FM Randomness: Strength or Weakness

[elsgouro]

To have a feeling of control over the game, as the OP suggests, then randomness is necessary up to a point, in order to reflect RL situations. Example: if we see a football match IRL, we can watch one of the teams dominate the game, create chances, ball hits the post, ball inces out, anyway the outcome is they didn't score. They had the right formation, the correct tactic, tempo etc, but they didn't score. So you can blame luck, randomness if you like.

Now, FM has to make that clear. I.e, my strikers miss a lot of one-on-ones. Is it cause I have the wrong tempo or it's just luck? I have the ball strike the post 3 times in every game. Is that because of radomness or due to my wrong tactic the game won't let me score? I have the possession, a dozen shots on target but can't score. Is it because of my instructions, bad morale or just but carma?

So, if the game clearly punish our bad tactic/choises with the luck of ccc's, possession, and generaly domination of a match, we can blame ourselves and our managerial abilities. If we dominate but cannot win, we can blame randomness, like IRL. IMO, the problem is not if there's a lot of randomness or not. After all, randmness is the factor (one of the factors, anyway) that makes the bookies rich. It just have to be clear.

[Hammer1000]

Garry, once more you are stating opinions as facts.

1: I imagine I have far less playing time for FM than you do. I spend time on the forums to break up my day, as I am writing full time nowadays, and a quick visit here freshens me up. I'm lucky if I manage more than an hour's actual play a day, with the odd exception of a free Sunday. Despite that, I still get through my matches at a reasonable pace. The only difference between my matches and yours is that I use extended highlights and change between saved tactics to play. That is hardly a time consuming process and takes no longer than making a substitution. The idea that I watch every second of every game and micromanage every aspect of the club is far off the mark. The only time consuming thing is making the tactics in the first place, which can be quite a frustrating task.

I dont think i suggested that you personally watched every minute of every game?

Quoting myself.

This is because it forces them to watch matches in far greater detail, in fact, the worse you are at understanding the changes you are making, the greater the need to watch the match in even more detail, this of course takes up a lot of time and this is something the average FM'er just does'nt have, not if they have any kind of life at all away from FM?

I stand by this and i'd like to hear from you regarding this quote?

Of course it is quicker for you to make changes, we are all aware that you understand the game much better than others, the fact that you had a hand in developing this years ME may or may not have something to do with that, i dont know? but the fact remains that a large % of FM'ers have very little understanding of the ME? which was largely verified in a Poll.

You even admit that using your own tactical sets is a learning process which may take up to 3 seasons to understand fully. I'd have to suggest that this is not just a case of understanding, but the fact that the game tends to get much easier the more seasons you play through it.

2: Nobody has mentioned the big clubs apart from you.

Really? have a look back through the thread for things like "I'm not experiencing these problems whatsoever, in my game as Big Club.......................

3: Likewise, as mentioned before, the tactics forum is not dominated by people searching for one tactic solutions to FM.

Again, really? in the "Best Tactic" thread did you even add your set up to the Poll? i have not seen a single person mention "TT&F inspired Tactic Sets", although i am aware of many using TT&F to produce singular tactics?

4: Just because the forums haven't produced a working 4-4-2 diamond or 4-3-1-2 doesn't mean they are not possible. I made and tested both in the TT&F tactics download pack, and they worked just fine.

Well, if it worked for one out of 1,000,000 FM'ers who knows the game inside out you must be right?

5: Your original post was about tactics. You can't then segue into debate about other elements of the game and decide they are mere window dressign and tactics are all that matters. We have not been debating that at all. All we are discussing is whether a single strategic decision (I will always use exactly this tactic) should enable you to predict, with reasonably accuracy, where you'll finish in the league. We've been working on the assumption that you do the rest OK. We still disagree that the one tactic, never tweak approach should work.

I won the quadruple with Liverpool in the 2nd season and came 5th with West Ham in my first season with exactly this approach. If this approach should not work as you suggest, surely then this should not be possible WHOEVER you play as?

6: Even if it were in jest, the very idea that people would vote to back me up out of unthinking loyalty to me is not just ridiculous, but somewhat insulting to other members of the forum, as it suggests they are dupes lacking the ability to coherently think. Deserves an apology I think.

Actually, so many people have got the wrong end of the stick as to what my end of the argument is all about "No i dont mean easier to win" that the jokey nature of this statement may actually hold some water, but as has been your mood in recent weeks, i shall make the apology in fear of recieving an infarction or worse?

I get shot to pieces by Rupal for making assertations about the game, as my proof is never deemed exacting enough, but she seems to let you get away with grandiose sweeping statements with no basis in reality. If I point them out to you, I am either roundly ignored or you try to change the argument. In logical detail, address the following points:

Not once has Rupal taken sides, in fact i'm well aware that she has not sided with me in a single thread? i have no problem with that, i dont see why you should take such offence?

All she has tried to suggest is that we may both be wrong/right in parts and that nobody has the definitive answer.

1: I don't spend much time playing FM as I have a busy life. Neither do some other prominent members of the thread. Why, when we claim we don't spend too much time playing, are you making an argument about how much time we must be spending to play it our way?

I think its pretty obvious that the more ingame tweaking necessary the longer this game takes to play and the less you actually understand how the ME works and what changes you are actually making and why? increases this time considerably.

2: Nobody here seems to be managing a big club and yet aren't experiencing this randomness. The only difference is that they change/tweak tactics to deal with certain match situations. What justification do you have in saying the only people who don't experience this frustrating randomness manage major sides?

Have i ever said that? :confused: (please refer me back to this quote as i will retract it)

3: Please address and prove your claim that the majority of FMers want a single tactic approach to be successful, using evidence from the forums. If you can't, please withdraw the claim.

My claim is that this game should appeal to the masses, yet in recent releases it is becoming ever more time consuming, added to that just how many FM'ers have little or no understanding of how the ME actually works, making it even more difficult to address tactical issues, justified by SI's inclusion of a Tactical Wizard for FM2010 and you are somewhere near to just what my claim actually is.

