Football Manager 2024 Official Feedback Thread

[Gilberto Silva]

I feel really cheated by this update. Have waited to start a new save, when I could have used an unofficial update all this time? 

[holstein28]

4 minutes ago, Gilberto Silva said:

I feel really cheated by this update. Have waited to start a new save, when I could have used an unofficial update all this time? 

Not even the worst part. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on...

[Rashio]

4 minutes ago, DavutOzkan said:

I believe this line is why Sweden is unchanged: 

Additionally, rosters for certain licensed leagues whose seasons run to the calendar year will only be reflective up until the end of the 2023 season and so will not include incoming and outgoing transfers made for 2024.

That's not why, that's just them stating that they didn't do it. Besides, MLS is one of those leagues that run to the calendar year. But it's not just that, it's all sorts of things. The most obvious as a Swede would be that we don't have a manager for the national team in the game. You want a more high profile case? Roy Hodgson is still the manager at Crystal Palace in game. Most other changes not implemented are from those leagues going by the calendar year, such as Brazil, Norway, Sweden etc. But there's no reason they couldn't do that when they do it for the MLS.

[João14]

21 minutes ago, LucasBR said:

Preparing myself mentally to be extremely disappointed with South American transfers update 

I don't remember a year worse than this.

It has nothing past early/mid February. Not even one.

[tezcatlipoca665]

Hopefully SI will think about outlining what they definitely are and definitely are no longer working on in the forum from now on, at the very least. They haven't touched the ME since the first patch four weeks after the official release and should have made it both clear and known that the match engine was finalized. A pinned post would've helped solve a lot of this.

[tezcatlipoca665]

7 minutes ago, Rashio said:

That's not why, that's just them stating that they didn't do it. Besides, MLS is one of those leagues that run to the calendar year. But it's not just that, it's all sorts of things. The most obvious as a Swede would be that we don't have a manager for the national team in the game. You want a more high profile case? Roy Hodgson is still the manager at Crystal Palace in game. Most other changes not implemented are from those leagues going by the calendar year, such as Brazil, Norway, Sweden etc. But there's no reason they couldn't do that when they do it for the MLS.

The reason why the current changes have been made and not others is because those are the database changes that didn't make it in the last patch. As far as SI was concerned, the other nations were updated and that was the end of that. Think of this as a part 2 of the last patch and it'll make more sense.

[João14]

11 minutes ago, tezcatlipoca665 said:

The reason why the current changes have been made and not others is because those are the database changes that didn't make it in the last patch. As far as SI was concerned, the other nations were updated and that was the end of that. Think of this as a part 2 of the last patch and it'll make more sense.

Then it should change starting next game.

It does not make sense to release a patch in April that does not cover a lot of South American leagues that have windows open until March/April. The rosters are not even updated as far as February on SA.

[El Payaso]

43 minutes ago, Gilberto Silva said:

I feel really cheated by this update. Have waited to start a new save, when I could have used an unofficial update all this time? 

Why not do it in the first place? Of course it is dependant on where you want to manage but in general there are really good data updates available for the game. If I would start a game in Finland, for example, then I would definitely use a data file that has been created by someone domestic. The data in those much more accurate than the general database. 

[Gilberto Silva]

The post says 400,000 database changes, so we’re talking 400,000 changes in the two-week window between the last update and when the cut-off was? 

It doesn’t make sense to release a data update on 9th April that had a cut-off of mid-February. 

[tezcatlipoca665]

27 minutes ago, João14 said:

Then it should change starting next game.

It does not make sense to release a patch in April that does not cover a lot of South American leagues that have windows open until March/April. The rosters are not even updated as far as February on SA.

Another thing SI should do is make it clear when their cut-off dates for database changes are so people at least know what to expect with the patches. This was all completely avoidable and could've been solved with extremely basic communication. People holding off playing the game they bought for months, based on the assumption of what the patches would fix, is a really bad reflection of this.

Edited April 9 by tezcatlipoca665

[santy001]

3 minutes ago, Gilberto Silva said:

The post says 400,000 database changes, so we’re talking 400,000 changes in the two-week window between the last update and when the cut-off was? 

It doesn’t make sense to release a data update on 9th April that had a cut-off of mid-February. 

It was an internal March deadline as mentioned in the release info. 

[Rashio]

40 minutes ago, tezcatlipoca665 said:

The reason why the current changes have been made and not others is because those are the database changes that didn't make it in the last patch. As far as SI was concerned, the other nations were updated and that was the end of that. Think of this as a part 2 of the last patch and it'll make more sense.

