Scum Save (Research Edition)

[Inter61]

I’m primarily interested in playing this game from the viewpoint of statistical comparative outcomes when compared to ‘real’ football. 
The biggest ‘blind spot’ appears to be what I originally assumed to be some kind of narrative building element deep in the game programming. In other words, when the probability of outcome seems to depart significantly from ‘real’ football. However, according to some earlier responses in this forum, that would not appear to be the case?

As an example, I’m currently playing as a home team in 19th position in the Championship versus a team in 4th place. Current form is pretty comparable, and so is team morale.

Via scum saving, I’m now up to 17 straight losses, played across many different tactical set-ups. If the home team is winning with 5 minutes to go, as has happened several times, then the away side will inevitably score two goals in added time.

Thoughts?

[HUNT3R]

Teams who are behind, aren't happy with that result as it stands. No team wants to lose. They will make changes to get back into things, home or away and especially if it's a 4th place team trailing a team in 19th.

 

Using multiple random tactics might not be the best way to judge either as you'll have big tactical familiarity issues, I'd imagine.

[XaW]

My biggest issue with this is that there are a lot of factors that are already decided, such as confidence, complacency, form, fatigue, morale, etc. So replaying the game SHOULD provide relatively similar results if the same players are used in a similar matter. Completely changing tactics should likely change things a bit, but mostly for the worse for the changing side.

All that aside, SI have on multiple occasions said there are nothing in the game to artificially create tension or intrigue in the matches.

To paraphrase and repeat. As soon as you start the match, it's "played" in the match engine up to half time to know what happens in order to show highlights when they happen. This is played based on the current teams. Every time either a human manager, or an AI manager does something, the game is recalculated from that point on. So whatever happens happens. When something is shown in a highlight the graphical engine takes what the match engine have produced and tries to show that as realistic as possible and select the correct animations to match. So if you think you are destined to lose, then make a sub and the world is recalculated (for better or worse). However, as I started this post with, a lot of the factors are not changed and will provide similar results since the variables are similar. There would be some sort of randomness to it at some point otherwise everything would be identical up to a change!

Also, why on earth would the developer create "scripting" to make the user lose? What would they gain from that, other than angry users? The other way would be much more likely, as everyone loves to win!

[wazzaflow10]

7 hours ago, XaW said:

My biggest issue with this is that there are a lot of factors that are already decided, such as confidence, complacency, form, fatigue, morale, etc. So replaying the game SHOULD provide relatively similar results if the same players are used in a similar matter. Completely changing tactics should likely change things a bit, but mostly for the worse for the changing side.

All that aside, SI have on multiple occasions said there are nothing in the game to artificially create tension or intrigue in the matches.

To paraphrase and repeat. As soon as you start the match, it's "played" in the match engine up to half time to know what happens in order to show highlights when they happen. This is played based on the current teams. Every time either a human manager, or an AI manager does something, the game is recalculated from that point on. So whatever happens happens. When something is shown in a highlight the graphical engine takes what the match engine have produced and tries to show that as realistic as possible and select the correct animations to match. So if you think you are destined to lose, then make a sub and the world is recalculated (for better or worse). However, as I started this post with, a lot of the factors are not changed and will provide similar results since the variables are similar. There would be some sort of randomness to it at some point otherwise everything would be identical up to a change!

Also, why on earth would the developer create "scripting" to make the user lose? What would they gain from that, other than angry users? The other way would be much more likely, as everyone loves to win!

There are lots of examples of older games where the developer allows the AI to "cheat" because its easier to program shortcuts for the computer than build out human logic. I don't know if SI does this in any part of their game (maybe transfers/contracts?). The ME is/should be the ME. Maybe someone could argue making the match engine harder on human players makes the game more challenging b/c of the potential to break the ME in a way the AI never would. Given the desire to sell as many copies as possible I'd agree it'd make no sense to have the human lose rather than win. It definitely feels good to rant though.

[FrazT]

At what point in the game do you save and go back to?

It has been reported before that the factors that effect the next game outcome start from the previous game team talk, then take account of training issues/feedback, player interactions, pre-game press conferences-all this before getting to the game day and selecting players and tactics etc.

[rsihn]

On 05/07/2021 at 10:32, Inter61 said:

 

Via scum saving, I’m now up to 17 straight losses, played across many different tactical set-ups. If the home team is winning with 5 minutes to go, as has happened several times, then the away side will inevitably score two goals in added time.