4: Do you really think that, in a realistic football management game, a user using just one tactic for every match, no matter the opponent or the conditions, should be successful?

If as you claim success should not be possible using just one tactic, then this should be the case right across the board and not as it is at this moment in time, where i can go out and overachieve getting West Ham into the top 5 in my very first season, or winning the quadruple with Liverpool in just my 2nd season?

Those of us who go looking for shortcuts in a bid to get the most out of the game as we can with the time we have, as well as the fact that any long term success is largely marred by the undeniable AI flaw of not strengthening their squads in any way, are left with a game that is no longer desirable and largely unplayable?

I still believe that a massive number of FM'ers are constricted by such things and as such, will be forced to stop playing a game that they have loved and enjoyed year after year after year?

Rich, i can't help but think yourself and others are convinced that i am in fact on some kind of crusade against yourself, the Collyer brothers and SI as a whole? but this could not be further from the truth, i just want this game to still appeal to me next year, the year after that and the year after that, as it has done for more years than i can remeber, but that appeal is waning rapidly, there HAS to be a happy medium somewere to guarantee this game still being of appeal to the masses? i can only hope that in some way i can help just a little bit in making this the case?

I purchased a brand new £450 PC two and a half years ago and why? i had to convince the GF that i would use it for a whole host of things, but in reality i bought it to play FM, in fact, out of the 8 PC game boxes i have on my computer shelf 6 of them are CM/FM games, the other two are both Zoo Tycoon(original and expansion) which are still both wrapped in their plastic unused.

[BigRedMart]

I fail to understand the argument as outlined in the OP.

Overachieve with West Ham in season 1 , Improve the squad and finish season 2 mid table.

This seems totally plausible to me.

Finish 4th with Liverpool + 3 Cup finals in season 1 and in an uncompleted season 2 seems to be flying high on all fronts.

Again totally plausible.

So where is the argument? Or am I missing something?

Liverpool's second season was better than the first with only minor squad improvements so less disruption to the gelling of the squad. And Hammer1000 said himself that West Ham overachieved in season 1.

I completely fail to understand why the above can give the impression that there are miscalculations being made by the game .

It looks to me very much like that there is some obvious miscalculations being made by the game, maybe its something as simple as Liverpool somehow becoming massively overrated after actually underachieving in season 1, or, West Ham are being massively underrated after overachieving in season 1, even a mix of the two?

The results from the test seem totally realistic to me and if they are largely down to any randomness implemented by SI then I say well done to them as they seem to have got things very close to what could happen in real life.

I wonder what complaints would be made on these forums if people playing the game had achieved results that have actually occurred in real life would be?

Norwich were top of the EPL at Xmas in 1992-93 season and finished an eventual 3rd.

Readings first season in the EPL saw them finish 8th.

Hull City have had a great first season in the EPL at least for the first half of it.

Tottenham have spent in excess of £337m in transfer fees since September 1996 whilst Arsenal have spent just £184.25m in the same period.

But while Wenger can look back on three Premier League triumphs (1998, 2002 and 2004), four FA Cups (1998, 2002, 2003 and 2005) and appearances in the finals of the UEFA Cup (2000) and Champions League (2006) since joining the Gunners in September 1996, Spurs have had just two League Cup victories to shout about since the Frenchman moved in down the road.

Anyway my point is that in my opinion the ME isn't broke, cheating or flawed it is a merely the ME for the best Football Manager simulation on the market and certainly the closest to real life.

Time is an issue for most of us and especially those of us with families etc. but I believe that there are games available on the market that may appeal to the more casual gamer including the hand-held version of FM which from my understanding is more "pick up and play"

From what I gather SI does not want to alienate those loyal fans of the series that have enjoyed so many of the previous incarnations of the game and any implementation of a Tactical Wizard will go a long way to ensuring that they don't. But ultimately as the series has progressed it has tried to become closer to real life and hopefully will continue to do so.

FM Randomness: Strength or Weakness ?

Strength of course. Without it the game would be to easy and quite simply boring and would not mimic real life football.

[Hammer1000]

I cannot explain just how frustrating it is reading post after post from FM'ers who just do not or will not try to understand my side of this argument? :confused:

I do understand however, that is almost impossible to be 100% clear with just the use of words, so maybe i should open a FM seminar where we can all sit around our PC's and i can go through it all with you step by step?

I can't possibly answer and re-answer every single question over and over again, but thats what i am basically being asked to do? "i think Hammer should respond to this?", "i think Hammer should respond to that?", well i HAVE on numerous occasions, but i still get the same replys, or the suggestion that i have NO answer, or that all i really want is an easy game? or quoted as saying something that was taken completely out of context?

Please, i have tried to raise an important issue here, not completely outlined in the OP because i never posted the OP, but i have since attempted to cover these issues and have answered a majority of questions more than once.

Do i claim to have all the answers? NO!

I'm more than happy to respond to mature and intelligent questions, as i am happy to discuss the game in a calm and civilised manner, if you cannot do the same then please refrain from posting simply trying to annoy me or embarras me? as i'll refuse to respond.

Try reading back through the many posts already in this thread if your really interested in a discussion?

[moj]

Another thread that highlights my point - http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=115474

Coincidence that it has been locked?

[chopper99]

Considering we already have this thread that is covering the exact same topic in a much more constructive way then no, I don't think it's coincidence that it's been locked.

If anyone can provide some proper proof that there is too much randomness in the game then I'll gladly listen to it. Unfortunately I've yet to see anything that comes close. Unfortunately Hammer, what you experienced with West Ham and Liverpool in no way proves that there is too much randomness. It's a very very limited experiment, and tbh if both teams followed the same pattern over the two season I for one would be more worried.

Football is a random game at times, and this needs to be represented. Personally I feel that any 'randomness' that people feel that they are experencing is down to the difficulty around understanding the current tactical system and it's effect on the match engine. This is a very different issue than the game being too random.

