*Official* Football Manager 2023 Early Access Beta Feedback Thread

[Ferocious289]

58 minutes ago, johnnyyakuza78 said:

So after a little discussion on new updates for FM23 I realised that I felt a little disappointed that there haven't been any radical changes to the actual way the game is played since.. well a very long time. I've played this game since it was Championship Manager, which is decades! The core of the game is very similar, but each year new features are added, things are imperceptibly tweaked under the hood, the interface changes a bit.

Over time the game has grown and grown, but it's also very similar.

The way I play the game is also very similar, no matter what version I'm on. 

There are some things I do a lot

• Play with my tactics on the tactics screen
• Look at my players
• Go to my inbox and hit space thousands of times to get through my emails
• Play a football match
• Go to my inbox and hit space thousands of times to get through my emails

 

There are some things I might do a few times a season such as

• Look at staff
• Sort out my training
• Check my finances 
• Do scouting
   

And there are A LOT of other things in the game that I never do. There are a lot of screens I never use, there are screens I did not know exist. I could easily get lost in the game, but I don't because I stick to what I know and don't venture too far. 

It occurred to me that the game has a lot of bloat and it is unwieldy. I said in another thread that it reminded me of Microsoft products like Word, where the core functionality of the program, the thing I needed to do to achieve my goal when using it, becomes lost under layers of added features that only a tiny percentage of people actually use. 

On top of that, bloat extends to every screen. From a design perspective almost every screen is very hard to read and consume because there is so much to take in. Again I've been playing for decades so I know which bit of a screen I need to pay attention to, which means I basically ignore most of the info presented to me. If I didn't ignore it I would never be able to finish a season in my lifetime. 

So essentially what I'm saying that personally I not only ignore 80% of the features and screens of the game, but 80% of the content on each of those screens. So I wonder what is the value for it to be there, and wouldn't it make sense to design the interface in a much more streamlined way that fits the way users actually play the game.

So thats why I wondered am I alone in playing this way? Are other people spending their time playing FM by endlessly ignoring everything on screen until they get to the interesting bit. I know SI wanted to change this behaviour but I haven't seen much in the way of radical change. 

Am I alone here? How do other people play the game? Do you read everything? What do you ignore? Do you mostly just hammer your way through your inbox till a non skippable action occurs or a game? 

Let me know.

 

 

Scouting screens definitely overload my brain

 

Edited October 25, 2022 by Ferocious289

[zzkeg27]

Unlike existing games, too many CM-based formations have disappeared, and ai Managers are using too many 2dm-based formations.

 

fm2023 formation

 

fm2022 formation

[greenz81]

2 minutes ago, zzkeg27 said:

Unlike existing games, too many CM-based formations have disappeared, and ai Managers are using too many 2dm-based formations.

 

fm2023 formation

 

fm2022 formation

I think they should merge the DMC & MC role into one. A player shouldnt have to be trained in either position if this is the new way the tactics are. Think of it as a MC that can play deep or normal. 

[DavyDepuydt1]

How come there is so much difference in the "Quick Pick" (done by the assistant manager, checked it in the "pick guidelines") and the "Selection Advice" of that same Assistant manager? (pick guidelines are default, so it's not because they are set to extreme things why some player aren't getting selected)

[Jack Joyce]

32 minutes ago, greenz81 said:

I think they should merge the DMC & MC role into one. A player shouldnt have to be trained in either position if this is the new way the tactics are. Think of it as a MC that can play deep or normal. 

Positions is always a difficult topic, especially in the modern game where positions/roles are so fluid - it almost just becomes a game of semantics! 

Previously we had a problem - a CM in a 433 is fundamentally very different to a CM in a 4231, they're really not the same position. e.g. you might see Mason Mount as a CM in a 433 and not bat an eyelid, but if you saw him at the base of a 4231 you'd wonder what the manager is thinking! However, in game the AI managers were constantly using players like Mason Mount as CMs in formations where you'd typically expect a double-pivot to be deployed e.g. 4231, 523, 5221.

We reviewed all the possible solutions and felt this was best for the realism of the team selection system, fundamentally players in the base of a 4231 are pivots, and these changes reflect that. It does mean that some players needed their positions adjusted by researchers to reflect these changes, and if you see any issues where this still hasn't happened, please report it to the researchers via the forums. You'll probably find that most CMs will end up also having at least some ability at either DM or AM, but this is expected.

It does mean that there's a lot less formations used by the AI managers with CMs - but there's still some e.g. 442 diamond and 442 flat which remain.

But overall we feel like this has benefits for not only tactical balance and team selection for AI managers, but also for AI shortlisting - since now when they look to recruit a player to play at the base of a 4231 they're not even considering a player like Mason Mount for it.

It's worth noting that when you use DMs with no CMs in the team, then those DMs will position higher - and the same for CMs when there's no DMs, they'll position a bit deeper in certain phases.

[LeoFM]

33 minutes ago, Double0Seven said:

My point is that youth and newgens seem to be bugged over and over year in year out. Not the exact same issue, but yet another issue surrounding it. The issue of low newgen did get fixed in FM22, but people were playing a broken FM21 despite paying full price for it. It got better but only after multiple updates months after FM21 released. Is this ok to you? And waiting a full year for FM22 to fix it. Now FM23 is plagued with yet another youth bug. In FM21 they took months to better it and a new iteration to completely fix it. If it repeats again, people are gonna be pissed. They already are, but as someone who has played since FM06 I see this happening over and over again. Release a version that is bugged, not fixing it fast enough, postponing it a bit to next year and oh look there is another big bug. 

