Football Manager 2021 *Official* Feedback Thread

[Abysmal 148]

19 minutes ago, BigV said:

This isn't feedback... if you have issues take it up in the specific sub forums, advise most of you that aren't giving feedback to do the same- Just cluttering important info that will potetnailly be passively missed through loads of nippy comments

I can see where you are coming from but the issue is some people have tried to take up the issue in the relevant sub forums but have received no response in regards to them. With this being one of the most viewed threads of the forum its more likely to receive a response.

[Abysmal 148]

1 hour ago, andu1 said:

I can't remember the player ratings having any issues in the first beta release or on release? Did they mess something up after the 24th November release?

I had no issues in the first release of the game, after the first patch was released is when issues started to occur.

[BigV 880]

7 minutes ago, Abysmal said:

I can see where you are coming from but the issue is some people have tried to take up the issue in the relevant sub forums but have received no response in regards to them. With this being one of the most viewed threads of the forum its more likely to receive a response.

Sometimes they will, sometimes they wont but they go through them/even the mods go through them, the SI tag them- e.g. i've seen major stuff like player ratings, pass maps, stats that aren't showing up in anaylsis after game are being looked at- they all have tags on them being under review/known issues etc. they wont fix it one by one, they will likely be done in the next hotfixes or big patch.

Not putting the right response in the right thread will effect very little for the posters, with more digs to the SI, the game itself it isn't exactly feedback where they are looking to guage the overall issues, it makes it harder for the SI staff to look at it, they have to go through every comment to find what they are looking for with majority (at least latter stages of the update) being comments that aren't useful. 

Believe me i've done the same before and i've learnt from it, doesn't end up anywhere. Lets leave it at that so we don't clutter whats important. 

[ARustyFirePlace 51]

43 minutes ago, BigV said:

This isn't feedback... if you have issues take it up in the specific sub forums, advise most of you that aren't giving feedback to do the same- Just cluttering important info that will potetnailly be passively missed through loads of nippy comments

>if you have issues take it up in the specific sub forums

 

Yes because obviously that works, considering these things were pointed out as errors in the """""beta""""" and then ignored and still haven't been fixed 3 months later, plenty of people have taken time out of their lives to post indepth about certain problems, only for SI to ignore the issue and never even respond as to whether or not it will be fixed, so what's the point of me giving feedback if they will just ignore it? 

 

[BigV 880]

5 minutes ago, ARustyFirePlace said:

Yes because obviously that works, considering these things were pointed out as errors in the """""beta""""" and then ignored and still haven't been fixed 3 months later, plenty of people have taken time out of their lives to post indepth about certain problems, only for SI to ignore the issue and never even respond as to whether or not it will be fixed, so what's the point of me giving feedback if they will just ignore it? 

It does, check the bugs pages, just because they haven't replied or seen your yet doesnt mean its for everyone. They can't tell people it will be fixed until the patch comes through, every little change they make can make something else worse off, it's not *easy* to make these changes without having other faults to fix. They dont ignore it though, you can see whos in the thread at the bottom and there is usually a mod/SI staff trying to filter through to any feedback (very little cause of the clutter you see in the thread that isn't relevant to the specific thread)

As for your issue, i've encountered it myself and will most likely/at somepoint post a few pkms and analysis of whats wrong like you have done yourself, be patient, they'll get around to it. 

@Neil Brock might be worth looking into/passing on the above pass map issue quoted by arustyfireplace 

[Sharkn20 250]

18 hours ago, Abysmal said:

My team last year got promoted with 106 points, the best attack in the league along with the tightest defence. Only two of them got above a 7 rating and they were my strikers. You cant tell me that has anything to do with what im doing? How can my team be performing very well yet individually the players arent?

My LB with 11 appearances and 7 assists this season is on a 6.9, when last year he would be on a much higher rating.

I completely understand that the issue isnt universal but its wide-spread and is down to much more than what some players are and arent doing

Because you are probably playing attacking football hoofing the ball up straight, no patience, hence shooting 15+ times per game and 75% completed passes.

Ratings are gonna go down if you don't achieve a good % of passes or if you shoot 17486181 times per game, scoring only 2 or 3 goals.

Is all about quality.

Low ratings is not a bug anymore, are deserved for playing that gegenpress attack football.

Edited January 22 by Sharkn20

[DP 341]

5 minutes ago, Sharkn20 said:

Because you are probably playing attacking football hoofing the ball up straight, no patience, hence shooting 15+ times per game and 75% completed passes.