[BigRedMart]

I cannot explain just how frustrating it is reading post after post from FM'ers who just do not or will not try to understand my side of this argument? :confused:

I do understand however, that is almost impossible to be 100% clear with just the use of words, so maybe i should open a FM seminar where we can all sit around our PC's and i can go through it all with you step by step?

I can't possibly answer and re-answer every single question over and over again, but thats what i am basically being asked to do? "i think Hammer should respond to this?", "i think Hammer should respond to that?", well i HAVE on numerous occasions, but i still get the same replys, or the suggestion that i have NO answer, or that all i really want is an easy game? or quoted as saying something that was taken completely out of context?

Please, i have tried to raise an important issue here, not completely outlined in the OP because i never posted the OP, but i have since attempted to cover these issues and have answered a majority of questions more than once.

Do i claim to have all the answers? NO!

I'm more than happy to respond to mature and intelligent questions, as i am happy to discuss the game in a calm and civilised manner, if you cannot do the same then please refrain from posting simply trying to annoy me or embarras me? as i'll refuse to respond.

Try reading back through the many posts already in this thread if your really interested in a discussion?

Well I certainly tried to understand your side of the argument and took the time to read through the entire thread but based on the facts from your experiment that was outlined in the OP I came to the conclusion that the results of your test were realistic.

I am sorry that there are posters here that don't agree with your side of the argument but thats life i'm afraid.

[catafan]

If i manage to take Liverpool to the quadruple with consumate ease in season 2, this would suggest that i'm getting most of the above right? so on that basis, i should also be able to manage a modicum of success with West Ham in season 2 after finishing season 1 in 5th place. With the large improvement in the squad and a side that are gelling well together, plus an identical Management technique, i should still be able to maintain a certain amount of consistency and if not? that suggests that there is a randomness in the game that largely interferes with those abilities to make the right Managerial decisions and as such, largely detracts from the fun and the reason for playing and loving this game in the first place?

The different experience with WestHam and Liverpool could be caused by Randomness, but it could be something else. I don't know the code of the match engine so I can only guess (but reasonable and realistic) some reasons that could influence the match results:

(1) How the opposition evaluate your team. IRL ManUtd beat Fulham by 4-0 in FA Cup and four days later knocked out Inter Milan by 2-0 in Champions League. Another 10 days later when ManUtd faced Fulham again in EPL they lost, probably because they were too confident to pay much effort in front of the obvious underdog. Imagine if that match is not an EPL game, but the FA Cup final or Champions league knock-out game, would you think ManUtd will lose it to Fulham? Similar things may happened to you. Your Westham overachieved in the first season probably because other teams in the EPL had not considered your side as very strong, and in the second season they tended to give more effort to overcome you to grab the points.

(2) AI teams progressed also. You said your WestHam should get better in the second season because you bought some more qualified players. But at the same time AI teams also bought players, changed managers and built up their team. Maybe 5 or 6 of AI teams did that better than you and therefore your position fell from 5th to 10th. As for your Liverpool, you might have done better team improvement than the other big-3.

Cheers

[SFraser]

Hammer 1000,

Your arguement is based entireally upon generalisations and assumptions. For example:

I won the quadruple with Liverpool in the 2nd season and came 5th with West Ham in my first season with exactly this approach. If this approach should not work as you suggest, surely then this should not be possible WHOEVER you play as?

The entire premise of Football Manager is that the success or failure of any tactical approach is dependant upon the players. Tactical success is completely contextual and is in no way independant of the factors you do not acknowledge. This is the crux of your complaint of randomness because you raise this discussion purely from a tactical consistency perspective when clearly consistency of success with a single tactical approach cannot be expected without acknowledging the function of the players within that tactic. The randomness is produced because you ignore the determining factor of players in the outcome of any tactical approach.

I would go so far as to say that given your professed lack of tactical involvement your success or failure in any context has absolutely nothing to do with your tactics, man management or the game engine at all, but your luck in choosing a team of players suited to your arbitrary tactical choice. The randomness is not a product of the game engine, but of your general approach to Football Manager.

Well, if it worked for one out of 1,000,000 FM'ers who knows the game inside out you must be right?

This is at best an assumption, at worst hyperbole, at no point an arguement. Yet it is consistently passed for an arguement throughout this particular forum.

You raise the issue of time repeatedly throughout your posts as well. Your basic arguement goes something like this:

"Tactical setups, player management and observing the match engine take up too much time. Few people have the spare time to watch the match engine second by second."

The greatest problem I have with that view is that clearly Match Day, Tactics and Player Management have become the central focus for gameplay in Football Manager. The Match Engine takes about ten minutes to watch at high speed, and it is you that chooses to rush through this game without taking the time to accept and deal with the gameplay challenges the game is built to produce. It is like stating that the Opening and Mid-Game of Chess is time consuming and boring as really all everyone wants to see is the super cool Check Mate. I personally think that you are completely missing the point of this game. If you can find a spare hour maximum you can run the match in full detail. You choose not to, you miss the entire point of the development of the gameplay of Football Manager in recent years, and you complain about randomness in consequences.

Granted you can choose not to involve yourself in Training regimes, you can choose not to delve into the Tactical setup too deeply and you can choose not watch the match in full detail, but that is not how the game is built to be played. If a game does not suit your personal playstyle or time contraints that is not a flaw in the game. This is something yourself and others are going to have to accept, untill such time as development takes a different approach. Football Manager is not the same game it was ten years ago. It is not a season a day or a weekend but a couple of matches a day or a weekend.

Those of us who go looking for shortcuts in a bid to get the most out of the game as we can with the time we have, as well as the fact that any long term success is largely marred by the undeniable AI flaw of not strengthening their squads in any way, are left with a game that is no longer desirable and largely unplayable?

It would appear so, yes.

i just want this game to still appeal to me next year, the year after that and the year after that, as it has done for more years than i can remeber, but that appeal is waning rapidly, there HAS to be a happy medium somewere to guarantee this game still being of appeal to the masses? i can only hope that in some way i can help just a little bit in making this the case?