Thoughts?

In my experience, this is where  the leadership stats of your players, especially the captains, come into play.

One of the things I've been tracking in my own save is how much the match changes when I sub out my captain.  My save is mostly an academy challenge so my players are very young in general but I've kept a couple of older players around from our early days just for their leadership rather than ability.  Inevitably though, I sub out that captain to let a younger player get some experience and the match nearly always turns into a disaster for us.  Leading a team 1-0 in the second half and sub out the captain and concede 3 goals in the next 15 minutes despite it looking like we had the match completely under control prior to the sub.  This scenario has happened many times.  It took me quite a long time to figure out what was happening exactly but once I did, I started testing it in game with similar results each time.  

[Inter61]

- Playing at home, second game of the season, against Everton.

- Both sides are evenly matched, as evidenced by the level bookies odds.

- Finished two places above them last season.

- Now replaying the game for the 14th time.

- Current record is: 9 away wins and 4 draws.

Utter nonsense.

Perhaps the makers of this game should have spoken to a statistician before releasing it…..

(Edit: 9 away wins and 5 draws)

(Edit: 10 away wins and 5 draws - Game 15 was hilarious- winning 1-0 in the 90th minute, only for Everton to score in the 91st and 96th minutes)

(Edit: 10 away wins and 6 draws)

(Edit: 11 away wins and 6 draws)

(Edit: And Finally……. 1 home win, 6 draws and 11 away wins)

So, 1 in 18 is a home win. Interestingly enough, in the real world Norwich City are 18/1 to win at Manchester City on the opening day of the new season.

Edited July 28, 2021 by Inter61

[XaW]

I merged your two almost identical threads together. And since you didn't care to respond to any of the responses you got last time, I have severe doubts you will this time. The same answers stand though.

[XaW]

And I can also point back to your 3rd thread regarding this, with just about the same answers then:

For the future, please keep this to this topic and don't start new ones about the same thing.

[Inter61]

On 06/07/2021 at 00:12, wazzaflow10 said:

There are lots of examples of older games where the developer allows the AI to "cheat" because its easier to program shortcuts for the computer than build out human logic. I don't know if SI does this in any part of their game (maybe transfers/contracts?). The ME is/should be the ME. Maybe someone could argue making the match engine harder on human players makes the game more challenging b/c of the potential to break the ME in a way the AI never would. Given the desire to sell as many copies as possible I'd agree it'd make no sense to have the human lose rather than win. It definitely feels good to rant though.

I’d argue that it isn’t as simple as ‘have the human win or lose’. Both of which would be potential negatives for the game developers. Agreed that a constant losing experience would put people off playing, but so would the reverse if it seemed too easy. If I was building a game, and my primary economic requirement was to retain players, I’d want to engineer it to be difficult but not impossible, occasionally successful but mostly near misses. Highs and lows, disappointments followed by minor triumphs.

[HUNT3R]

1 hour ago, Inter61 said:

- Playing at home, second game of the season, against Everton.

- Both sides are evenly matched, as evidenced by the level bookies odds.

- Finished two places above them last season.

- Now replaying the game for the 14th time.

- Current record is: 9 away wins and 4 draws.

Utter nonsense.

Perhaps the makers of this game should have spoken to a statistician before releasing it…..

(Edit: 9 away wins and 5 draws)

(Edit: 10 away wins and 5 draws - Game 15 was hilarious- winning 1-0 in the 90th minute, only for Everton to score in the 91st and 96th minutes)

(Edit: 10 away wins and 6 draws)

(Edit: 11 away wins and 6 draws)

(Edit: And Finally……. 1 home win, 6 draws and 11 away wins)

So, 1 in 18 is a home win. Interestingly enough, in the real world Norwich City are 18/1 to win at Manchester City on the opening day of the new season.

Do you anything in these matches based on what you're seeing or what's happening? Do you learn from the previous playthrough and adapt or do you do the same thing over and over?

Pre-game stats mean nothing. Goals mean everything. If you lose/draw that regularly, it's either something your doing or not doing, how you've set up tactically, player selection or a bit of everything.

[Inter61]

1 hour ago, HUNT3R said:

Do you anything in these matches based on what you're seeing or what's happening? Do you learn from the previous playthrough and adapt or do you do the same thing over and over?

Pre-game stats mean nothing. Goals mean everything. If you lose/draw that regularly, it's either something your doing or not doing, how you've set up tactically, player selection or a bit of everything.

