression as some clubs like Arsenal (Arteta) and Man City (Pep) favour a head coach model over manager. It would add an interesting challenge for players as head coach would be limited to tactics and training etc. I think interim manager/head coach role would be another great challenge to lead a club midway through a season and depending on performance offered to make the role permanent.
3. FM21 - Limit the amount of new features so that the match engine is priority. Sometimes we get like 500 new features which is great but at what cost to the match engine? No doubt different departments handle certain features but the match engine team need more resources to make the match engine the best it can be. It's a fact that I like many others have spent over £100 on FM18-20 and this is my opinion that it has not been an improvement on FM17 ME and has gotten worse.

 

Respectfully, just a few ideas, thanks.

This is (by far) the best input, I have read on this forum to date! - Please take this into actual consideration, SI.

[KUBI]

vor 1 Minute schrieb Toonrock:

This is (by far) the best input, I have read on this forum to date! - Please take this into actual consideration, SI.

They take everything into consideration. Even that people not get used to the upvote button here. 

[Toonrock]

match engine is priority #1

Edited December 22, 2019 by Toonrock

[bahrami]

Can we please just get the FM 2019 ME installed onto FM 2020 version until the update is ready? This is a joke.

[KUBI]

vor 8 Minuten schrieb bahrami:

Can we please just get the FM 2019 ME installed onto FM 2020 version until the update is ready? This is a joke.

That's technically not possible as a lot of stability fixes (crashes) are also ME related. It would just open another pandora's box.

[jere_d]

This game was bad from the release.

then the update has made it unenjoyable. Playing an attacking style as a strong team has been rendered a hindrance, through terrible finishing both headers and 1 v 1s.

People havent even mentioned the amount of tap in that are saved by godlike acrobatics of keepers. 

I'll list the issues that I have Had

Keepers: Heavily OP can be seen jumping from 1 post to the other to save shots. Never have I seen this happen in real life but it's a continuous occurance.

Fullback/Wingbacks: every single  one believes he's maicon, shooting from the byline instead of cutting the ball back. How can SI have removed cut backs from the game ???????? I cant remember seeing 1 player cutting the ball back from the byline.
Constantly getting into space on the side of the area then waiting to be closed down before attempting a cross.

Centre backs : Don't read long balls, will constantly try to dribble through the opposition and don't mark properly.

Defenders as a whole only defend properly when using a park the box tactic

cm/cams: rarely play through balls, always hold onto the ball too long. when they receive the ball they always take a touch in the direction the ball came from (slowing down moves)

Wingers: Don't cross when the opportunity to play the striker in occurs, dont cut the ball back from the byline and shoot  terribly 

Inside forwards: Rubbish at shooting, playing through-balls and crossing

also playing wingers and IFs on attack mean they dont track back, Playing them on Support they dont get into the box.

Forwards: Miss loads of chances, get hella off sides against deep defenses.... (imagine   ) and the runs they make aren't very good.

Corners and freekicks from the update have been crucified, constant headers over the bar, not many freekicks scored.

tactics seem meaningless coz the most type of chances you get are long balls.

Throw ins are annoying someones usually offside if near the corner, the striker always comes short no matter what your tactic may be and players arent defended well from them too.

Pressing: If more than 1 player goes to press the ball both players will run towards the same point leading to the 2 or more pressers standing on the same spot, this is literally the same as being pressed by 1 player.

Speed: Aubameyang Is always getting caught when through on goal, It is mythical to see a player through on goal creating distance whilst players are chasing him whilst dribbling.

Tactics are meaningless, no one can play like brazil 2010 or peps barca the match engine doesn't support this type of play

 

All of these have contributed to me giving up on fm. It's too anti-goal!

It's a game fun should not be substituted for "realness" please remember this!

[bahrami]

34 minutes ago, KUBI said:

That's technically not possible as a lot of stability fixes (crashes) are also ME related. It would just open another pandora's box.

It's a real shame SI can't fix this before Christmas, it's going to be driving away a lot of users.

[thomas_e]

58 minutes ago, KUBI said:

I'm managing most of the time in lower and lowest leagues and the variety of goals seems to be a lot better than what I read here. 

So do we have a first world problem/bug here? Do other people managing semi-pro teams also encounter less issues like one on one's?

Could be helpful for investigating the issue. 

I am playing in the Croatian league. In the top division now, but have also played in the 2nd division. Except for a couple of top teams I would say the average team is poor. 