This is a completely understandable point and one I can sympathise with, but you are not the masses, and indeed it is foolish to assume that the "masses" are the target audience for this game. Success is not a God given right for any game, it must be earned and maintained.

[Bigwig]

(1) How the opposition evaluate your team.... Your Westham overachieved in the first season probably because other teams in the EPL had not considered your side as very strong, and in the second season they tended to give more effort to overcome you to grab the points.

While I agree with your point, I don’t think FM represents this accurately.

In reality if West Ham were overachieving, then opposite sides would start to cotton on to this fact mid-way through the season and change their approach to games against West Ham in the same season they’re flying high, whereas as in FM I don’t think this happens until the end of season and you get the re-ranking (although I could be wrong on this).

If teams like Stoke, Wigan and West Brom were all coming to Upton Park early on in the season all playing 4-4-2 and losing then at the back end of the season you’d expect the likes of Sunderland, Bolton and Middlesbrough to perhaps try a different approach after seeing teams similar to their level all losing. However, as far as I’m aware this won’t happen in FM until the end of season which isn’t very realistic.

Another problem I have with this system is that it’s all a bit too generic that every team of a similar mould will all cotton on to your style of play a exactly the same time and all try the exact same approach against you. I would expect after the first season for some managers to adapt and some to keep things their own ways. From the 6 teams mentioned Stoke, Bolton, Middlesbrough and Wigan might all adapt their tactics second time round and play a lone striker but Sunderland and West Brom might stick with their original game plan whereas in FM it’s more than likely all of the teams would all change their style which doesn’t reflect management individuality.

[Rupal]

Hammer 1000,

I would go so far as to say that given your professed lack of tactical involvement your success or failure in any context has absolutely nothing to do with your tactics, man management or the game engine at all, but your luck in choosing a team of players suited to your arbitrary tactical choice. The randomness is not a product of the game engine, but of your general approach to Football Manager.

For somebody who is critical of Hammer for making assumptions that is one hell of one!!

Physician, heal thyself!

[SFraser]

For somebody who is critical of Hammer for making assumptions that is one hell of one!!

Physician, heal thyself!

What part of the results of an arbitrary tactic downloaded from the forums combined to an arbitrary choice of squad being the product of luck is difficult to follow, is assumed or is indeed illogical?

[Rupal]

What part of the results of an arbitrary tactic downloaded from the forums combined to an arbitrary choice of squad being the product of luck is difficult to follow, is assumed or is indeed illogical?

I do not see any evidence produced to substantiate that Hammer's choice of tactic was arbitrary.

I do not see any evidence produced to substantiate the claim that Hammer's choice of squad was arbitrary.

I do not see any evidence produced to substantiate your assertion that Hammer's man management has had nothing to do with his success.

I do not see any evidence produced to substantiate your claim that his success or failure has nothing to do with the match engine.

Are those sufficient?

[chopper99]

I do not see any evidence produced to substantiate that Hammer's choice of tactic was arbitrary.

I do not see any evidence produced to substantiate the claim that Hammer's choice of squad was arbitrary.

I do not see any evidence produced to substantiate your assertion that Hammer's man management has had nothing to do with his success.

I do not see any evidence produced to substantiate your claim that his success or failure has nothing to do with the match engine.

Are those sufficient?

I have not seen any evidence that proves the game is random.

So by your reasoning the argument is now over, is it not?

[Hammer1000]

Considering we already have this thread that is covering the exact same topic in a much more constructive way then no, I don't think it's coincidence that it's been locked.

If anyone can provide some proper proof that there is too much randomness in the game then I'll gladly listen to it. Unfortunately I've yet to see anything that comes close. Unfortunately Hammer, what you experienced with West Ham and Liverpool in no way proves that there is too much randomness. It's a very very limited experiment, and tbh if both teams followed the same pattern over the two season I for one would be more worried.

Football is a random game at times, and this needs to be represented. Personally I feel that any 'randomness' that people feel that they are experencing is down to the difficulty around understanding the current tactical system and it's effect on the match engine. This is a very different issue than the game being too random.

Hopefully i can clear things up a little by replying to this post(not aimed at you Chopper, but i suspect this will not be the case?)

If your saying to me that just because i finished 5th with West Ham in the first season, this does not give me the right to just expect to finish in a similar or even better position in season 2 just because i improved my squad? then i Agree wholeheartedly!

Let us first get that presumption out of the way.

Now if i may explain myself?

In season 1 i obviously overachieved with a mediocre squad, now, i put this down to the fact that i had a reasonably solid tactic, but more so because over the years of playing previous releases and in the first 6 months of playing FM09 i had managed to maximise the knowledge i had gained from previous experiences into my management techniques, thus, getting the best out of my players in any given management related scenario.

So, i continue to use these techniques into season 2, knowing that i had a decent grasp on this particular area of the game, plus my reasonably solid tactic AND a much improved squad(6 new signings, compared to the 8 i made in season 1 with great success) and YES! because of all these things, expecting another reasonably succesful season.

In no way was i expecting to challenge for the title? i was merely expecting to be challenging for another European slot, again, not just because i did well the previous season and then improved my squad, but because of all the little things i've explained that would suggest that my management skills were sufficient enough to do so?

Now, had my West Ham side struggled to gel in season 2?, or had i witnessed an unlucky amount of injuries?, or had i lost the dressing room(unhappy players)?, or one of any number of these things that both RL and FM Managers must contend with? then our position in the table would be more than justified, as it happened, none of these things were an issue, not as far as i was made aware during my game anyway?

So lets go onto the tactic issue.

First of all what do i look at when deciding what tactic to use?

Performance - Irrespective of results(to a degree of course) i look to see if we are largely making a game of it against different opposition, different formations etc? and are we doing so consistently?

Areas for imrovement - Are we conceding a lot of early goals?, or late goals after the AI switches to 4-2-4?, are we struggling to get back into matches when going behind?, are we not managing to peg back the AI late in games when looking for an equaliser or winner?