I’ve sampled it both ways, with no changes and then using different tactical set ups.

Interestingly, when using no changes, there were large variations in shots and shots on target. In fact the only constant appeared to be the end result, which would vary between 0-1 with one shot on target, to 1-5 with 11 shots on target.

And therein lies the suspicion that ‘greater forces’ are in play.

It reminds me of that old joke about football being a game of 22 men kicking a ball around, and then the Germans win.

[herne79]

Do you replay matches that you win?  Why not?  It's the exact same thing after all because the Match Engine doesn't know who the AI manager and human manager is.  If it can't tell the difference it can't favour one over the other.

2 hours ago, Inter61 said:

and then using different tactical set ups

How do you know those tactical set ups were any good if all you were doing was trying them out for the first time in a match you were replaying?  And what about your team's tactical familiarity with those new tactics?

The bottom line is this has nothing to do with "greater forces" at play or SI not talking to statisticians.  The best thing you can do is understand why your team let you down, learn from it and move on.  If you need help and advice of how to do that there are plenty of willing people in the help forums that you can ask .

[Grifty]

I never see the point in looking to the game this in depth. So what if you are correct and there is something deep in the code that means you HAVE to lose a particular game. What does it matter? What are you going to do with that information? Start a new save? Never play it again?

At the end of the day, it's a game. Play it for fun. If you don't have fun, don't play it. Go and do something you do enjoy.

[Svenc]

39 minutes ago, Grifty said:

I never see the point in looking to the game this in depth. So what if you are correct and there is something deep in the code that means you HAVE to lose a particular game. 

Spoiler: There isn't. 30 time reload, but you can't win - Football Manager General Discussion - Sports Interactive Community (sigames.com)  

Would the game in question be uploaded, somebody would win it immediately. 


(As the Match Engine always has issues, sometimes it may appear though a game is "unwinnable". For example, if you didn't realize back then that three central fowards didn't track back, you always had a troubled time defending them when the AI switched to such a formation (can be mid-match, can be from the start). They hung at the half way line and overran your defense on each interception. 

Still remember AI de Boer managing Chelsea on a save way back uploaded due to an "unwinnable" Chelsea match. Due to his editor traits, he oft switched to 3 Central Forwards at HT if results didn'T go his way at that point. The 3 CFs were Hazard (who would average tons of dribbles per match anyway), Costa et all respectively. Curiously, it was easier to win that match if you didn't lead at HT but later on, as that switch oft then wouldn't come...  ) Back then, the Barcelona assistant employed similar tactics from kick-off if you holidayed and let him take over. He broke all kinds of La Liga records in terms of goals scored (the AI managers mostly couldn't defend the 3 CFs very well either).  

 

https://imgur.com/ED734b8

Edited July 28, 2021 by Svenc

[jeerinho]

I suppose that Everton are going route-one to Calvert-Lewin. If you line up with your shortest centrebacks then you are letting them play to one of their strengths. It's not surprising to get the same outcome no matter how many repeats. You should already be very familiar with their patterns: Richarlison cutting in, Rodriguez killer pass, Doucoure arriving late, Digne bombing forward to deliver that killer cross. Try to nullify their patterns. For example, getting your right winger to tightly mark Digne.

[MBarbaric]

after all these years, i don't know who is to blame here. people who ask these questions or those who come to answer  

[Svenc]

1 hour ago, MBarbaric said:

after all these years, i don't know who is to blame here. people who ask these questions or those who come to answer  

Touché.   You can also already predict that there will be no uploaded save, as (mostly) usual. 

The core argument actually seems similar to some of GarryHammerWHUFC10000, who under his new alias sadly seems back to being banned, at least muted, for about the 10000th time. Namely, there being ME mechanisms that ensure point drops, to keep things "interesting". That must be why Rashidi went like several hundred matches unbeaten on a prior release, basically even beating "bad luck", say in the form of 3 DFKs conceded in a single match against all odds.  

It's likely the the guy is having a similar issue, namely for some reason being unable to read the match engine. The added clue is also in the random tactical switches, which will always be random unless you can read the ME. Not only for the added challenge, I'd actually wish SI would code the AI managers to be brutal, so that there would be no such supicious, but needed reloads point drops left and right from the very start. 

 

 

Oops, I did it again.

 

Edited July 29, 2021 by Svenc