I hope im wrong. But if the past tells me anything...

Yeah I fully agree with this. 

As a software developer myself I find it very peculiar how such issues can stay in the game for such a long time. Especially knowing that SI do have the resources to correct these issues.

I guess the problem is that the "average FM player" does not notice/care enough about these things. As long as enough people are playing and paying for the game it seems SI are not that bothered. This makes the smaller "FM addicts" population perceive the service level as very bad (rightly so).

Edited October 25, 2022 by LeoFM

[greenz81]

4 minutes ago, Jack Joyce said:

Positions is always a difficult topic, especially in the modern game where positions/roles are so fluid - it almost just becomes a game of semantics! 

Previously we had a problem - a CM in a 433 is fundamentally very different to a CM in a 4231, they're really not the same position. e.g. you might see Mason Mount as a CM in a 433 and not bat an eyelid, but if you saw him at the base of a 4231 you'd wonder what the manager is thinking! However, in game the AI managers were constantly using players like Mason Mount as CMs in formations where you'd typically expect a double-pivot to be deployed e.g. 4231, 523, 5221.

We reviewed all the possible solutions and felt this was best for the realism of the team selection system, fundamentally players in the base of a 4231 are pivots, and these changes reflect that. It does mean that some players needed their positions adjusted by researchers to reflect these changes, and if you see any issues where this still hasn't happened, please report it to the researchers via the forums. You'll probably find that most CMs will end up also having at least some ability at either DM or AM, but this is expected.

It does mean that there's a lot less formations used by the AI managers with CMs - but there's still some e.g. 442 diamond and 442 flat which remain.

But overall we feel like this has benefits for not only tactical balance and team selection for AI managers, but also for AI shortlisting - since now when they look to recruit a player to play at the base of a 4231 they're not even considering a player like Mason Mount for it.

It's worth noting that when you use DMs with no CMs in the team, then those DMs will position higher - and the same for CMs when there's no DMs, they'll position a bit deeper in certain phases.

Sounds good... thanks for clearing that up

[eye-switcher]

6 minutes ago, LeoFM said:

Yeah I fully agree with this. 

As a software developer myself I find it very peculiar how such issues can stay in the game for such a long time. Especially knowing that SI do have the resources to correct these issues.

I guess the problem is that the "average FM player" does not notice/is not bothered enough by these things. As long as enough people are playing and paying for the game it seems SI are not that bothered. This makes the smaller "FM addicts" population percieve the service level as very bad (rightly so).

Yes the whole SI as a company doesn't look so professional  to me looking from the outside. The youth bug surely should have been picked up by and rectified by the QA department. Add to that the few really new features that are in the game and with how much they sell each year you really start to wonder what they are doing. I understand they are doing a lot of work after release but that only makes you question their business model

Edited October 25, 2022 by eye-switcher

[2calvin]

11 minutes ago, Jack Joyce said:

Positions is always a difficult topic, especially in the modern game where positions/roles are so fluid - it almost just becomes a game of semantics! 

Previously we had a problem - a CM in a 433 is fundamentally very different to a CM in a 4231, they're really not the same position. e.g. you might see Mason Mount as a CM in a 433 and not bat an eyelid, but if you saw him at the base of a 4231 you'd wonder what the manager is thinking! However, in game the AI managers were constantly using players like Mason Mount as CMs in formations where you'd typically expect a double-pivot to be deployed e.g. 4231, 523, 5221.

We reviewed all the possible solutions and felt this was best for the realism of the team selection system, fundamentally players in the base of a 4231 are pivots, and these changes reflect that. It does mean that some players needed their positions adjusted by researchers to reflect these changes, and if you see any issues where this still hasn't happened, please report it to the researchers via the forums. You'll probably find that most CMs will end up also having at least some ability at either DM or AM, but this is expected.

It does mean that there's a lot less formations used by the AI managers with CMs - but there's still some e.g. 442 diamond and 442 flat which remain.

But overall we feel like this has benefits for not only tactical balance and team selection for AI managers, but also for AI shortlisting - since now when they look to recruit a player to play at the base of a 4231 they're not even considering a player like Mason Mount for it.

It's worth noting that when you use DMs with no CMs in the team, then those DMs will position higher - and the same for CMs when there's no DMs, they'll position a bit deeper in certain phases.

Wait, was this originally posted somewhere else? On my monitor it looks like a screenshot but then I can edit it so I'm confused. Anyway, it's really good.

Edited October 25, 2022 by 2calvin

[craiigman]

30 minutes ago, Double0Seven said:

My point is that youth and newgens seem to be bugged over and over year in year out. Not the exact same issue, but yet another issue surrounding it. The issue of low newgen did get fixed in FM22, but people were playing a broken FM21 despite paying full price for it. It got better but only after multiple updates months after FM21 released. Is this ok to you? And waiting a full year for FM22 to fix it. Now FM23 is plagued with yet another youth bug. In FM21 they took months to better it and a new iteration to completely fix it. If it repeats again, people are gonna be pissed. They already are, but as someone who has played since FM06 I see this happening over and over again. Release a version that is bugged, not fixing it fast enough, postponing it a bit to next year and oh look there is another big bug. 