Not true. Because they added in transfers made in MLS last time as well, and then added onto that now. So there is no reason they couldn't have done the same everywhere else. Why was that the end of the other nations when there was a continuation of China and the US?

[NineCloudNine]

10 minutes ago, Gilberto Silva said:

The post says 400,000 database changes, so we’re talking 400,000 changes in the two-week window between the last update and when the cut-off was?

It doesn't say that. It says:

Quote

 

Database 24.3** 

• ~400k database changes since database 24.2, including China and MLS*** 

 

That's 400k including the last update. This isn't a new database, it's completing the updates to the current (24.3) database.

 

 

 

 

[tezcatlipoca665]

15 minutes ago, Rashio said:

Not true. Because they added in transfers made in MLS last time as well, and then added onto that now. So there is no reason they couldn't have done the same everywhere else. Why was that the end of the other nations when there was a continuation of China and the US?

Premier League, Bundesliga, LaLiga, Serie A, Ligue 1,  transfer deadline date = 1st of February.
US Major League Roster Compliance Deadline (not transfer deadline, which falls on April 23rd which they'd had to release a patch in May for - which they won't) = 23rd of February.
Chinese Super League transfer deadline date = 28th of February.

I'm not disputing that they included updated rosters for the MLS in the last update. I'm saying that this is a continuation and finalization of the previous patch. Roy Hodgson left on the 19th of February, after the transfer deadline date on the 1st of February, which - if you think about it - is probably the real reason why he hasn't been removed in-game, because SI most likely finalize *everything* at the transfer date cut-off points of each nation.

I'm not defending SI here, but what I'm saying sure makes a lot more sense than 'this is a political move and the Chinese are responsible for it somehow'.

[timtim11]

This update is pathetic.  whats the point of this.     SI used to pride itself on the database and now its at least 2 months behind.    Really poor when the public can make updates better than you lot.

[Rashio]

30 minutes ago, tezcatlipoca665 said:

Premier League, Bundesliga, LaLiga, Serie A, Ligue 1,  transfer deadline date = 1st of February.
US Major League Roster Compliance Deadline (not transfer deadline, which falls on April 23rd which they'd had to release a patch in May for - which they won't) = 23rd of February.
Chinese Super League transfer deadline date = 28th of February.

I'm not disputing that they included updated rosters for the MLS in the last update. I'm saying that this is a continuation and finalization of the previous patch. Roy Hodgson left on the 19th of February, after the transfer deadline date on the 1st of February, which - if you think about it - is probably the real reason why he hasn't been removed in-game, because SI most likely finalize *everything* at the transfer date cut-off points of each nation.

I'm not defending SI here, but what I'm saying sure makes a lot more sense than 'this is a political move and the Chinese are responsible for it somehow'.

No, what you're saying doesn't make sense because the US and China are not the only nations with a later transfer windows, and yet are the only ones being updated and finalised. Give me one good reason why it's China and the US getting this continuation, and not Sweden, Brazil, Norway etc. There is no logic in "Oh well, we already dropped an update on that nation so it can't possibly be finished later along with other nations we are finalising". Even SI's most recent golden child Japan didn't get a finalised transfer window. This update is made for political reasons AND maybe because they want to break into the American market and think this'll make a slight difference. Which it won't because not even Americans play in MLS.

That China influences a lot of games is not some kind of conspiracy though. Not just politically, but Chinese people are major spenders in the game industry, though that applies more to the mobile market than the PC market. Look towards Blizzard for confirmation. The Chinese government is very willing to block games they don't agree with, however, so pleasing them is a very common trend in the game industry.

[the_hdk]

Worst for me is that they havn't fixed gamebraking bugs that have been reported more than a month ago.

[SkaldfraNorden]

4 minutes ago, the_hdk said:

Worst for me is that they havn't fixed gamebraking bugs that have been reported more than a month ago.

Better try more than 3-5 years ago

[the_hdk]

18 minutes ago, SkaldfraNorden said:

Better try more than 3-5 years ago

may I ask you to share the game-breaking bugs you are refering to with me (can also pm me)  as im not aware of some to be there that long.

[SkaldfraNorden]

52 minutes ago, the_hdk said:

may I ask you to share the game-breaking bugs you are refering to with me (can also pm me)  as im not aware of some to be there that long.