I am not seeing goalkeepers defying physics. They seem pretty balanced. Penalty conversion seems to be good as well. 

1vs1 conversion rate seems to be a bit better than what many other users are describing. But it's still way too many of those chances being created and I am getting quite a few goals from it (and conceding of course). My central defenders have terrible technical stats, but they can still play world class through balls over the top. At the same time I don't see many of them coming from my creative AM. 

The rest of the ME issues are definitely there, but I do think it's more present in Premier League/La Liga etc. I haven't played in those leagues, but reading other comments it seems to be the case. Some people are saying that they never score 1vs1's, and that might of course be the case for them, but its not as extreme for me. I had my striker score 26 goals one season, quite a few of them were 1vs1's and his stats are terrible! 

I am also seeing some more variety in goals than many other users are describing, but I would also point out that many of them come from defending being so bad it's another ME issue in itself. Defenders keeping the ball in play and instantly lose it, general defensive positioning being bad etc. But the goals are still pretty varied! 

[janrzm]

11 minutes ago, bahrami said:

It's a real shame SI can't fix this before Christmas, it's going to be driving away a lot of users.

I actually think that for quite a lot of people this is a big gaming period. Lots of free time in the holidays, chill out and play your favourite game. I think plenty will be annoyed but long term they'll get over it.

Ultimately, I just find it very disappointing and I'm sure there are plenty of people in the SI building that wish they were finishing for Christmas with the game in better shape. Hopefully they'll come back raring to go and get these creases ironed out because I'd hate to see this drag on.

Edited December 23, 2019 by janrzm

[steam just is]

I actually find this the best ME since 2017. One FM players meat is another’s poison etc.

I don’t blame SI they’re not trying to make a bad product. 
However, it is now a relentless theme that 17 was the best ME. Why did they ditch that and produce a shocker in 18? And why have subsequent iterations of the ME been tweaks on 18 rather than a step back(actually forwards) to the acclaimed 17.

SI have never ever explained the decision to move away from the 17 engine which was the product of positive evolution every year? Why did they do it and why won’t they go back to it??

an answer might explain what’s been happening but they choose to avoid the question.

 

[Brendever_]

I find the 18 engine quite good to be honest. Very balanced in most aspects and you can get goals from most situations.

Only annoying thing is the 3 strikers bug but even that isn't as common as I believed.

16 was definitely the worst one in recent times, even though I had fun with it, but you basically could only score through crosses. 

[Svenc]

3 hours ago, rdbayly said:

In the real world, big chance data comes from an almost infinite variety of patterns and circumstances. In FM, we are shown the SAME BIG CHANCE over and over and over and over and over and over - and nearly all of them missed - even by the world's best.

Aye, due to the long ball defending, such scenarios are much more common than in actual Football. @themadsheep2001 Which shot map do you mean specifically? I've done them for in-game Matches and typically mark the blue dots as set piece attempts (pressured headers, etc.), and mark the one on oneish in red. This Shows that in-game they oft, but not Always tend to be finished at tighter angles rather than premium zones (in parts also due to not Players squaring it). As well as that during Matches with a lot of SOT with Little Goals, it is easy to come by and accurate set piece attempts (pressured headers mostly saved) inflating those numbers. This seems be overlooked, in large parts because the game doesn't make a statistical distinction here from the off. 
 

 

Edited December 23, 2019 by Svenc

[JordanMilly]

7 hours ago, bitzu_rock said:

Maybe more developers and QAs should be hired ?

I'm sure you'd be able to hand them the money to do this then, right? Because I'm pretty sure if SI could afford to hire more people to develop their premier title to make it better in all aspects, given the level of passion shown by the likes of Miles, they would do.

Sadly, although a lot of people are playing FM at any one time on Steam, it's still a small purchaser base - it just looks like a lot because there are a significant number of people who only, or mostly, play FM, compared to other games where they sell 4-5 times the number of copies as FM, but people stop playing it after a month or two.

[lloyd1990]

On 22/12/2019 at 00:57, lloyd1990 said:

This^

Positive:

Match engine aside this is potentially the best FM game in terms of features and interface. Love the addition of Development Centre as always in my saves I place a great emphasis on the academy players, so this is most welcome. Club Vision has been an amazing addition.