I hope im wrong. But if the past tells me anything...

While not directly linked to youth/newgens, unfortunately the explanation you have given is exactly the reason I can't bring myself to buy FM23. The amount of years a bug/issue has been found during beta that doesn't get fixed until the next release really is starting to mount up. I saw on Twitter Benjy say he is seeing a lot more negativity this year, and I just think people are running out of patience with it. 

[Jack Joyce]

1 minute ago, 2calvin said:

Where was this originally posted? It's really good.

We covered it a bit in the match blog that went out, but this particular post I copied over from when I explained it the other day in the private beta forums.

I'll fix the formatting!

[FM1000]

12 minutes ago, Jack Joyce said:

Positions is always a difficult topic, especially in the modern game where positions/roles are so fluid - it almost just becomes a game of semantics! 

Previously we had a problem - a CM in a 433 is fundamentally very different to a CM in a 4231, they're really not the same position. e.g. you might see Mason Mount as a CM in a 433 and not bat an eyelid, but if you saw him at the base of a 4231 you'd wonder what the manager is thinking! However, in game the AI managers were constantly using players like Mason Mount as CMs in formations where you'd typically expect a double-pivot to be deployed e.g. 4231, 523, 5221.

We reviewed all the possible solutions and felt this was best for the realism of the team selection system, fundamentally players in the base of a 4231 are pivots, and these changes reflect that. It does mean that some players needed their positions adjusted by researchers to reflect these changes, and if you see any issues where this still hasn't happened, please report it to the researchers via the forums. You'll probably find that most CMs will end up also having at least some ability at either DM or AM, but this is expected.

It does mean that there's a lot less formations used by the AI managers with CMs - but there's still some e.g. 442 diamond and 442 flat which remain.

But overall we feel like this has benefits for not only tactical balance and team selection for AI managers, but also for AI shortlisting - since now when they look to recruit a player to play at the base of a 4231 they're not even considering a player like Mason Mount for it.

It's worth noting that when you use DMs with no CMs in the team, then those DMs will position higher - and the same for CMs when there's no DMs, they'll position a bit deeper in certain phases.

This should be a part of the manual for users who don't follow the forum.

Can you also explain the changes related to mentality?

[VeniVV]

15 minutes ago, Jack Joyce said:

Positions is always a difficult topic, especially in the modern game where positions/roles are so fluid - it almost just becomes a game of semantics! 

Previously we had a problem - a CM in a 433 is fundamentally very different to a CM in a 4231, they're really not the same position. e.g. you might see Mason Mount as a CM in a 433 and not bat an eyelid, but if you saw him at the base of a 4231 you'd wonder what the manager is thinking! However, in game the AI managers were constantly using players like Mason Mount as CMs in formations where you'd typically expect a double-pivot to be deployed e.g. 4231, 523, 5221.

We reviewed all the possible solutions and felt this was best for the realism of the team selection system, fundamentally players in the base of a 4231 are pivots, and these changes reflect that. It does mean that some players needed their positions adjusted by researchers to reflect these changes, and if you see any issues where this still hasn't happened, please report it to the researchers via the forums. You'll probably find that most CMs will end up also having at least some ability at either DM or AM, but this is expected.

It does mean that there's a lot less formations used by the AI managers with CMs - but there's still some e.g. 442 diamond and 442 flat which remain.

But overall we feel like this has benefits for not only tactical balance and team selection for AI managers, but also for AI shortlisting - since now when they look to recruit a player to play at the base of a 4231 they're not even considering a player like Mason Mount for it.

It's worth noting that when you use DMs with no CMs in the team, then those DMs will position higher - and the same for CMs when there's no DMs, they'll position a bit deeper in certain phases.

Why do I have to go on a forum for this information? 

[Rashidi]

4 hours ago, FM1000 said:

So from this video he says that the list of ME changes is long...which means he has seen the list???

Mentally is reworked but not a single mention/guide by official SI staff on how and what is changed?? Should we find out our selves?

Like it's my day job, find out how or why a certain software feature works lol 😂.

Can us mere mortals also see list of ME changes from FM 22 to FM23??

Here is an SI staffer responding to my explanation and there are very obvious reasons why the devs don’t come in to address each and every concern. 
 

Hey but it’s entirely up to you. Believe what you want, my conscience is clear. I only do and share things to help the community. And yes maybe SI should have included their match engine changes as a MAJOR feature, and gone into great detail to explain it. Actually they did, but maybe they might go into it in a lot more detail later. Another thing SI like to do is to quietly put features out to see how many people actually notice them. Don’t forget I was very critical about the other features in the game, slamming the squad planner as “inconsequential”, but the match engine stands head and shoulders above anything I have played.

People who are struggling are those who are trying things that will now get punished, Thats not to say the match engine is easy or there are no flaws. There are and I have reported them, except I am no mere mortal I report things differently to SI than some of you. 

[Jack Joyce]

6 minutes ago, FM1000 said:

This should be a part of the manual for users who don't follow the forum.

Can you also explain the changes related to mentality?

Mentality changes are hard to explain comprehensively, since we made hundreds of ME changes every year and to some extent most of them will have some effects based on mentality (on either a player or team level).