I take all these thing and many more into consideration, often testing for a season or as many as two seasons and it is because of this continued extensive testing that i finally come up with what i believe to be a working tactic?

I have tried numerous sets, TT&F but the very nature of such things often lead to massively inconsistent performances(wwfan has said himself it can take up to 3 seasons to get a good understanding of the game using his style of play/tactic set/s ?) whereas with a solid balanced tactic my players get to grips with much quicker, gel quicker and put in much more consistent performances.

I also dont concede an unrealistic amount of early or late goals, whilst managing to get back into a realistic amount of games in which we go a goal down, as well as managing to score a realistic amount of late equalisers or winners?

wwfan will always put any inconsistencies i come across down to the fact that i use just a single tactic? teams must be playing more defensively against me?(some do, some dont, not much more so than in my previous season, but even so, we are not struggling against such teams, at least no more so than in the previous season?)

If not that then? your not making changes, your to one dimensional(well it worked in season 1 and it will suddenly work again in season 3 and season 4 the only difference maybe that my strikers are not putting away their chances whilst the opposition are, could it not be something else?) no its because you are using a single tactic what do you expect?(yeah, but it is suddenly working again, could it not just be that....?) NO its because your using a single tactic.

I'm not trying to ridicule Rich in any way, i'm just trying to explain how this kind of conversation tends to turn out?

I'm not even against using a tactic set, i have just not come across one since 9.3.0 that works for me?

What i am against is Micro Managing for the very sake of it. I will even admit that this DOES in fact add realism and that Managers have to do this very thing IRL, but what we have to remember here is that there are not very many of us who actually understand the nature of the ME enough to know when or how to make these changes for a start?(just think about why the Tactical Wizard is being introduced before you argue this point?)

If we are going to get into an argument about realism, i think that anyone who wishes to do so at this point, should only be those who watch every second of every match?(of which i'll concede you are in fact correct) otherwise we are simply arguing over our own personal choices as to just how in depth the whole Matchday Experience should be, because if this is about realism? then we should ALL be watching the full 90 minutes of every match, just like RL Managers.

I wonder how popular this game would be if we HAD to do just that?

[Rupal]

I have not seen any evidence that proves the game is random.

So by your reasoning the argument is now over, is it not?

Well, Chopper, if there was no random element at all, then you would get absolutely identical matches and identical results in a save/play/replay scenario, wouldn't you? And you don't. There are differences, so there must be some random element.

Sfraser appears to be claiming in his statement that he knows an awful lot about Hammer's choice of players and tactics. He's made a number of assertions. He may be right (I wouldn't presume to judge one way or the other as I don't have the necessary information but maybe Hammer has told him?). I don't know. But if he doesn't actually know these things for sure then he's assumed them, which is what I said in the first place.

[digsy11]

Hammer am I right in thinking these 2 test seasons carried out were all done via the holiday function? or was that a different thread?

[chopper99]

Hammer, I totally understand where you're coming from to a certain extent. I do not believe that you want the game to be easy and I understand that you have experience of the game and know how to manage. But, many people play this game in many different ways. If you could not play it in a way that allowed you to continuously build on last years success and progress then everybody would complain about it. If the game was simply random then everyone would have noticed it, we're not stupid. If the game is random and no matter what we do we will not effect the outcome then we will notice this.

Unfortunately for you the fact is that you're in the minority. I'll admit that I can't see a clear reason why your West Ham team performed so differently in that second season, it may have simply been bad luck in one or two games affecting the whole season. But does the fact that most people do not experience this not suggest that it is down to you in some way?

I'm not even against using a tactic set, i have just not come across one since 9.3.0 that works for me?

What i am against is Micro Managing for the very sake of it. I will even admit that this DOES in fact add realism and that Managers have to do this very thing IRL, but what we have to remember here is that there are not very many of us who actually understand the nature of the ME enough to know when or how to make these changes for a start?(just think about why the Tactical Wizard is being introduced before you argue this point?)

I don't feel there is a need to micro manage for the sake of it, far from it. As I said I have created my own tactic set that is basically 4 versions of the same tactic. Depending on whether my Sunderland team are stronger or weaker than the opposition I'll start with either my home or away tactic. If I'm in the lead I'll switch to a more defensive tactic and if I'm trailing I'll switch to my more attcking one. It really isn't time consuming and, for me anyway, it does work.

As someone who has always tried to find one balanced tactic that worked I have to say that I've found this way of playing much more satisfying. It's also not time consuming in the least, I have very little time to play the game, but switching between the tactics takes as much time as making a substitution.

[chopper99]

Well, Chopper, if there was no random element at all, then you would get absolutely identical matches and identical results in a save/play/replay scenario, wouldn't you? And you don't. There are differences, so there must be some random element.

Sorry, that should have said 'I have not seen any evidence that proves the game is too random' :o

Of course there is a random element, but this debate is about whether it is too random. I've seen no evidence of this and by your earlier argument this should therefore make any debate about it void until someone provides some real evidence.

[Hammer1000]

Well, Chopper, if there was no random element at all, then you would get absolutely identical matches and identical results in a save/play/replay scenario, wouldn't you? And you don't. There are differences, so there must be some random element.

Sfraser appears to be claiming in his statement that he knows an awful lot about Hammer's choice of players and tactics. He's made a number of assertions. He may be right (I wouldn't presume to judge one way or the other as I don't have the necessary information but maybe Hammer has told him?). I don't know. But if he doesn't actually know these things for sure then he's assumed them, which is what I said in the first place.

Rupal - I think we are both aware that Mr Fraser has a posting style that could be described as "Self proclaimed Genius" whilst he uses a lot of big words and makes rather lengthy posts, he does'nt actually say a lot? well nothing to enhance the discussion anyway?

For this reason i will choose to ignore him, maybe its best if you did the same?

[Hammer1000]

Hammer am I right in thinking these 2 test seasons carried out were all done via the holiday function? or was that a different thread?

No, that was something from a previous thread.