 

Negative:

Match Engine. I was thinking the same as the OP^ after FM18 ME (Long shots bug) & FM19 ME (Lack of central play bug).  Definitely FM20 ME (1v1s poor finishing, amount of 1v1s, aimless long balls to wide players, amount of clear cut chances, shooting from impossible angles, amount of long through balls bugs) is the worst ME of the 3 mentioned and arguably one of the worst of the series. This ME feels rushed. FM12 ME was enjoyable in terms of just wanting to have fun as a football manager. FM17 ME, however, is still the best ME in the series as not only was it fun and had more depth, it allowed you to clearly see the tactics and playing style you were trying to implement. There is no enjoyment in this ME and that's so important as the ME is the most important aspect of each FM edition. This is the first FM edition where I have done an Emery and changed tactics 2-3 times a match, every match because the players are not following my tactical instructions but instead trapped playing the FM20 ME bugs mentioned above and many others the community have revealed. 

 

Please Consider:

1. An annual database update would be a good move with a new FM game every 2-3 years so they get the ME right. I believe this year's FM was released later than in previous FM editions - once again this ME feels rushed/unfinished. In previous FM games SI stop support after the update in March which covers the Winter transfer update to focus on the next FM so I do hope more focus and time is given to the FM21 ME to get it to a level where you can see the tactics and playing style you want to implement. My only issue with FM20 is the ME. Everything else seems better than previous FM editions, especially the addition of the Development Centre which I love. However, due to the current ME I will be going back to FM17 until the update is released. 
2. Please also consider adding interim manager/head coach and permanent head coach job opportunities that we as players can apply for - head coach role could then be negotiated with the club's board to role of manager when renewing a contract based on job performance and the club's vision. Would add another element of realism and career progression as some clubs like Arsenal (Arteta) and Man City (Pep) favour a head coach model over manager. It would add an interesting challenge for players as head coach would be limited to tactics and training etc. I think interim manager/head coach role would be another great challenge to lead a club midway through a season and depending on performance offered to make the role permanent.
3. FM21 - Limit the amount of new features so that the match engine is priority. Sometimes we get like 500 new features which is great but at what cost to the match engine? No doubt different departments handle certain features but the match engine team need more resources to make the match engine the best it can be. It's a fact that I like many others have spent over £100 on FM18-20 and this is my opinion that it has not been an improvement on FM17 ME and has gotten worse.

 

Respectfully, just a few ideas, thanks.

Additional Thoughts:

FM17 Match Engine was almost perfect. I believe FM18 used a brand new ME which negatively took the ME several steps back when it just needed to be a polished version of FM17's excellent ME. FM19 ME was a tweaked but improved version of FM18 ME which fixed some bugs but introduced new bugs namely the lack of central play which was a killer for certain tactics. Unfortunately, FM20 ME currently has a staggering amount of bugs - the whole community is aware of them so I won't name them. It feels unprecedented that a ME is in such a bad state at this stage and that it does raise some serious questions of the alpha match engine testing stage. As I previously mentioned, it seems more resources is needed for the match engine team to help them create the best ME the game deserves.

 

Being a teacher, the Christmas holiday time is perfect for me to play but sadly in this current ME version it has made FM20 unplayable for me, especially if you are trying to implement a tiki-taka possession style of play. Despite my tactical instructions, my defenders nearly always hoof the ball up to my striker and the rest is history. 

 

Looking ahead this is a great opportunity for SI to make the match engine priority for FM21 and future editions. In my opinion new features are made redundant if a player takes great care to set up their tactical playing philosophy then train only for the match engine to simply ignore it. When that happens players retreat to a previous FM edition they enjoyed, namely FM17. 

 

Ultimately, I feel the match engine should be the culmination of  Tactics -> Scouting -> Training but FM20 ME doesn't allow a player to enjoy the experience. Players should be able to enjoy it. The match engine needs to get that enjoyment feeling back. It's okay not to annually add a load of new features to a new FM as I feel with next year's FM21, focusing and polishing the match engine would be more than enough to avoid this again. Less is more. There is a lot of great feedback on here. 

 

Lastly: Please add Interim manager/head coach role to FM21.

[kiwityke1983]

9 hours ago, yandex said:

Average conversion for what? Strikers being completely free on target, running basically without any pressure from defenders almost all the way from the halfway line, at the slightest of angles? Because THOSE are the chances we see on Football Manager 20. Over and over again. Countless times per game. Those sort of chances you hardly ever see in high level football. How many chances have there been in the premier league this year, where a striker runs alone with the ball for 30 yards with only the goalkeeper to beat?