Generally, we went into this year with the aim of making defensive mentalities more viable - previously it always felt that attacking mentalities were more or less the only way to go if you want to succeed as a manager, and we really wanted to rebalance things better and review the effects of mentality holistically.

There's been many, many changes to attacking movement, passing, risk assessment - but also to tracking back as well, attacking players are less consistently able to track back when they've committed themselves to an attack (obviously their fitness levels and work rate affect this too). This leads to more of a risk/reward approach to attacking football, whereas before it felt like teams could over-commit in attack but not always feel the cost of that when being countered.

Sorry its a bit vague, but we really do make hundreds of changes to the match engine every year and its really hard to fully explain everything! 

[themadsheep2001]

26 minutes ago, eye-switcher said:

Yes the whole SI as a company doesn't look so professional  to me looking from the outside. The youth bug surely should have been picked up by and rectified by the QA department. Add to that the few really new features that are in the game and with how much they sell each year you really start to wonder what they are doing. I understand they are doing a lot of work after release but that only makes you question their business model

1) it has was picked up.

2) QA don't fix this, they pass that on to Devs, who have already said it's a known issue and working on a fix. Remember their timeline is based on release, not early access. 

[CSF90]

2 hours ago, johnnyyakuza78 said:

So after a little discussion on new updates for FM23 I realised that I felt a little disappointed that there haven't been any radical changes to the actual way the game is played since.. well a very long time. I've played this game since it was Championship Manager, which is decades! The core of the game is very similar, but each year new features are added, things are imperceptibly tweaked under the hood, the interface changes a bit.

Over time the game has grown and grown, but it's also very similar.

The way I play the game is also very similar, no matter what version I'm on. 

There are some things I do a lot

• Play with my tactics on the tactics screen
• Look at my players
• Go to my inbox and hit space thousands of times to get through my emails
• Play a football match
• Go to my inbox and hit space thousands of times to get through my emails

 

There are some things I might do a few times a season such as

• Look at staff
• Sort out my training
• Check my finances 
• Do scouting
   

And there are A LOT of other things in the game that I never do. There are a lot of screens I never use, there are screens I did not know exist. I could easily get lost in the game, but I don't because I stick to what I know and don't venture too far. 

It occurred to me that the game has a lot of bloat and it is unwieldy. I said in another thread that it reminded me of Microsoft products like Word, where the core functionality of the program, the thing I needed to do to achieve my goal when using it, becomes lost under layers of added features that only a tiny percentage of people actually use. 

On top of that, bloat extends to every screen. From a design perspective almost every screen is very hard to read and consume because there is so much to take in. Again I've been playing for decades so I know which bit of a screen I need to pay attention to, which means I basically ignore most of the info presented to me. If I didn't ignore it I would never be able to finish a season in my lifetime. 

So essentially what I'm saying that personally I not only ignore 80% of the features and screens of the game, but 80% of the content on each of those screens. So I wonder what is the value for it to be there, and wouldn't it make sense to design the interface in a much more streamlined way that fits the way users actually play the game.

So thats why I wondered am I alone in playing this way? Are other people spending their time playing FM by endlessly ignoring everything on screen until they get to the interesting bit. I know SI wanted to change this behaviour but I haven't seen much in the way of radical change. 

Am I alone here? How do other people play the game? Do you read everything? What do you ignore? Do you mostly just hammer your way through your inbox till a non skippable action occurs or a game? 

Let me know.

 

 

Fully agree. I have an FM 'routine' that I developed many years ago, and each game fundamentally plays the same to me. It's the core gameplay loop that is addictive enough to make me buy it each year (although I may well skip this one), and whilst I do notice the slightly redesigned or new screens every version, they soon get ignored.

I think that's part of the challenge that SI has; how do they improve the game in a way that actually enhances that core gameplay loop rather than with 'bloat' (as others have put it). I think they've mostly missed in their attempts to do that, but I do suggest you load up an older version of FM every now and again just to remind yourself what you've gotten used to!

I also do think there are a number of bugs and QoL improvements that can and should be made to features that are slightly invasive or a part of that core gameplay loop, such as a media and team talk rework, better newgen attribute balancing, player interaction / unhappiness rework etc.

Edited October 25, 2022 by CSF90

[harrycarrie]

@Jack Joyce

 

Just wanna say thanks for the clarity on certain questions. It's nice to see in-depth information and explanations given to such queries, and honestly I just wish this happened more.

 

It would help negate quite a bit of negativity that populates the forum (myself included!) If clear, proper explanations are given.

 

Thank you for being the first I've seen in ages to take such time , and this approach 

Edited October 25, 2022 by harrycarrie

[장낙서]

35 minutes ago, Jack Joyce said:

Positions is always a difficult topic, especially in the modern game where positions/roles are so fluid - it almost just becomes a game of semantics! 

Previously we had a problem - a CM in a 433 is fundamentally very different to a CM in a 4231, they're really not the same position. e.g. you might see Mason Mount as a CM in a 433 and not bat an eyelid, but if you saw him at the base of a 4231 you'd wonder what the manager is thinking! However, in game the AI managers were constantly using players like Mason Mount as CMs in formations where you'd typically expect a double-pivot to be deployed e.g. 4231, 523, 5221.