Ratings are gonna go down if you don't achieve a good % of passes or if you shoot 17486181 times per game, scoring only 2 or 3 goals.

Is all about quality.

Low ratings is not a bug anymore, are deserved for playing that gegenpress attack football.

This is incorrect. There is a problem with strikers not quite achieving the ratings they should. Have a look at strikers in your own leagues. 

[Abysmal 148]

22 minutes ago, Sharkn20 said:

Because you are probably playing attacking football hoofing the ball up straight, no patience, hence shooting 15+ times per game and 75% completed passes.

Ratings are gonna go down if you don't achieve a good % of passes or if you shoot 17486181 times per game, scoring only 2 or 3 goals.

Is all about quality.

Low ratings is not a bug anymore, are deserved for playing that gegenpress attack football.

Clearly low ratings are an issue due to the numerous amounts of complaints about it both within this thread and others. 

I dont play gegenpress attacking football, I player with shorter passing and have generally quite high passing percentages in games that I win, despite this players still get low ratings. I can absolutely accept that if a player completes under 80% of his passes and doesn't win tackles or headers, he will get a low rating but there are numerous cases where theres nothing in his stats suggesting a low mark.

 

[JordanMillward_1 1,046]

16 hours ago, mielony said:

I think so too

Same here, had no issues really with ratings since the hotfix.

[Abysmal 148]

3 minutes ago, JordanMillward_1 said:

Same here, had no issues really with ratings since the hotfix.

Do you not agree that enough people are complaining about it that there might still be an issue though?

[andu1 359]

Anyone seen an AI managed striker score more than this guy? He's blasting the Dutch League.

 

 

[XaW 5,637]

8 minutes ago, Abysmal said:

Do you not agree that enough people are complaining about it that there might still be an issue though?

Certainly there are something strange at foot, but it's not a clear issue for everyone. And for certain users, I'm sure there could be tactical issues causing it. I've seen something strange with one of my midfielders, but the others are not having it, so it could be that player who does not fit the roles are punished more than they should? I have no idea, but it seems to be more common in some tactical setups than others. So while one might see this as a major issue, another doesn't notice at all. So if it is indeed something that needs fixing, it's not just a simple blanket fix, but a more nuanced tuning it seems.

However, this is an issue for the bugs section, and anyone who experience it should report it and let SI examine it there. This is not the place for bug reports, but general impressions, likes, and dislikes, and that sort of thing.

[d d 16]

13 minutes ago, Abysmal said:

Do you not agree that enough people are complaining about it that there might still be an issue though?

I have to agree with Jordan, since the update my rating has got better. I had a full back issue with the ratings but that has improved since the minor patch

.

[d d 16]

1 minute ago, XaW said:

Certainly there are something strange at foot, but it's not a clear issue for everyone. And for certain users, I'm sure there could be tactical issues causing it. I've seen something strange with one of my midfielders, but the others are not having it, so it could be that player who does not fit the roles are punished more than they should? I have no idea, but it seems to be more common in some tactical setups than others. So while one might see this as a major issue, another doesn't notice at all. So if it is indeed something that needs fixing, it's not just a simple blanket fix, but a more nuanced tuning it seems.

However, this is an issue for the bugs section, and anyone who experience it should report it and let SI examine it there. This is not the place for bug reports, but general impressions, likes, and dislikes, and that sort of thing.

It seems like a divided opinion with these ratings.

 

[kalokalitokalo 34]

So, Erling Haaland scoring 38 goals +7 assists in 36 games is giving 7.50.

What would he need to add to get +8? 38 assists? +50 goals?

 

So a 2011 Messi would only get +8 instead of +9?

It's ridicoulous. 

[Novem9 896]

3 часа назад, d d сказал:

This has been an ongoing feature. Once i had back to back home  games all cancelled due to weather.

 

Many many hours for last many FMs and I see this in first time  Was a surprise

[CFuller 1,749]

These ratings are from my Rennes team in season 4. We won the French double undefeated and also reached the Champions League Final.

Ratings don't seem as bad as some people say they are. The defenders could probably have higher ratings, as we only conceded 13 goals in 38 league games (though we were very leaky in the Champions League), but that might be partly related to the ongoing issue with key tackles not recording properly.

Average ratings are always tough to balance. I've played FMs where centre-backs got the highest ratings because they were so deadly from set-pieces, and others where wing-backs got the highest ratings because crossing was so powerful. Meanwhile, goalkeepers have traditionally struggled to get good ratings, even in the early stages of FM21 (though that looks much better now).