I've watched every single Barnsley match in the championship this season and there has been 1 such chance which was scored by us. 

Also our defence this season has made even the worst FM defences look competent so you'd think we would have conceded several ourselves but we haven't at all. 

Lots of 2 on 1s where the balls passed across to a man free (which you never ever see in FM20) , but literally zero strikers clean through from the halfway line. 

[alian62]

2 hours ago, lloyd1990 said:

Additional Thoughts:

FM17 Match Engine was almost perfect. I believe FM18 used a brand new ME which negatively took the ME several steps back when it just needed to be a polished version of FM17's excellent ME. FM19 ME was a tweaked but improved version of FM18 ME which fixed some bugs but introduced new bugs namely the lack of central play which was a killer for certain tactics. Unfortunately, FM20 ME currently has a staggering amount of bugs - the whole community is aware of them so I won't name them. It feels unprecedented that a ME is in such a bad state at this stage and that it does raise some serious questions of the alpha match engine testing stage. As I previously mentioned, it seems more resources is needed for the match engine team to help them create the best ME the game deserves.

 

Being a teacher, the Christmas holiday time is perfect for me to play but sadly in this current ME version it has made FM20 unplayable for me, especially if you are trying to implement a tiki-taka possession style of play. Despite my tactical instructions, my defenders nearly always hoof the ball up to my striker and the rest is history. 

 

Looking ahead this is a great opportunity for SI to make the match engine priority for FM21 and future editions. In my opinion new features are made redundant if a player takes great care to set up their tactical playing philosophy then train only for the match engine to simply ignore it. When that happens players retreat to a previous FM edition they enjoyed, namely FM17. 

 

Ultimately, I feel the match engine should be the culmination of  Tactics -> Scouting -> Training but FM20 ME doesn't allow a player to enjoy the experience. Players should be able to enjoy it. The match engine needs to get that enjoyment feeling back. It's okay not to annually add a load of new features to a new FM as I feel with next year's FM21, focusing and polishing the match engine would be more than enough to avoid this again. Less is more. There is a lot of great feedback on here. 

 

Lastly: Please add Interim manager/head coach role to FM21.

FM17 was the best match engine but im not sure they used a new match engine after . I was under the impression they did as well and I wish we could get clarity on that because I was advised the only thing they did was a graphics upgrade not a ME upgrade . 

[HUNT3R]

2 hours ago, lloyd1990 said:

I believe FM18 used a brand new ME

 

8 minutes ago, prot651 said:

FM17 was the best match engine but im not sure they used a new match engine after .

The ME gets updates and sections get re-writes every year. The ME wasn't 'new' though. The Graphics Engine was new in FM18, but that is completely different to the ME, animations, lighting and the graphics itself.

[Bakiano]

Okay, another question, it isn't maybe fm20 related, but would like to know the answer.

When you buy a player for some fee plus bonuses. The bonuses are after league appearences and goal leagues. When you sell him before he activates these bonuses, what happens with these bonuses? Are they cancelled or they are still active regardless the player are not in your club anymore.

 

It's a silly question, but never thought about that, so wanna know the answer.

 

Thanks!  

[alian62]

1 hour ago, HUNT3R said:

 

The ME gets updates and sections get re-writes every year. The ME wasn't 'new' though. The Graphics Engine was new in FM18, but that is completely different to the ME, animations, lighting and the graphics itself.

Yeah this is what I was advised but then its weird if this is the case how FM17 was a good ME but now it seems to have become worse 

[luka_zg]

Who is better..a coach with great attributes but 2 star rep, or a coach with ****** attributes but 4 star rep? 

[Armistice]

8 hours ago, bahrami said:

It's a real shame SI can't fix this before Christmas, it's going to be driving away a lot of users.

I don’t think it’s a likely scenario. People will play the game even if they consciously know it’s bugged. Which is a good thing for SI but not so good for the regular player who demanded improvements in specific areas of the game.

I’ve said it before, the game generates more profit from year to year so it’s a good indicator that it’s doing its job. Why would they alter their business strategy?

It’s only my opinion of course but I feel the gaming industry, just like the modern football, has sold its soul in an attempt to generate as much profit as possible. The passionate vibe has disappeared and it’s now only about the cash, no matter how they get it. Sad (not talking about a particular gaming company here, it’s a common theme).