We reviewed all the possible solutions and felt this was best for the realism of the team selection system, fundamentally players in the base of a 4231 are pivots, and these changes reflect that. It does mean that some players needed their positions adjusted by researchers to reflect these changes, and if you see any issues where this still hasn't happened, please report it to the researchers via the forums. You'll probably find that most CMs will end up also having at least some ability at either DM or AM, but this is expected.

It does mean that there's a lot less formations used by the AI managers with CMs - but there's still some e.g. 442 diamond and 442 flat which remain.

But overall we feel like this has benefits for not only tactical balance and team selection for AI managers, but also for AI shortlisting - since now when they look to recruit a player to play at the base of a 4231 they're not even considering a player like Mason Mount for it.

It's worth noting that when you use DMs with no CMs in the team, then those DMs will position higher - and the same for CMs when there's no DMs, they'll position a bit deeper in certain phases.

I don't understand this answer.
Until the previous work, AI directors used 2CM formations such as 4-2-3-1 WIDE or 4-4-1-1 WIDE.
The current FM23 has all formations removed from its tactical presets.
As far as I know, AI coaches can only use formations set in the game itself.

So most of the formations in the presets are 2DM formations, so the AI coach only uses limited formations.

Why was the formation setting using 2CM removed?

Should I use only 4-3-3 or 4-4-2 to use 2CM?

Of course, users are free to set their tactics.
However, since the AI coach cannot deviate from the formation set in the game, there are only 4-3-3 and 4-4-2 formations using 2CM.

As you can see from the screenshots, the variety of formations has been significantly reduced compared to the FM22.

I hope you understand this issue.

[qwertygod]

Can we talk about opposition tactics - for the supposedly much improved AI - every single game its now 5 - 3 - 2 with 8 defensive players and 2 strikers - like 10 times worse than previous years - i am queens park and playing in europe against some decent opposition and whether its hearts hibs or young boys its all the same. I would imagine that its reputation based as this was not happening in my first 3 seasons or so and its only from the season after when i managed to win the scottish cup

[Johnny Ace]

1 minute ago, 장낙서 said:

Why was the formation setting using 2CM removed?

He's explained it very well in his post 

The AI would use the likes of Mason Mount as a CM in 4-2-3-1 (as a 6) were he's more of a number 8 type player in a 4-3-3 DM

Quite often the AI Man U manager would use Van der Beek, Pogba & Bruno in a 4-2-3-1. 4-2-3-1 DM helps to avoid that 

[GOODNAME]

But when you see Tottenham formation in ME its super defensive and they barley create anything up top 

[장낙서]

1 minute ago, Johnny Ace said:

He's explained it very well in his post 

The AI would use the likes of Mason Mount as a CM in 4-2-3-1 (as a 6) were he's more of a number 8 type player in a 4-3-3 DM

Quite often the AI Man U manager would use Van der Beek, Pogba & Bruno in a 4-2-3-1. 4-2-3-1 DM helps to avoid that 

So, did you know that fm23's current ai managers cannot use formations like 4-2-3-1, 4-4-1-1, 4-1-4-1?
Check out the basic tactical settings.

Compared to fm22, the formation that uses 2cm has disappeared and only the formation that uses only 2dm is set.

ai managers only use off-the-shelf and most ai team members use 2dm when playing games.

Tactical diversity was significantly lower than that of the fm22.

[Jack Joyce]

4 minutes ago, qwertygod said:

Can we talk about opposition tactics - for the supposedly much improved AI - every single game its now 5 - 3 - 2 with 8 defensive players and 2 strikers - like 10 times worse than previous years - i am queens park and playing in europe against some decent opposition and whether its hearts hibs or young boys its all the same. I would imagine that its reputation based as this was not happening in my first 3 seasons or so and its only from the season after when i managed to win the scottish cup

If you think you're seeing overly-defensive setups against you consistently then please report some examples in the match AI bugs forums, but:

1. 532 isn't really inherently 8 defensive players depending on the roles, if you use wingbacks then thats 4 attackers already, but if you use mezzalas/advanced playmakers then they'll be advanced too.
2. The AI will look to create a defensive/attacking balance through roles like this, and will consider how different roles work together.

[FearMaster]

I have a question. When I go "Add/Remove Leagues" section, I observe estimated game speed is changing after couple of seconds. It occurs whenever I head to "Add/Remove Leagues". Is it normal or bug?

First, I saw this picture.

After 1-2 secs, becoming like this:

[Meraklija Vujevic]

Another ice hockey result!

Fix the defending in this game!

[Slippy_]

8 minutes ago, qwertygod said:

Can we talk about opposition tactics - for the supposedly much improved AI - every single game its now 5 - 3 - 2 with 8 defensive players and 2 strikers - like 10 times worse than previous years - i am queens park and playing in europe against some decent opposition and whether its hearts hibs or young boys its all the same. I would imagine that its reputation based as this was not happening in my first 3 seasons or so and its only from the season after when i managed to win the scottish cup

5-3-2 certinally does not have to be defensive. Your wingbacks can be very attacking minded and you could have an extra 2 midfielders push forwards. I play a 5-3-2 (sometimes DM, sometimes flat 3, sometimes AMC) and it can be very attacking/controlling/defensive. Super flexable.

Did you win or lose those games in which the AI played a 5-3-2?

[XaW]

1 minute ago, Meraklija Vujevic said:

Another ice hockey result!

Fix the defending in this game!