But what's a good match rating anyway? It's subjective, really. It's not as simple as saying that any match rating above 6.7 is good, or that any match rating below that is rubbish. It's certainly not as simple as in the CM days, when there were no decimal points and it was much easier to get a 10 rating - and MUCH easier to get a 1 rating.

Is there still an issue? Maybe. There are clearly still some issues where certain stats aren't recording properly (e.g. I noticed a couple of weeks ago that own goals weren't counted against goalkeepers when recording their clean sheets and goals conceded), but SI are well aware of them and are investigating. If they can get a fix out, they will do at some point, but there's no guaranteeing there won't be other knock-on effects, so they have to be cautious.

I'm frustrated as some of you guys are about certain bugs that haven't been fixed yet, but complaining about them or resorting to abuse won't suddenly make a patch come quicker. Even asking the devs to put some kind of timescale on a new patch is just a waste of time, as there's the risk they'll give a date and then fail to release it by that date, which just leaves them open to more abuse.

In the meantime, we just need to stay patient, keep giving constructive feedback, and keep submitting bug reports. On that note, if more users used the bugs forums for submitting bug reports instead of as a secondary General Discussion forum (and vice versa), I reckon there'd be less frustration all round.

[andu1 359]

I found a way to stop english teams dominating the champions league.

Yes, i will restart the game until they are all out of the competition. It's just ridiculous at this stage. I just had to reload because bloody Liverpool and Arsenal both qualified to the final in extra time. It would have been Liverpool's 5th!!! final in the last 6 years and probably would have won it again. Sorry but it doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

 

Yeah go make Liverpool the BESTEST EVAAAAR team in the world because they won 1 title in the last 30 years and a champions league.

Edited January 22 by andu1

[bielsadidnothingwrong 391]

On 20/01/2021 at 07:39, Marko1989 said:

But in next FM, they will give him 17 for acceleration again haha.

Every release, SI openly admits their aging system is broken as we have plenty of over-32 players with decent physicals. Hey, Maxi Rodriguez is like 38 and starts the season with physical attributes the game would have long stripped him of. And like you say, come FM22, Ronaldo and Messi will still be 15+ on plenty categories. I wish they would re-tool young and old players. 

[Marko1989 422]

51 minutes ago, bielsadidnothingwrong said:

Every release, SI openly admits their aging system is broken as we have plenty of over-32 players with decent physicals. Hey, Maxi Rodriguez is like 38 and starts the season with physical attributes the game would have long stripped him of. And like you say, come FM22, Ronaldo and Messi will still be 15+ on plenty categories. I wish they would re-tool young and old players. 

It is not just aging system that is broken. Whole development system is limited and many times makes no sense at all. Not just older players attributes are decreasing too quickly but also younger player get their attributes decreased for who knows what reason.

Here is just one example. Rashford at the start of the game:


Rashford just two years later in my save. He got slower and worse at dribbling, without any injuries, now when he is much more experienced Man Utd first team player.

And this is just one example, I have provided a couple of more examples in other threads regarding player development, where players would have their attributes decreasing for no reason. Then you must question yourself - - If highly rated youngster like Rashford got worse over the years, what is the point of developing my youngsters if their attributes will decrease without the reason after age of 23, or players will completely stagnate after 23 no matter the form and other factors. That, along with the problems with older players as you've said makes this development system to me very limited. But, as I've said, that is what it is, people like it, and I really don't expect anything

Edited January 22 by Marko1989

[themadsheep2001 8,047]

4 minutes ago, Marko1989 said:

It is not just aging system that is broken. Whole development system is limited and many times makes no sense at all. Not just older players attributes are decreasing too quickly but also younger player get their attributes decreased for who knows what reason.

Here is just one example. Rashford at the start of the game:


Rashford just two years later in my save. He got slower and worse at dribbling, without any injuries, now when he is much more experienced Man Utd first team player.

And this is just one example, I have provided a couple of more examples in other threads regarding player development, where players would have their attributes decreasing for no reason. Then you must question yourself - - If highly rated youngster like Rashford got worse over the years, what is the point of developing my youngsters if they will decrease without the reason after age of 23.

That, along with the problems with older players as you've said makes this development system to me very limited. But, as I've said, that is what it is, people like it, and I really don't expect anything

@santy001  will this have anything to do with the fact his rating for ML and AMR have gone up?

[Marko1989 422]

Even if that is the case, it makes no sense to get slower and worse at dribbling just because you got better at some other positions.