There are none game-breaking, as the game doesn't crash to desktop, at least not for me once it goes through the loading sequence up to the main menu, but from the top of my head, constantly, but constantly clicking every time I load the game and go to any screen with customizable columns right click > auto size all columns > manually set width so everything stays within one screen

You'd think the UI in 2021, let alone 2024 would be more adaptable than that

[santy001]

4 hours ago, Rashio said:

Give me one good reason

Researchers volunteer their time. As a researcher myself I know that SI spend a lot of effort updating us on when our "active" periods are during the year and while we can work on stuff year round there are certain periods of time during the year SI will ask for a more concerted effort. I would expect there to be some respect for the fact that we're volunteering our time and SI don't want to excessively press the researchers to volunteer more and more of their time. So it makes sense that certain updates are more targeted so as not to mobilise the full 1500+ voluntary researchers on a continuous basis. 

[Aoyao]

OK

Here is the bug of UI.

They are not be fixed in FM24.4

[Mobius]

Do 1200+ people really work for SI for free every year doing all these transfer and data update research?

[santy001]

31 minutes ago, Mobius said:

Do 1200+ people really work for SI for free every year doing all these transfer and data update research?

Turns out my information might be a little out of date. Looking at the latest I could see referencing it there are now over 1500. 

Football Manager Research: What’s Involved? | Football Manager 2024

[Mobius]

Blimey.

[daveh83]

7 hours ago, timtim11 said:

This update is pathetic.  whats the point of this.     SI used to pride itself on the database and now its at least 2 months behind.    Really poor when the public can make updates better than you lot.

It’s obv that most of the team is working on fm25. They haven’t touched the match engine in nearly a year on fm24

[dashi112]

5 hours ago, santy001 said:

Turns out my information might be a little out of date. Looking at the latest I could see referencing it there are now over 1500. 

Football Manager Research: What’s Involved? | Football Manager 2024

Is it a case of a bottleneck issue thats been slowly building over the years? like they added more leagues n they have been struggling to handle it with all the changes they have yet to fix / input?  when the community does a better job than the developers with data n you want people to keep buying FM, Shouldn't you be on top of eliminating that bottleneck?

I think its fair to say that we wanna be told if stuff is broken / incomplete and how you intend to fix it. Silent treatment doesn't go over well nor does leading us on a wild goose chase with overpromising and under delivering. Yes FM25 is important but when you push 24 as a 'best of the best' ( cant remember the exact phrasing) kinda deal and you come out with this? then something is wrong there.

[XaW]

3 minutes ago, dashi112 said:

Is it a case of a bottleneck issue thats been slowly building over the years? like they added more leagues n they have been struggling to handle it with all the changes they have yet to fix / input?  when the community does a better job than the developers with data n you want people to keep buying FM, Shouldn't you be on top of eliminating that bottleneck?

I think its fair to say that we wanna be told if stuff is broken / incomplete and how you intend to fix it. Silent treatment doesn't go over well nor does leading us on a wild goose chase with overpromising and under delivering. Yes FM25 is important but when you push 24 as a 'best of the best' ( cant remember the exact phrasing) kinda deal and you come out with this? then something is wrong there.

I think it's more of being thorough about it. A few of those fan made updates are good for transfers and such, but for attributes they are all over the place usually. And this is not to be negative to the ones doing it, but it's really hard to both gauge all the attributes on every player, but also make sure that people don't over- or under-appraise based on preference or simply not understanding the scale the same way. Making sure that a 10 is the same in the English leagues, the Chinese, the Canadian, and the Icelandic for example? How high do you rate an average strength?

And I also know that the researchers for SI test the game a lot to see if the players _act_ as close to real life too. I know @santy001 has made comments about this before, as it's not enough to make the attributes what seems fine, but it's also fine-tuning them to behave as you want in terms of traits and how they link with the attributes. Fan updates cannot be asked to do the same, and I don't think anyone expect them too, but that also mean that it goes slower with the official updates.

As for communication, I totally agree, more is better, in my view. And I've said my piece before about how I think the game needs to fix more issues and polish current systems much more than any new feature. But even so, I don't think the game is broken in any way, at least not in my experience. Issues and bugs, certainly, but nothing game breaking. Things that kill immersion at times are the worst ones for me.

[santy001]

42 minutes ago, dashi112 said:

Is it a case of a bottleneck issue thats been slowly building over the years?

My point was just highlighting why I don't think SI are asking us collectively as a research team to be doing full updates all the time. There isn't a lack of capacity on SI's side to handle that based on my experience, rather they are very respectful of our time and other commitments in life. From time to time you see people suggest the EA equivalent of weekly updates, and sure SI could ask that of us. Many people would likely find that isn't suitable with their other commitments in life. But I've always been happy with the fact SI have respected our day-to-day lives to never even ask that. 