I had a look at your profile and I don't see any bug reports. What defending bugs have you reported playing the BETA of the game?

[Johnny Ace]

3 minutes ago, 장낙서 said:

So, did you know that fm23's current ai managers cannot use formations like 4-2-3-1, 4-4-1-1, 4-1-4-1?
Check out the basic tactical settings.

Compared to fm22, the formation that uses 2cm has disappeared and only the formation that uses only 2dm is set.

ai managers only use off-the-shelf and most ai team members use 2dm when playing games.

Tactical diversity was significantly lower than that of the fm22.

Yes, I'm, aware 

The changes have been made to better reflect real World football

For example:

Last season, Man Utd used Fred and McTominay in the double pivot as 6's (DMs)

In FM22 they were using Pobga and Van der Beek instead as 8's (CMs)

[Meraklija Vujevic]

Just now, XaW said:

I had a look at your profile and I don't see any bug reports. What defending bugs have you reported playing the BETA of the game?

What bugs complete match engine needs to be fully replaced!

[jdubsnz]

Have been reading through this thread and haven’t quite found a definitive answer. I’ve started a save on the beta which I am getting into and enjoying. If there are challenges with player development, etc, will any released patches update in my current save or will I need to start a new one for any changes to take effect? Thanks in advance 

[frank_olaf]

The summer transfer window just closed and I got a notification that Aston Villa and Douglas Luiz mutually agreed to terminate his contract, meaning he's now available on a free. 

 

This seems like odd behaviour for a player with time left on his contract (I don't know if he had one year left or if his contract renewal was included in the beta)

 

[SeaCarrot]

Just now, jdubsnz said:

Have been reading through this thread and haven’t quite found a definitive answer. I’ve started a save on the beta which I am getting into and enjoying. If there are challenges with player development, etc, will any released patches update in my current save or will I need to start a new one for any changes to take effect? Thanks in advance 

Fixes will be retroactive. If they ever happen, likely by the Winter update like the youth bug last year and the year before. 

[Jonthedon26]

1 hour ago, Fabregas_04 said:

I feel tactics are an irrelevance for the issues I refer to and comes down to players consistently making ridiculous mistakes. Tactics in your case may simply be stifling the game to a degree that masks the problems.

I agree, could well be my tactic masking the issue for me.

[XaW]

Just now, Meraklija Vujevic said:

What bugs complete match engine needs to be fully replaced!

This is a beta, the idea of it is to identify and report bugs. If you chose not to do so, then fine, but it's hard to take you seriously when you don't and still think the game has issues. Whining about hockey results, you clearly have save showing issues, so why not report them and hope for a change?

[XaW]

1 minute ago, jdubsnz said:

Have been reading through this thread and haven’t quite found a definitive answer. I’ve started a save on the beta which I am getting into and enjoying. If there are challenges with player development, etc, will any released patches update in my current save or will I need to start a new one for any changes to take effect? Thanks in advance 

I've posted a few times in the thread here. SI have said that it will be save compatible, but not retroactive.

[Jack Joyce]

5 minutes ago, 장낙서 said:

So, did you know that fm23's current ai managers cannot use formations like 4-2-3-1, 4-4-1-1, 4-1-4-1?
Check out the basic tactical settings.

Compared to fm22, the formation that uses 2cm has disappeared and only the formation that uses only 2dm is set.

ai managers only use off-the-shelf and most ai team members use 2dm when playing games.

Tactical diversity was significantly lower than that of the fm22.

Yes, AI managers have less formations available for selection through the researchers, and this is absolutely intentional.

Less formations doesn't necessarily mean less tactical diversity though, as we've greatly improved the way AI managers choose their roles and team instructions.

Bielsa has gone on record as saying there's only 10 formations in football. and any system you play is some variation of these 10 formations. We still have more than that!
 

"Tactical systems are not of extreme importance, as the positions are not fixed, and player's roles will change within match context."

[andu1]

7 minutes ago, Jack Joyce said:

If you think you're seeing overly-defensive setups against you consistently then please report some examples in the match AI bugs forums, but:

1. 532 isn't really inherently 8 defensive players depending on the roles, if you use wingbacks then thats 4 attackers already, but if you use mezzalas/advanced playmakers then they'll be advanced too.
2. The AI will look to create a defensive/attacking balance through roles like this, and will consider how different roles work together.

Hi Jack. Are you aware that the AI managers hardly deviate from their first Pref formation? for example if their first in 4-3-3 and second is 4-2-3-1 they will always start the game in a 4-3-3 even if underperforming?

You would expect some managers to be tactically more versatile and swap between their pref one but doesn't happen to often? In fact they never use their second as a starting lineup? Is it intended behavior or a bug?

There are already reports on the match AI bug tracker.

 

 

 

[장낙서]

5 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

Yes, I'm, aware 

The changes have been made to better reflect real World football

For example:

Last season, Man Utd used Fred and McTominay in the double pivot as 6's (DMs)

In FM22 they were using Pobga and Van der Beek instead as 8's (CMs)

It's a matter of role, not formation.
Let me give you an example.
It's about the ai manager, not the player.

up to fm22
In the 4-2-3-1 WIDE formation, he used the tactic of assigning one of the 2CMs to play the role of Mezzala.

The current problem is that AI managers cannot use the 4-2-3-1 WIDE form.