[Bigwig]

I think part of the problem is your assumption that your tactic is solid, but it’s only solid when you’re a mid-table side and once you become a European side then it ceases to be a solid tactic because the opposition will change their approach in games towards you.

I’m not sure if I can explain it correctly but here goes…

Let’s say you start the game as a mid-table side and have set up your tactic which we’ll call tactic A.

In your first season since you’re a mid-table side and as such the opposition managers will treat you as a mid-table opponent all throughout the season. Whether you’re top or bottom of the league the AI will approach you as mid-table side and play tactic B against you.

Since your tactic A is stronger than the opposition tactic B, you tend to do better, overachieve and finish in 5th position.

At the end of the season re-ranking occurs and from that point onward instead of the opposition approaching you as a mid-table side they now approach you as a top 6 side and instead of using tactic B against you, they now use tactic C against you.

Previously, your tactic A was stronger than the opposition tactic B so you did a lot better, but now your tactic A isn’t quite as good as tactic C so you won’t do as well, despite the obvious improvements in your squad.

Once you finish your second season lower down the table, re-ranking will again occur and instead of the opposition approaching you as a top 6 side and playing tactic C against you, they’ll revert to playing tactic B against you, which will explain why your tactic suddenly works again.

[Daley]

No, that was something from a previous thread.

Hammer100, would you be prepared to send me your tactic as I am quite prepared to do a little testing to see what results I get then opst them for all to analyse?

I have no issues with the length of test or the number of times. I will report back every reult and all injuries etc. If we can agree to the exact parameters of the test and ensure that the number of possible variables are limited as much as possible.

[Rupal]

Rupal - I think we are both aware that Mr Fraser has a posting style that could be described as "Self proclaimed Genius" whilst he uses a lot of big words and makes rather lengthy posts, he does'nt actually say a lot? well nothing to enhance the discussion anyway?

For this reason i will choose to ignore him, maybe its best if you did the same?

I take it then that you didn't share your thinking about squads and tactics with him? Just want to be sure; I wouldn't want to accuse him of making assumptions when you'd actually told him, because that wouldn't be fair at all.

[macdyne73]

You know what? This will never end.

Hammer, you and others like you will insist the game is flawed in some way. The game is too random. Too time consuming. Requires too much micro management. You have stated your argument many times. Other people also have the same problems as you. Fair enough.

I and others like me disagree. The game is flawed? Sure, it's not perfect but it's good enough for me currently and it seems to be good enough for others too. I don't think that the game is too random or too complex. I don't have to micromanage. No need for me to watch whole matches or even extended because I'm just too lazy to do that. And no I'm not a tactical genius and I don't know much nor do I care about what goes on in the background. I just use my common sense. That's it. I don't notice any randomness and I haven't encountered any other problems or flaws that would make this game unplayable. Doesn't matter if I'm in the top leagues or the Blue Square South.

Apparently, others also have the same experience as me and are enjoying themselves a lot.

The only thing that this argument has cleared up for me so far is that there are two sides to this coin and neither side will be able to convince the other any time soon. We all apparently want different things from this game. Some of us are getting that and some of us aren't. Why is that? Who knows?

Perhaps it's time to back off from this and chill out before we make enemies of each other. Agree to disagree and to each his own. To be honest, the mud slinging is getting very, very ugly in here.

Besides, I honestly don't think that this argument will make any big impact on FM10 as I'm sure SI have their own definite ideas about where FM is going next.

Who's side will they be on? Wait and see shall we?

[Hammer1000]

Unfortunately for you the fact is that you're in the minority. I'll admit that I can't see a clear reason why your West Ham team performed so differently in that second season, it may have simply been bad luck in one or two games affecting the whole season. But does the fact that most people do not experience this not suggest that it is down to you in some way?

My initial argument was NOT that the game was random, rather that there was some element of the games calculations that were slightly askew? i mentioned random only as an explanation if my initial hypothesis was simply brushed off? which it was.

I don't feel there is a need to micro manage for the sake of it, far from it. As I said I have created my own tactic set that is basically 4 versions of the same tactic. Depending on whether my Sunderland team are stronger or weaker than the opposition I'll start with either my home or away tactic. If I'm in the lead I'll switch to a more defensive tactic and if I'm trailing I'll switch to my more attcking one. It really isn't time consuming and, for me anyway, it does work.

As i said, i'm not opposed to using a tactic set. In fact if you would be kind enough to allow me to try it, i would like to give your set a go?(with any further instructions needed if possible?)

As someone who has always tried to find one balanced tactic that worked I have to say that I've found this way of playing much more satisfying. It's also not time consuming in the least, I have very little time to play the game, but switching between the tactics takes as much time as making a substitution.

Hopefully i can try it for myself?

[Daley]

No, that was something from a previous thread.

Hammer100, would you be prepared to send me your tactic as I am quite prepared to do a little testing to see what results I get then opst them for all to analyse?

I have no issues with the length of test or the number of times. I will report back every reult and all injuries etc. If we can agree to the exact parameters of the test and ensure that the number of possible variables are limited as much as possible.

I take it that it is not something that you want to do Hammer1000? I understand if it's not but the offer is there.

[chopper99]

Hammer, I'll happily send you my tactic set, I'd be interested to see if they worked for others. Be warned though, I'm no tactical expert so while they work for my Sunderland team I have no idea how they will work for anyone else. Also, with my Sunderland team I've managed 14th, 10th and now 7th place in the league. This is by no means overachieving but is the kind of progression I'm happy with.

If you're happy with reasonable progression then they may work for you. Or they may crash and burn, I can make no promises. I'll e-mail you something later.

[digsy11]

There was a time when Hammer, and I think Rupal was in agreement with him in this, that the ME had some sort of mechanism that kicked in when your team was performing to well and the game didn't like it.

Although all seems to of gone quiet on that front or do you still believe in this?

[Hammer1000]

You know what? This will never end.

Hammer, you and others like you will insist the game is flawed in some way. The game is too random. Too time consuming. Requires too much micro management. You have stated your argument many times. Other people also have the same problems as you. Fair enough.