But it does not matter, I've promised myself not to argue with people here regarding development anymore, so I will shut up 

[Weller1980 614]

3 hours ago, XaW said:

Certainly there are something strange at foot, but it's not a clear issue for everyone. And for certain users, I'm sure there could be tactical issues causing it. I've seen something strange with one of my midfielders, but the others are not having it, so it could be that player who does not fit the roles are punished more than they should? I have no idea, but it seems to be more common in some tactical setups than others. So while one might see this as a major issue, another doesn't notice at all. So if it is indeed something that needs fixing, it's not just a simple blanket fix, but a more nuanced tuning it seems.

However, this is an issue for the bugs section, and anyone who experience it should report it and let SI examine it there. This is not the place for bug reports, but general impressions, likes, and dislikes, and that sort of thing.

The player ratings bug/balance issue effects everyone's games, its just most people don't analyse data from outside their team and therefore don't notice it. Active leagues struggle generating positive average ratings over the course of the season, more so outside the elite leagues see screenshot below. Only 4 strikers with an average rating of above 7.00 that isn't right surly?

 

Edited January 22 by Weller1980

[santy001 1,076]

I'd log it as a bug since it seems like the AI is training him very poorly by presumably looking to dedicate more of his training to the ML & AMR positions. 

Single digit drops even across those attributes would have a near enough negligible effect in the ME. But its more going to be a case of if a player is training certain things less then they're not going to maintain them. My immediate thoughts are again that just this would be incredibly poorly planned out training for the player and getting that looked into as a bug with the AI would be worthwhile since you have the save where its taking place. 

[bielsadidnothingwrong 391]

11 hours ago, Marko1989 said:

Whole development system is limited and many times makes no sense at all.

Totally agree. Though it is not my playing style, I am forced by the game to prioritize youth over established players because of it. One thing that really gets under my skin are young players with high mentals in anticipation, vision, decision, and/or composure.

One solution would be players under 23 should have the hardest time developing these attributes and should remain under a certain value until they reach 24. At this point, physicals should be peaking with exception to strength and stamina, which would be determined by natural fitness. Additionally at this point, they're much better at taking to technique training to hone in their skills. 28-30 would be peak years, meaning you cannot get anything more technically or physically out of them, but they can always learn more in the classroom so this would be when mentals really pick up. Composure should grow the most during this development phase. By 30, you should not see much more development outside of composure and anticipation as the players will continue to grow in those areas the more they play. Vision and decisions should be relative to tactical understanding and should fluctuate by +/- 2 during peak and post-30 ages. Physical dropoffs post-30 need to be reined in as well, like I said above.

Unfortunately, I do not work for SI and am nothing but the bright idea fairy at this point, so regardless of whether or not my proposal makes any sense, we all can agree the way players age in this game absolutely needs addressing (just please do not make us players responsible for finding bugs again). 

Edited January 23 by bielsadidnothingwrong

[rdbayly 1,180]

Is there a particular reason why many of my key players, despite being first team regulars, aged between 19-24, with a highly rated coaching team, and good training facilities - are seeing wholesale attribute drops?

[samuelawachie 143]

8 hours ago, Novem9 said:

Is it new feature? Dont remember this before

Hi, you must be new here..

[Delvi 129]

2 ore fa, bielsadidnothingwrong ha scritto:

Totally agree. Though it is not my playing style, I am forced by the game to prioritize youth over established players because of it. One thing that really gets under my skin are young players with high mentals in anticipation, vision, decision, and/or composure.

One solution would be players under 23 should have the hardest time developing these attributes and should remain under a certain value until they reach 24. At this point, physicals should be peaking with exception to strength and stamina, which would be determined by natural fitness. Additionally at this point, they're much better at taking to technique training to hone in their skills. 28-30 would be peak years, meaning you cannot get anything more technically or physically out of them, but they can always learn more in the classroom so this would be when mentals really pick up. Composure should grow the most during this development phase. By 30, you should not see much more development outside of composure and anticipation as the players will continue to grow in those areas the more they play. Vision and decisions should be relative to tactical understanding and should fluctuate by +/- 2 during peak and post-30 ages. Physical dropoffs post-30 need to be reigned in as well, like I said above.

Unfortunately, I do not work for SI and am nothing but the bright idea fairy at this point, so regardless of whether or not my proposal makes any sense, we all can agree the way players age in this game absolutely needs addressing (just please do not make us players responsible for finding bugs again). 

I agree with you. I wrote a month ago my ideas for new models of player development, if you guys are interested I could post them here as well.