It's not a question of role, it's a question of form.

[Jonthedon26]

2 hours ago, johnnyyakuza78 said:

So after a little discussion on new updates for FM23 I realised that I felt a little disappointed that there haven't been any radical changes to the actual way the game is played since.. well a very long time. I've played this game since it was Championship Manager, which is decades! The core of the game is very similar, but each year new features are added, things are imperceptibly tweaked under the hood, the interface changes a bit.

Over time the game has grown and grown, but it's also very similar.

The way I play the game is also very similar, no matter what version I'm on. 

There are some things I do a lot

• Play with my tactics on the tactics screen
• Look at my players
• Go to my inbox and hit space thousands of times to get through my emails
• Play a football match
• Go to my inbox and hit space thousands of times to get through my emails

 

There are some things I might do a few times a season such as

• Look at staff
• Sort out my training
• Check my finances 
• Do scouting
   

And there are A LOT of other things in the game that I never do. There are a lot of screens I never use, there are screens I did not know exist. I could easily get lost in the game, but I don't because I stick to what I know and don't venture too far. 

It occurred to me that the game has a lot of bloat and it is unwieldy. I said in another thread that it reminded me of Microsoft products like Word, where the core functionality of the program, the thing I needed to do to achieve my goal when using it, becomes lost under layers of added features that only a tiny percentage of people actually use. 

On top of that, bloat extends to every screen. From a design perspective almost every screen is very hard to read and consume because there is so much to take in. Again I've been playing for decades so I know which bit of a screen I need to pay attention to, which means I basically ignore most of the info presented to me. If I didn't ignore it I would never be able to finish a season in my lifetime. 

So essentially what I'm saying that personally I not only ignore 80% of the features and screens of the game, but 80% of the content on each of those screens. So I wonder what is the value for it to be there, and wouldn't it make sense to design the interface in a much more streamlined way that fits the way users actually play the game.

So thats why I wondered am I alone in playing this way? Are other people spending their time playing FM by endlessly ignoring everything on screen until they get to the interesting bit. I know SI wanted to change this behaviour but I haven't seen much in the way of radical change. 

Am I alone here? How do other people play the game? Do you read everything? What do you ignore? Do you mostly just hammer your way through your inbox till a non skippable action occurs or a game? 

Let me know.

 

 

I too have been playing since the Championship Manager days and I play the game exactly the way that you do. I never look at the data hub, squad planner etc etc I literally click continue through most gameweeks until I get to the match itself. If I had to guess at what % of features in FM I use I would say it is below 20%.

[andu1]

Totally agree that 4-2-3-1 should be played with double DM's like IRL football. However not so sure why 4-4-1-1 or 4-1-4-1 were removed. If AI can use 4-3-3 DM and 4-2-3-1 act like those 2 then it's not an issue

[장낙서]

8 분 전, 잭 조이스는 말했다 :

예, AI 관리자는 연구원을 통해 선택할 수있는 형성이 적으며 이는 절대적으로 의도적 인 것입니다.

포메이션이 적다고 해서 반드시 전술적 다양성이 줄어드는 것은 아니지만, AI 관리자가 자신의 역할과 팀 지침을 선택하는 방식을 크게 개선했기 때문입니다.

비엘사는 축구에 10개의 포메이션이 있다고 말한 것으로 기록되어 있다. 그리고 당신이 플레이하는 모든 시스템은이 10 포메이션의 일부 변형입니다. 우리는 여전히 그 이상을 가지고 있습니다!
 

"전술 시스템은 포지션이 고정되어 있지 않기 때문에 매우 중요하지 않으며 선수의 역할은 경기 컨텍스트 내에서 바뀔 것입니다."

사용자가 자신의 전술을 자유롭게 설정할 수 있기 때문에 중요하지 않습니다.
문제는 AI 관리자에 있습니다.

AI 코치는 기본 포메이션에서 벗어날 수 없습니다. 그렇지 않습니까?

전술 사전 설정을 보면 4-3-1-2, 4-1-4-1, 4-4-1-1, 4-2-4 WIDE와 같은 전술은 없습니다.
이로 인해 AI 관리자의 성형 옵션이 제한됩니다.

역할은 플레이어의 위치에 따라 변경됩니다. fm22에서 포메이션을 삭제한 이유는 무엇입니까?

다시 말하지만, 나는 사용자의 형성 설정에 대해 이야기하는 것이 아니라 ai 감독의 형성이 매우 제한적이며 대부분 2dm 형성이라는 사실에 대해 이야기하고 있습니다.

[Jack Joyce]

7 minutes ago, andu1 said:

Totally agree that 4-2-3-1 should be played with double DM's like IRL football. However not so sure why 4-4-1-1 or 4-1-4-1 were removed. If AI can use 4-3-3 DM and 4-2-3-1 act like those 2 then it's not an issue

This is one of those cases where positions/formations are fairly arbitrary labels, but:

• 4411 - A 4231 in a mid/low block phase will take up this shape.
• 4141 - A 433 in a mid/low block phase will take up this shape.

It's important for us to have consistency in how formations are set, which is why these are not used anymore. However as you suggested, based on the instructions/tendencies the manager has they are able to create these shapes through roles and instructions during a match.