[Itego]

So this is the end, final rating for FM24:2/10

Worst of the series but we have gone a long way a new season begins with fm25 lol

[southside]

Absolute jokers now

[SHK-555]

I don't get why people are raging and acting suprised at the Final Update, I mean what were people expecting after reading the roadmap which outlined exactly what changes was going to be in the Final Update?

[g1nh0]

17 minutes ago, SHK-555 said:

I don't get why people are raging and acting suprised at the Final Update, I mean what were people expecting after reading the roadmap which outlined exactly what changes was going to be in the Final Update?

Honestly, I think a major contributor is the fact we were promised a whole host of things within this year's game release, which ultimately would be the most polished version of FM.

It couldn't be further off the mark, and every new aspect that was implemented, was done so extremely poorly - and with a complete lack of care shown for this year's  game too, makes this year's game overall a dreadful experience - at least to those familiar with the series, and those wanting a progression from last year's game along with a challenging one.

[SHK-555]

14 minutes ago, g1nh0 said:

Honestly, I think a major contributor is the fact we were promised a whole host of things within this year's game release, which ultimately would be the most polished version of FM.

It couldn't be further off the mark, and every new aspect that was implemented, was done so extremely poorly - and with a complete lack of care shown for this year's  game too, makes this year's game overall a dreadful experience - at least to those familiar with the series, and those wanting a progression from last year's game along with a challenging one.

I'm happy with the M.E i think some issues with player interaction need fine tuning, but I've not seen anything game breaking in the game to require a major fix which is what some people are acting like was missed. I certainly wouldn't call it a dreadful experience, I mean I was hoping for the winter update for them change the M.E but I fully understand why they didn't with the risk of throwing something else off in the game and then we complain that they ruined the M.E I don't think SI can win here, like seriously what did you expect them to change to make it not a ''dreadful experience''?

[João14]

10 hours ago, santy001 said:

Researchers volunteer their time. As a researcher myself I know that SI spend a lot of effort updating us on when our "active" periods are during the year and while we can work on stuff year round there are certain periods of time during the year SI will ask for a more concerted effort. I would expect there to be some respect for the fact that we're volunteering our time and SI don't want to excessively press the researchers to volunteer more and more of their time. So it makes sense that certain updates are more targeted so as not to mobilise the full 1500+ voluntary researchers on a continuous basis. 

I did some research as well but that's beyond the point, things will need to be updated for FM25 so work will be done regardless right? Is this data update really necessary? I think this could be better managed just that

I think it would be better to manage the data updates in a different manner, no? Transfer windows are not the same they used to be 4 years ago, for example most people that play on South America leagues have an outdated DB for half of the game cycle. Why is that? Europe leagues are directly affected by this as well because there are innumerous transfers out to other leagues that stay open during February/March/April. 

2 hours ago, santy001 said:

My point was just highlighting why I don't think SI are asking us collectively as a research team to be doing full updates all the time. There isn't a lack of capacity on SI's side to handle that based on my experience, rather they are very respectful of our time and other commitments in life. From time to time you see people suggest the EA equivalent of weekly updates, and sure SI could ask that of us. Many people would likely find that isn't suitable with their other commitments in life. But I've always been happy with the fact SI have respected our day-to-day lives to never even ask that. 

I don't think weekly updates are the answer but a more clear communication would be nice. Setting deadlines for the Data Updates in a precise manner would be nice for example. Like: "24.3 (March) is updated until 1 Feb" or other any date. If SI manages expectations and clearly states what we can expect i think most people will set theirs accordingly.

Communication is always the first thing to address in these cases imo.

Edited April 10 by João14

[g1nh0]

53 minutes ago, SHK-555 said:

I'm happy with the M.E i think some issues with player interaction need fine tuning, but I've not seen anything game breaking in the game to require a major fix which is what some people are acting like was missed. I certainly wouldn't call it a dreadful experience, I mean I was hoping for the winter update for them change the M.E but I fully understand why they didn't with the risk of throwing something else off in the game and then we complain that they ruined the M.E I don't think SI can win here, like seriously what did you expect them to change to make it not a ''dreadful experience''?

Basically everything, and at least show some care for the product with a willingness to improve what was implemented poorly and issues highlighted very early in the cycle.

*game has in general regressed, and much less of a challenge, which goes against a realistic football management sim SI are supposedly aiming to create

*set pieces implemented poorly, both with how it functions, realism and ability to micromanage certain strategies

*positional play ruined balance of the game, particularly affecting online gaming, ultimately being a poor implementation overall

*player interactions not functioning to an acceptable level

*bugs highlighted early this year and previous years never fixed, thus seemed to have been ignored completely

*communication with player base extremely poor

What could they have done better? At least improve some key elements above to at least make this final game play at a reasonable standard and show they did care about this final product & player base, with players also appreciating that time would be limited and not all able to be fixed. But zero time and care was shown to try and achieve any fixes / improvements to areas holding a degree of significance.