I and others like me disagree. The game is flawed? Sure, it's not perfect but it's good enough for me currently and it seems to be good enough for others too. I don't think that the game is too random or too complex. I don't have to micromanage. No need for me to watch whole matches or even extended because I'm just too lazy to do that. And no I'm not a tactical genius and I don't know much nor do I care about what goes on in the background. I just use my common sense. That's it. I don't notice any randomness and I haven't encountered any other problems or flaws that would make this game unplayable. Doesn't matter if I'm in the top leagues or the Blue Square South.

Apparently, others also have the same experience as me and are enjoying themselves a lot.

The only thing that this argument has cleared up for me so far is that there are two sides to this coin and neither side will be able to convince the other any time soon. We all apparently want different things from this game. Some of us are getting that and some of us aren't. Why is that? Who knows?

Perhaps it's time to back off from this and chill out before we make enemies of each other. Agree to disagree and to each his own. To be honest, the mud slinging is getting very, very ugly in here.

Besides, I honestly don't think that this argument will make any big impact on FM10 as I'm sure SI have their own definite ideas about where FM is going next.

Who's side will they be on? Wait and see shall we?

I think your probably right.

I actually have no issues at all with anyone who posts in a civilised and friendly manner, its when people start posting rubbish that adds absolutely nothing to the debate that i start to just shake my head.

I will just say one thing though, some arguments/discussions do make an impact on future games. Just look at what SI are hoping to introduce to FM2010. A Tactical Wizard, obviously they have taken on board that what must be a large amount of FM'ers are struggling with the tactical side of this game?, if not why introduce it?

This is a good thing and credit must go to SI for introducing it, lets hope its a success?

[Hammer1000]

I take it that it is not something that you want to do Hammer1000? I understand if it's not but the offer is there.

I have no problem with this, i'll send you a PM with the link a little later!

[Hammer1000]

I take it then that you didn't share your thinking about squads and tactics with him? Just want to be sure; I wouldn't want to accuse him of making assumptions when you'd actually told him, because that wouldn't be fair at all.

I have'nt told him anything Rupal.

[Hammer1000]

There was a time when Hammer, and I think Rupal was in agreement with him in this, that the ME had some sort of mechanism that kicked in when your team was performing to well and the game didn't like it.

Although all seems to of gone quiet on that front or do you still believe in this?

Rupal never agreed with me on this matter, just as she does'nt agree with me on the subject in this thread.

As for do i still believe it? it ticked a lot of boxes pre 9.3.0

[Rupal]

There was a time when Hammer, and I think Rupal was in agreement with him in this, that the ME had some sort of mechanism that kicked in when your team was performing to well and the game didn't like it.

Although all seems to of gone quiet on that front or do you still believe in this?

That wasn't quite my position.

I speculated that because the calculations take form into account, in order to stop an ever increasing likelihood of a good run continuing (a sort of never ending virtuous circle - you win so your team's morale gets higher and your form is better, so you are more likely to win the next match...rinse and repeat) there might be some sort of counterbalancing effect so that it became slightly more difficult to get a result after each win that you had had. Eventually this would outweigh the advantage gained by better form/morale and you would lose.

I thought of it as a possibility, no more, really.

[digsy11]

I just read through an old thread, something about a levelling system against over acheiving teams.

Interesting some comments made in there compared to some made earlier in this thread by the same users.

[Daley]

I have no problem with this, i'll send you a PM with the link a little later!

No problem, so to ensure I get as close as possible to the situation you experienced, could you tell me the parameters of your game. Such as starting reputation, players sold, players bought, training used, your approach to teamtalks. Obviously there will be variables such as injuries and bans that can't possibly be consistant.

I was thinking of running the game for two whole seasons on each save and hopefully a total of 5 different saves for West Ham and a few others for different teams. Does that sound ok?

[Hammer1000]

No problem, so to ensure I get as close as possible to the situation you experienced, could you tell me the parameters of your game. Such as starting reputation, players sold, players bought, training used, your approach to teamtalks. Obviously there will be variables such as injuries and bans that can't possibly be consistant.

I was thinking of running the game for two whole seasons on each save and hopefully a total of 5 different saves for West Ham and a few others for different teams. Does that sound ok?

I'll dig out the info and send it to you via a PM

I'm not entirely sure if the whole thing is worthwhile, it may well be that one of us is a much better Man Manager than the other making it hard to distinguish between your own game and mine?

I take it you will play through the game yorself, as opposed to Holiday Mode?

[Daley]

I'll dig out the info and send it to you via a PM

I'm not entirely sure if the whole thing is worthwhile, it may well be that one of us is a much better Man Manager than the other making it hard to distinguish between your own game and mine?

I take it you will play through the game yorself, as opposed to Holiday Mode?

Well I know that there will be variables but I am going to try to detail as much info as possible and react the same in the press conferences etc.

I'll play as myself but seeing as there are no in-game tweaks that need to be made then I'll just use commentary only. With regards to man management then if you have certain ways that you do things which you can advise me of then I'll replicate that as well.

[Mitja]

football is the most random and unpredictable sport probably, that's what makes it as beautiful and popular. the problem is, a I see it, that the emphesis on tactics is too strong in FM, tactics are far too important compared to man managment, squad atmosphere, confidence, gelling, players' relationships, and some other things which are all close to non-existant in FM (at least when you compare it to tactics). the only 'real' challange FM player has is to find the right tactics at the right time (and buy good players which is far too easy)..

I think Bigwig's last two posts make sense, what needs to be improved here is that AI looks more your curent form than pre-season odds (or whatever it looks), when aproaching opposition tacticaly.