[Slippy_]

Something I wanted to add (which might be a bug, I have reported as such along with another scouting bug) is that it appears that a lot of countries arent scoutable in game. For example here I have world scouting available to me for an Australian club. Many african nations, north american nations and some nations from Europe are not scoutable. So it appears that world scouting is NOT actually world scouting. I have noticed that for some clubs it depends on your location. For example as Norwich when I upped my scouting to world I couldnt scout Singapore but for this Australian club I could.

Anyway this might suggest going back to region scouting will make more sense.

 

[Johnny Ace]

11 minutes ago, 장낙서 said:

It's a matter of role, not formation.
Let me give you an example.
It's about the ai manager, not the player.

up to fm22
In the 4-2-3-1 WIDE formation, he used the tactic of assigning one of the 2CMs to play the role of Mezzala.

The current problem is that AI managers cannot use the 4-2-3-1 WIDE form.

It's not a question of role, it's a question of form.

In the real world, a manager wouldn't use a Mezzala in a 4-2-3-1, I think that's part of the point in the change 

[Defensive]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb Meraklija Vujevic:

mate with City I conceded only 21 goal with top teams is easy

 try to defend with mid and  underdogs teams

try to get over 80 points as underdog in Premiership

 

example

So you are agreeing that good defending is possible, thats a first step.

And i dont want to get 80 points with an underdog because that would be very unrealistic, so thats a good thing.

Also you didnt explain why in your screen all AI matches are like 1-0, 0-1, 0-0. Other Users here reporting the same with their own team. Doesnt that make you think it has to do with tactics?

 

[qwertygod]

40 minutes ago, Slippy_ said:

5-3-2 certinally does not have to be defensive. Your wingbacks can be very attacking minded and you could have an extra 2 midfielders push forwards. I play a 5-3-2 (sometimes DM, sometimes flat 3, sometimes AMC) and it can be very attacking/controlling/defensive. Super flexable.

Did you win or lose those games in which the AI played a 5-3-2?

https://gyazo.com/b39adbaea3ece06e65b4fcba0c50ab1d   3 - 1 win home to Rakow Europa League Q

https://gyazo.com/416da3f279c50f01d22538879e572576    1 - 1 draw away to Rakow Europa League Q

https://gyazo.com/85104d5e10db737ec1de72948e5f4b7a   0 - 2  loss away to St Mirren SPFL

https://gyazo.com/f53785a7b9ac5f4eb389dbff84210a9b     1 -0 away win Oostende Europa League Q

https://gyazo.com/5c19839255165303aae2e51af2393373    1 - 0 home win to Championship Ross County in PS Cup (this is the only justified game in which the opposition is justified in my opinion)

https://gyazo.com/8e975010a4bc9773b8a6d05b2e462588   4 - 3 home win Oostende Europa League Q

https://gyazo.com/be01cce613f58d5b1558ba5c4766ad47    0 - 1 loss home to St Mirren SPFL

https://gyazo.com/38dfdfc0fb647391dfdbcda18b1c6348   5-1 win home to U Craicova Europa Conference League

It seems to be impacting on European games more - possibly because i don't have these leagues loaded? Again maybe reputation based. So yes i really should not be complaining as besides 2 loss to St Mirren its all been good for me.

https://gyazo.com/2882027b698589c003105b216e76eb39 League table - St Mirren in second after 18 games with a good squad that should be running over the top of me - just adds to the bizarreness of the whole thing.

Some of these games are not a 5 -3 - 2 but a 3 4 2 1 - Basically with 2 wingers and a striker rather than 2 strikers.

 

Edited October 25, 2022 by qwertygod

[obasa_G]

10 minutes ago, Slippy_ said:

Something I wanted to add (which might be a bug, I have reported as such along with another scouting bug) is that it appears that a lot of countries arent scoutable in game. For example here I have world scouting available to me for an Australian club. Many african nations, north american nations and some nations from Europe are not scoutable. So it appears that world scouting is NOT actually world scouting. I have noticed that for some clubs it depends on your location. For example as Norwich when I upped my scouting to world I couldnt scout Singapore but for this Australian club I could.

Anyway this might suggest going back to region scouting will make more sense.

 

You can only scout a nation if there are enough players in them. Those nations are greyed out because the amount of players in them are not enough. To be able to scout them, you should load more players through the advanced database.

[Slippy_]

1 minute ago, qwertygod said:

It seems to be impacting on European games more - possibly because i don't have these leagues loaded? Again maybe reputation based. So yes i really should not be complaining as besides 2 loss to St Mirren its all been good for me.

 

 

 

Outside of Europe it seems like using the 5-3-2 agaisnt you has been effective. I am guessing you are a few seasons deep to be in the Euorpa League as Queeks Park and in the qualifying there are a lot of not great teams. Hell even my awful Flint Town/Banger team from Wales busted a few noses in the qualifying rounds!

Looking at those results nothing jumps out at me as being too bad and we can see that Oostende did knock past 3 you.

[Slippy_]

1 minute ago, obasa_G said:

You can only scout a nation if there are enough players in them. Those nations are greyed out because the amount of players in them are not enough. To be able to scout them, you should load more players through the advanced database.

Ah that would make sense thank you.  Although does this mean the local top clubs wouldnt produce regens? For example Algeria is one of the top ranked nations in Africa so you would expect them to produce some decent players for their national team.

Presumably if you region scout you would pick up any players that those clubs do generate.