A 2 out of 10 quoted I think summarizes this year's game perfectly as an overall rating, being both as a general product (which I would give a 5) and the care / attention given to it (reducing it to a 2).

The game with the most tools and potential, but ultimately the lack of effort placed within it has resulted in something very lacklustre to what was promised/expected by consumers, in both gaming and non gaming aspects.

[Itego]

27 minutes ago, g1nh0 said:

Basically everything, and at least show some care for the product with a willingness to improve what was implemented poorly and issues highlighted very early in the cycle.

*game has in general regressed, and much less of a challenge, which goes against a realistic football management sim SI are supposedly aiming to create

*set pieces implemented poorly, both with how it functions, realism and ability to micromanage certain strategies

*positional play ruined balance of the game, particularly affecting online gaming, ultimately being a poor implementation overall

*player interactions not functioning to an acceptable level

*bugs highlighted early this year and previous years never fixed, thus seemed to have been ignored completely

*communication with player base extremely poor

What could they have done better? At least improve some key elements above to at least make this final game play at a reasonable standard and show they did care about this final product & player base, with players also appreciating that time would be limited and not all able to be fixed. But zero time and care was shown to try and achieve any fixes / improvements to areas holding a degree of significance.

A 2 out of 10 quoted I think summarizes this year's game perfectly as an overall rating, being both as a general product (which I would give a 5) and the care / attention given to it (reducing it to a 2).

The game with the most tools and potential, but ultimately the lack of effort placed within it has resulted in something very lacklustre to what was promised/expected by consumers, in both gaming and non gaming aspects.

Well nothing can be done again, we manage it till fm25.

[SHK-555]

4 minutes ago, g1nh0 said:

Basically everything, and at least show some care for the product with a willingness to improve what was implemented poorly and issues highlighted very early in the cycle.

*game has in general regressed, and much less of a challenge, which goes against a realistic football management sim SI are supposedly aiming to create

*set pieces implemented poorly, both with how it functions, realism and ability to micromanage certain strategies

*positional play ruined balance of the game, particularly affecting online gaming, ultimately being a poor implementation overall

*player interactions not functioning to an acceptable level

*bugs highlighted early this year and previous years never fixed, thus seemed to have been ignored completely

*communication with player base extremely poor

What could they have done better? At least improve some key elements above to at least make this final game play at a reasonable standard and show they did care about this final product & player base, with players also appreciating that time would be limited and not all able to be fixed. But zero time and care was shown to try and achieve any fixes / improvements to areas holding a degree of significance.

A 2 out of 10 quoted I think summarizes this year's game perfectly as an overall rating, being both as a general product (which I would give a 5) and the care / attention given to it (reducing it to a 2).

The game with the most tools and potential, but ultimately the lack of effort placed within it has resulted in something very lacklustre to what was promised/expected by consumers, in both gaming and non gaming aspects.

Half of what you highlighted is personal gripes, it's not a widespread issues

 

*game has in general regressed, and much less of a challenge, which goes against a realistic football management sim SI are supposedly aiming to create'

this is your personal opinion, you can probably find a host of users who find the game too difficult to get to grips and complain about scripting, cheating

*set pieces implemented poorly, both with how it functions, realism and ability to micromanage certain strategies

This again is a personal gripe, I find the new set piece to be great and much more options than there was before

*positional play ruined balance of the game, particularly affecting online gaming, ultimately being a poor implementation overall

You'll need to expand on this, way to broad a statement to make, personally I've seen some great positional play leading to great passages of play 

*player interactions not functioning to an acceptable level

I agree this is a widespread problem, but nothing ground breaking more frustrating

*bugs highlighted early this year and previous years never fixed, thus seemed to have been ignored completely

I think it's widely acknowledged that some of things can't be fixed on this engine which is what we're hoping will be addressed in fm25 with the Unity engine

*communication with player base extremely poor

I don't agree they've given us road maps I think only the winter update didn't have the roadmap outlining what was to be expected.

I think the game plays at a more than reasonable standard, I mean if you only focus on the negative of course you can make out it's substandard. No one mentions all the things the game does right and of course it skews peoples perception on how good the game really is

 

[Purple Bane]

You know 'The fans are unsure why a player on a hat trick has been withdrawn' that seems to have been a thing in every version of the game for all time? Is that a thing?