[Marko1989 422]

3 hours ago, rdbayly said:

Is there a particular reason why many of my key players, despite being first team regulars, aged between 19-24, with a highly rated coaching team, and good training facilities - are seeing wholesale attribute drops?

You will find some answers here: 

and here: 

 

[kevgaleuk 46]

Promises

I have noticed that promises are a lot more prevalent in this years game but there is a bit of a gap IMO - I had a great player who was subject to a laughable bid that frustrated them when I refused it and going through the finances not right etc route I had to promise to accept a bit of £80m + a lot of money but given he is a player that could easily fetch 100+ not great to have hanging around

After the window I managed to convince him to sign a new contract but the promise remains - I would imagine in any negotiation with players the club would remove that promise as a condition of signing a new improved deal OR at the very least you'd imagine the agent of the player wanting to cement a min fee release clause either at that level or maybe higher per a negotiation. 

Similarly with players brought in with loan promises but who end up playing games there is no mechanic to discuss removing the promise based on a change in circumstances e.g. you've been in and around the first team so we won't be seeking to loan you out; we can revisit the situation in the summer etc

[kevgaleuk 46]

B & C Teams

I was wondering whether there is (and has been over multiple FM's) an issue with the AI relating to AI teams and their players being used in B & C or II teams? To me the player being put there for what appears to be 1 or 2 non-competitive matches seems unrealistic but I can't find out from the tinter web whether established first team player routinely go to these sub teams. To my mind players (young prospects, not-needed players) are placed in these teams at the start of the year rather than flit back and forth and maybe if a young player is doing well then they might get a chance for the senior team but this would be the minority not the majority

What I seem to see in FM is that almost all youngsters play next to no games for both rather than consistently for one and more annoyingly senior players having these random lines for B & C or II teams for no obvious reason.

It might be for a very good reason but I can't fathom why

[andu1 359]

Why is the Dutch transfer system broken as in FM20? Ajax sells all of their top players just to buy only aged Dutch players? And why only Dutch players, why not from other nations? And i have loaded almost all major leagues from the planet...

Why are some bugs that are reported in previous versions find their way in newer versions?

 

[Ronnieekelund 16]

22 hours ago, JordanMillward_1 said:

Same here, had no issues really with ratings since the hotfix.

I've had Calvert Lewin score 42 league goals in 37 games, yet only achieved an average rating of 7.30 so there is definitely something wrong with that!

[Ronnieekelund 16]

22 hours ago, kalokalitokalo said:

So, Erling Haaland scoring 38 goals +7 assists in 36 games is giving 7.50.

What would he need to add to get +8? 38 assists? +50 goals?

 

So a 2011 Messi would only get +8 instead of +9?

It's ridicoulous. 

Exactly I had the same striker scores 42 goals in 37 games but gets a rating between 7.3 and 7.5, ridiculous 

[JordanMillward_1 1,046]

10 minutes ago, Ronnieekelund said:

Exactly I had the same striker scores 42 goals in 37 games but gets a rating between 7.3 and 7.5, ridiculous 

I'm not sure how it's ridiculous, given that the average is based on the ratings from each individual match, and there are going to be plenty of games where they score one goal and get a rating in the mid 7s, a few games where they score 2-3 goals and get a rating in the 8s and 9s, and some matches where they just don't perform and get a rating in the mid 6s. All of those come together to make an average of in the mid-7s. Makes perfect sense to me, and I've never in any FM had a player with an average rating in the 8s, regardless of how many goals they scored, so the suggestion that this is something unique to FM21 is incorrect. 

[Federico 1,271]

7 minuti fa, JordanMillward_1 ha scritto:

I'm not sure how it's ridiculous, given that the average is based on the ratings from each individual match, and there are going to be plenty of games where they score one goal and get a rating in the mid 7s, a few games where they score 2-3 goals and get a rating in the 8s and 9s, and some matches where they just don't perform and get a rating in the mid 6s. All of those come together to make an average of in the mid-7s. Makes perfect sense to me, and I've never in any FM had a player with an average rating in the 8s, regardless of how many goals they scored, so the suggestion that this is something unique to FM21 is incorrect. 

And again, all those stating ratings are broken offer only their own opinion as counter-proof: "he got 7, he should get 8!". Not much to discuss about.

[kalokalitokalo 34]

1 hour ago, Federico said:

And again, all those stating ratings are broken offer only their own opinion as counter-proof: "he got 7, he should get 8!". Not much to discuss about.

lol, opinions:

 

Lewandoski, my player:

 

First of all:

- A season like the 2010/11 Messi's Ballon d'Or winning one is just worth 7.61.