Outside of your oddball mate remarking on it in the pub once in 1999 i mean. Not important, just an observation.

Edited April 10 by Purple Bane

[g1nh0]

47 minutes ago, SHK-555 said:

Half of what you highlighted is personal gripes, it's not a widespread issues

 

*game has in general regressed, and much less of a challenge, which goes against a realistic football management sim SI are supposedly aiming to create'

this is your personal opinion, you can probably find a host of users who find the game too difficult to get to grips and complain about scripting, cheating

*set pieces implemented poorly, both with how it functions, realism and ability to micromanage certain strategies

This again is a personal gripe, I find the new set piece to be great and much more options than there was before

*positional play ruined balance of the game, particularly affecting online gaming, ultimately being a poor implementation overall

You'll need to expand on this, way to broad a statement to make, personally I've seen some great positional play leading to great passages of play 

*player interactions not functioning to an acceptable level

I agree this is a widespread problem, but nothing ground breaking more frustrating

*bugs highlighted early this year and previous years never fixed, thus seemed to have been ignored completely

I think it's widely acknowledged that some of things can't be fixed on this engine which is what we're hoping will be addressed in fm25 with the Unity engine

*communication with player base extremely poor

I don't agree they've given us road maps I think only the winter update didn't have the roadmap outlining what was to be expected.

I think the game plays at a more than reasonable standard, I mean if you only focus on the negative of course you can make out it's substandard. No one mentions all the things the game does right and of course it skews peoples perception on how good the game really is

 

this is your personal opinion, you can probably find a host of users who find the game too difficult to get to grips and complain about scripting, cheating

I don't disagree with some players finding it harder than others - but to claim this is a realistic game this year, is far from the mark. Many players have complained about the difficulty of the game, with proof of how easy they have found it. I personally also had an unrealistic scoreline in one of the games, being Man City winning 10-0 at home vs Liverpool. And here's a screenshot of another post patch. There's no way I should be capable of not being outplayed away at Old Trafford against a strong side with a vastly inferior team.

 

This again is a personal gripe, I find the new set piece to be great and much more options than there was before

-False statement. Now, you can only leave 2 players back 100% of the time when having an offensive corner, where the AI can choose to leave 3 players up top to hit you on the break leaving you exposed. Previously, you had no limitations in how you chose to place your players and on any set pieces, and number. It's unrealistic not to be able to adapt to being outnumbered in a set piece scenario.

I would like to have the option to have at least 3 players back 100% of the time, maybe 4 in such a scenario so i'm not exposed late on in a game when I am defending a lead.

I would also like to be able to pick a particular danger / target man in the box when defending set players. You used to be able to man mark a danger / tall player, now you cannot on both accounts.

Additionally, you now no longer are able to set any varied routines for throw ins (such as short, mixed, quick). So less options to play with, and less of an ability to counter how the AI / player chooses to setup their routines.

So I don't know how you can claim there are more options than before. If anything, it has been simplified to be more friendly to the casual player. (which seems to be the direction SI headed with this year's game, with it being no challenge this year)

It has the potential to be good - but like everything else, all the new features were implemented poorly, and in the instances of set pieces you have less options. And well, since the update they appear more broken than they were, 39 goals from corners in 46 games which is way too many!!:

You'll need to expand on this, way to broad a statement to make, personally I've seen some great positional play leading to great passages of play 

-Mentioned this on previous posts. You only need to refer to tactic testing websites (FM Arena) which shows the complete imbalance of overpowered roles (espec x2 DM-S with neither holding are used in all the top tactics this year with both wing backs bombing on which should leave you very susceptible defensively but currently it does not  - also players not able to play in this DM position effectively but are employed there, doesn't make the tactic significantly less effective when it really should)  and the engine much easier to exploit this year, resulting in players using identical tactics and roles when playing online, because there are no logical tactics that are as effective). But I guess you will need to play in such an environment to experience this yourself.

I'm not saying positional play is a step backwards - it is a step forwards, but the implementation has led to it causing a balance / exploit problem, which this year is very widespread.

Things highlighted early such as the set pieces and exploitation of roles should have been focussed on to make the final product an improvement from an earlier build - but nothing has improved, nor does it appear there has been any attempt to improve anything. That is my gripe.

Edited April 10 by g1nh0

[jlammi]

Hello my game version is still 24.3 what should i do get latest update?