- A season like the 2012/2013 Ronaldo's Ballon d'Or winning one is just worth 7.61.

 

Then I go to non loaded leagues:

Firmino

Agüero:

Harry Kane:

Icardi:

Luis Suarez:

Benzema:

Griezmann:

Messi:

 

And finally let's go back to Erling Haaland in my league:

 

So yeah, full match engine ratings for attackings are perfectly fine, and people is just giving an opinion. lol

[ottey_swe 11]

The game still starts in fullscreen mode on Big Sur 11.1

[Federico 1,271]

2 ore fa, kalokalitokalo ha scritto:

lol, opinions:

 

Lewandoski, my player:

 

First of all:

- A season like the 2010/11 Messi's Ballon d'Or winning one is just worth 7.61.

- A season like the 2012/2013 Ronaldo's Ballon d'Or winning one is just worth 7.61.

 

Then I go to non loaded leagues:

Firmino

Agüero:

Harry Kane:

Icardi:

Luis Suarez:

Benzema:

Griezmann:

Messi:

 

And finally let's go back to Erling Haaland in my league:

 

So yeah, full match engine ratings for attackings are perfectly fine, and people is just giving an opinion. lol

Please try again when you understood what I was talking about.

"lol".

[Zoolok42 60]

Does the game calculate xG for blocked and off-target shots? I'm asking because, on the shot map match analysis screen, the LOW XG - HIGH XG legend goes from one shade of purple to another, but blocked and off-target shots are white in the map. Only scored and saved shots are in a shade of purple.

[bielsadidnothingwrong 391]

38 minutes ago, Zoolok42 said:

Does the game calculate xG for blocked and off-target shots? I'm asking because, on the shot map match analysis screen, the LOW XG - HIGH XG legend goes from one shade of purple to another, but blocked and off-target shots are white in the map. Only scored and saved shots are in a shade of purple.

you should still be able to hover over the blocked and off-target shots to get an xG rating on them IIRC, so yes, it does factor in blocks and off-targets.

[Zoolok42 60]

56 minutes ago, bielsadidnothingwrong said:

you should still be able to hover over the blocked and off-target shots to get an xG rating on them IIRC, so yes, it does factor in blocks and off-targets.

Thanks, I play on the Touch version on Switch, so hovering over them never really occurred to me 

[Nick_CB 264]

What is the logic? My player has 2 key heads and only 1 aerial duel (lost by the way)

[Zoolok42 60]

42 minutes ago, Nick_CB said:

What is the logic? My player has 2 key heads and only 1 aerial duel (lost by the way)

He headed the ball without being in a duel?

[anindyarajan19 37]

Fullbacks need to be more aggressive in closing down. They give far too much time to the wingers to turn and run at them.

[Sharkn20 250]

8 hours ago, anindyarajan19 said:

Fullbacks need to be more aggressive in closing down. They give far too much time to the wingers to turn and run at them.

Give them the close down instructions, they will do it then?

[luka_zg 157]

Sometimes I feel the game should be called Blocking Manager 21. I'm watching games on extended and blocked shots are driving me insane. Can't imagine how it is on comprehensive or full.

Also when AI starts to play highlight like prime Pep Barcelona, you know it's going to end with the conceded goal for you. 

Edited January 25 by luka_zg

[marin_bar 12]

59 minutes ago, luka_zg said:

Sometimes I feel the game should be called Blocking Manager 21. I'm watching games on extended and blocked shots are driving me insane. Can't imagine how it is on comprehensive or full.

Also when AI starts to play highlight like prime Pep Barcelona, you know it's going to end with the conceded goal for you. 

Me to brother, blocking fiesta 

Also what frustrates me, playing with Bilbao I won LA Liga with 6 point margin in first season, with 94 points, played 5 times vs Real Madrid and beating them 4 (on time 6-0)  Beat Barcelona 3-0 , Sociedad two times 4-0... Only playing attacking in home and awaygames, didn't need to change tactics or anything... best player of the season my winger who was taking corners (Ibai Gomez btw)...realism 0...

[MasterFolke 12]

When are they gonna add more realistic fans on the arena? and more realistic awayfans, not all clubs have thousands of awayfans filling up a hole section. There is so much they should have done there but it looks the same as like 15 years ago. 

[Style 21]

what about the game not showing key tackles and etc in analysys? any fix soon ?