[SHK-555]

2 hours ago, g1nh0 said:

this is your personal opinion, you can probably find a host of users who find the game too difficult to get to grips and complain about scripting, cheating

I don't disagree with some players finding it harder than others - but to claim this is a realistic game this year, is far from the mark. Many players have complained about the difficulty of the game, with proof of how easy they have found it. I personally also had an unrealistic scoreline in one of the games, being Man City winning 10-0 at home vs Liverpool. And here's a screenshot of another post patch. There's no way I should be capable of not being outplayed away at Old Trafford against a strong side with a vastly inferior team.

 

This again is a personal gripe, I find the new set piece to be great and much more options than there was before

-False statement. Now, you can only leave 2 players back 100% of the time when having an offensive corner, where the AI can choose to leave 3 players up top to hit you on the break leaving you exposed. Previously, you had no limitations in how you chose to place your players and on any set pieces, and number. It's unrealistic not to be able to adapt to being outnumbered in a set piece scenario.

I would like to have the option to have at least 3 players back 100% of the time, maybe 4 in such a scenario so i'm not exposed late on in a game when I am defending a lead.

I would also like to be able to pick a particular danger / target man in the box when defending set players. You used to be able to man mark a danger / tall player, now you cannot on both accounts.

Additionally, you now no longer are able to set any varied routines for throw ins (such as short, mixed, quick). So less options to play with, and less of an ability to counter how the AI / player chooses to setup their routines.

So I don't know how you can claim there are more options than before. If anything, it has been simplified to be more friendly to the casual player. (which seems to be the direction SI headed with this year's game, with it being no challenge this year)

It has the potential to be good - but like everything else, all the new features were implemented poorly, and in the instances of set pieces you have less options. And well, since the update they appear more broken than they were, 39 goals from corners in 46 games which is way too many!!:

You'll need to expand on this, way to broad a statement to make, personally I've seen some great positional play leading to great passages of play 

-Mentioned this on previous posts. You only need to refer to tactic testing websites (FM Arena) which shows the complete imbalance of overpowered roles (espec x2 DM-S with neither holding are used in all the top tactics this year with both wing backs bombing on which should leave you very susceptible defensively but currently it does not  - also players not able to play in this DM position effectively but are employed there, doesn't make the tactic significantly less effective when it really should)  and the engine much easier to exploit this year, resulting in players using identical tactics and roles when playing online, because there are no logical tactics that are as effective). But I guess you will need to play in such an environment to experience this yourself.

I'm not saying positional play is a step backwards - it is a step forwards, but the implementation has led to it causing a balance / exploit problem, which this year is very widespread.

Things highlighted early such as the set pieces and exploitation of roles should have been focussed on to make the final product an improvement from an earlier build - but nothing has improved, nor does it appear there has been any attempt to improve anything. That is my gripe.

So you can't leave more than 2 players back, I would hardly say it ruins it everything else. How about what the new set piece creator allows you to do? There's more variance which shakes up the gameplay and the execution plays out on the pitch to how you created it.  this year the set pieces are pretty simple but also detailed. you can have multiple routines. i just have 2 best guys attack near post with another guy sitting back post. then 3 guys on the edge to win the clearance and prevent counter attacks. have the corner taker do a near post inswinger Of course there are limitations, it's a game it's not going to give the option of every single variance that you can do in real life

As for the game being too easy, if you are using the top tactics from FMarena which are designed to exploit the engine and be game breaking of course you are going to overachieve. According to the image you did get outplayed by Manchester United but you beat them by being more clinical. But like I said if you know how to exploit the match engine which is a possibility in any engine, then don't be shocked when it becomes too easy for you

Edited April 10 by SHK-555

[NineCloudNine]

22 minutes ago, jlammi said:

Hello my game version is still 24.3 what should i do get latest update?

You have the correct latest version. The database number did not change.

[g1nh0]

13 minutes ago, SHK-555 said:

So you can't leave more than 2 players back, I would hardly say it ruins it everything else. How about what the new set piece creator allows you to do? There's more variance which shakes up the gameplay and the execution plays out on the pitch to how you created it.  this year the set pieces are pretty simple but also detailed. you can have multiple routines. i just have 2 best guys attack near post with another guy sitting back post. then 3 guys on the edge to win the clearance and prevent counter attacks. have the corner taker do a near post inswinger Of course there are limitations, it's a game it's not going to give the option of every single variance that you can do in real life

As for the game being too easy, if you are using the top tactics from FMarena which are designed to exploit the engine and be game breaking of course you are going to overachieve. According to the image you did get outplayed by Manchester United but you beat them by being more clinical. But like I said if you know how to exploit the match engine which is a possibility in any engine, then don't be shocked when it becomes too easy for you

I'm not - I create my own tactics and set piece routines. In attempting to police online games, it's the best place for reference to try and cut out those that choose to exploit the game and ruin the fun for players that want to create their own systems and use them in a competitive environment. Fortunately, I am able to create competitive ones - but others may not.

How did I get outplayed by Man United? Just because they had more possession doesn't mean I got outplayed. I actually outplayed them, because my average xG per shot would have been higher than theirs. Regardless you've missed the point completely - I should be having shots bombarded at my goal away with Chesterfield.

With the set pieces, you could always have multiple routines, but key elements to reflect football realism have just been removed, which were available in the previous creators.

Again I do think overall, the idea of it is a step in the right direction, but why they have chosen to take significant steps back removing things which are a must within any set piece creator is beyond me - poor implementation.

Edited April 10 by g1nh0

[jlammi]

5 minutes ago, NineCloudNine said:

You have the correct latest version. The database number did not change.

okay thanks for the info so i am good to continue save game?

[NineCloudNine]

2 hours ago, g1nh0 said:

-Mentioned this on previous posts. You only need to refer to tactic testing websites (FM Arena) which shows the complete imbalance of overpowered roles (espec x2 DM-S with neither holding are used in all the top tactics this year with both wing backs bombing on which should leave you very susceptible defensively but currently it does not  - also players not able to play in this DM position effectively but are employed there, doesn't make the tactic significantly less effective when it really should)  and the engine much easier to exploit this year, resulting in players using identical tactics and roles when playing online, because there are no logical tactics that are as effective). But I guess you will need to play in such an environment to experience this yourself.

I'm not saying positional play is a step backwards - it is a step forwards, but the implementation has led to it causing a balance / exploit problem, which this year is very widespread.

 

Your focus on open PvP is warping your view. In every game that is not PvP by design, open PvP is a descent into finding meta and exploit tactics. Once one player starts using OP tactics downloaded from tactic sites, either everyone else follows or they all lose. For the large majority playing only against the AI, FM offers a wide range of ways to compete and enjoy the game without ever encountering the sort of edge-case tactical tweaks that emerge from the search for an edge in PvP.

For example, I have never once used 2xDM-S and my favourite FM tactic involves 2xIFBs, not WsB 'bombing on'. Since a tactic using such roles together make no sense, I wouldn't use them. I only know that's a meta tactic because players such as you come here and say so.

Edited April 10 by NineCloudNine

[NineCloudNine]

1 minute ago, jlammi said:

okay thanks for the info so i am good to continue save game?

You are. Your save game created before the update will use the database that was incorporated into that save file. You'll need to start a new game if you want to include database changes from updates that came after your current save started.

[g1nh0]

3 minutes ago, NineCloudNine said:

Your focus on open PvP is warping your view. In every game that is not PvP by design, open PvP is a descent into finding meta and exploit tactics. Once one player starts using OP tactics downloaded from tactic sites, either everyone else follows or they all lose. For the large majority playing only against the AI, FM offers a wide range of ways to compete and enjoy the game without ever encountering the sort of edge-case tactical tweaks that emerge from the search for an edge in PvP.

For example, I have never once used 2xDM-S and my favourite FM tactic involves 2xIFBs, not WsB 'bombing on'. Since a tactic using such roles together make no sense, I wouldn't use them. I only know that's a meta tactic becaise players such as you come here and say so.

Or perhaps your recognition that online gaming holds no importance is warping yours too  In this modern day where online gaming is highly popular, I would expect a lot of newer games to try and produce a game that caters well for online play. 

[NineCloudNine]

Just now, g1nh0 said:

Or perhaps your recognition that online gaming holds no importance is warping yours too  In this modern day where online gaming is highly popular, I would expect a lot of newer games to try and produce a game that caters well for online play. 

I didn't say it holds no importance, just that it is very rare to find good balanced open PvP in a game that is predominantly (or was conceived as) single player. Games designed to be PvP from the ground up are much less likely to be distorted by meta/exploit/edge-case gameplay elements because development was done with PvP in mind from the start. FM is a single player vs AI game with a PvP mode bolted on. At no point in its development is anyone considering how gameplay elements might be pushed to their extreme by human players trying to get an edge over other human players.

I enjoy PvP. But I enjoy it in games designed for PvP. FM is not such a game so feedback based on experience of open PvP tactical extremes is not relevant to the bulk of players or gameplay.

[jlammi]

10 minutes ago, NineCloudNine said:

You are. Your save game created before the update will use the database that was incorporated into that save file. You'll need to start a new game if you want to include database changes from updates that came after your current save started.

yeah, the game says its 24.4 version so i am correct version, which is good i dont have to verify my editor files?