[jayahr]

You are actually playing a real (as in not holidayed) game for two seaons each with five or more saves just for testing purposes??? That's a hell of an effort

At the same time I'm starting to get envious as I am just in August 2012 with my own and only save started in November (real time) because I just cannot get to play the game more often

[Daley]

You are actually playing a real (as in not holidayed) game for two seaons each with five or more saves just for testing purposes??? That's a hell of an effort

At the same time I'm starting to get envious as I am just in August 2012 with my own and only save started in November (real time) because I just cannot get to play the game more often

Yeah, well I am very interested in seeing the results and if it's just in commentary mode it shouldn't take too long. I think it will take longer for me to make a note of all the things that go on rather than actually play the games.

[Rupal]

Sorry, that should have said 'I have not seen any evidence that proves the game is too random' :o

Of course there is a random element, but this debate is about whether it is too random. I've seen no evidence of this and by your earlier argument this should therefore make any debate about it void until someone provides some real evidence.

I'm not sure that the question of whether it's too random or not is the sort of thing which is down to proof one way or the other really. Seems to me it's more a matter of how you feel about the game.

My argument was only answering Sfraser's post. He asked me what was assumed about what he was saying and so I told him.

[earmack]

Edit: never mind.

[SFraser]

I do not see any evidence produced to substantiate that Hammer's choice of tactic was arbitrary.

I do not see any evidence produced to substantiate the claim that Hammer's choice of squad was arbitrary.

In the context of the relationship between tactic and squad the choices are clearly arbitrary for A: the tactic was chosen based upon the release of a patch that reduced the ability to exploit the match engine and B: the tactic was transferred to multiple squads without alteration. There is no way he could have known exactly how the tactic would affect his squad before he chose it, there was no attempt to construct tactics based upon the strength of the respective squads. The results are clearly based entireally upon luck.

Rupal - I think we are both aware that Mr Fraser has a posting style that could be described as "Self proclaimed Genius" whilst he uses a lot of big words and makes rather lengthy posts, he does'nt actually say a lot? well nothing to enhance the discussion anyway?

For this reason i will choose to ignore him, maybe its best if you did the same?

Feel free to ignore me. I have been more than fair with you considering your conclusion of "randomness" is based not only upon a lack of well gathered data but a completely flawed premise. It may appear logical to you that using an identical tactic and identical man management techniques in two completely different squads across two seasons with multiple alterations to both sides throughout the course of the save would produce the consistent basis to make accurate judgements regarding the underlying mechanics of the game, but such a system for analysis is frankly laughable and clearly when that point is put to you in a calm and coherent manner you would rather insult my posting style, my method of producing an arguement and choose to ignore me than address the points in detail. Perhaps if we meet at your level you might be more inclined to understand where you went wrong.

You used two entireally different squads.

You used a single tactic that was not built for either squad and made no attempt to equalise its influence upon two completely different sets of players.

You bought and sold players over the course of two seasons.

You got involved in man management and motivational techniques.

You polluted your own test with multiple additional random influences.

You do not actually know what the root of the inconsistencies are.

You are jumping to conclusions.

I said in my first post that I thought WWFan was giving your point too much credit. Clearly though, and might I add fairly, you don't actually have a point at all. It appears random to you, you don't like delving into the details. There is nothing of substance here.

[heathxxx]

Hammer1000 - Just thought I would let you know the outcome of my save in the second season. You may be pleased to know that West Ham avoided relegation by beating Manchester United 2-1 away with an 84th minute goal. United had already clinched the title with five games to play. United are also in their 2nd consecutive (in the game as I know it would effectively be their third) Champions League final (won it last season also) and have won the Clup World Championship twice too.

Had West Ham not won the game, they would have gone down on goal difference, so Charlton suffered that fate

I'll keep an eye on how they do 3rd season for you

[heathxxx]

Hammer1000 - Just thought I would let you know the outcome of my save in the second season. You may be pleased to know that West Ham avoided relegation by beating Manchester United 2-1 away with an 84th minute goal. United had already clinched the title with five games to play. United are also in their 2nd consecutive (in the game as I know it would effectively be their third) Champions League final (won it last season also) and have won the Clup World Championship twice too.

Had West Ham not won the game, they would have gone down on goal difference, so Charlton suffered that fate

I'll keep an eye on how they do 3rd season for you

Oh and BTW...

Through luck as well as judgement, I managed to stear Altrincham (currently League 2) to the FA Cup final and beat Man Utd.

Has anyone else ever tried to do a lap of honour around a 4m x 4m room before? I did!

[Hammer1000]

In the context of the relationship between tactic and squad the choices are clearly arbitrary for A: the tactic was chosen based upon the release of a patch that reduced the ability to exploit the match engine and B: the tactic was transferred to multiple squads without alteration. There is no way he could have known exactly how the tactic would affect his squad before he chose it, there was no attempt to construct tactics based upon the strength of the respective squads. The results are clearly based entireally upon luck.

Feel free to ignore me. I have been more than fair with you considering your conclusion of "randomness" is based not only upon a lack of well gathered data but a completely flawed premise. It may appear logical to you that using an identical tactic and identical man management techniques in two completely different squads across two seasons with multiple alterations to both sides throughout the course of the save would produce the consistent basis to make accurate judgements regarding the underlying mechanics of the game, but such a system for analysis is frankly laughable and clearly when that point is put to you in a calm and coherent manner you would rather insult my posting style, my method of producing an arguement and choose to ignore me than address the points in detail. Perhaps if we meet at your level you might be more inclined to understand where you went wrong.

You used two entireally different squads.

You used a single tactic that was not built for either squad and made no attempt to equalise its influence upon two completely different sets of players.

You bought and sold players over the course of two seasons.

You got involved in man management and motivational techniques.

You polluted your own test with multiple additional random influences.

You do not actually know what the root of the inconsistencies are.

You are jumping to conclusions.

I said in my first post that I thought WWFan was giving your point too much credit. Clearly though, and might I add fairly, you don't actually have a point at all. It appears random to you, you don't like delving into the details. There is nothing of substance here.

Thanks for proving my point!

You might want to try reading the whole thread next time?

[digsy11]

Didn't this very same thing you're arguing about happen to West Ham?

Pardew took you up, first season in the premiership I recall you finished 8th or 9th and get to the FA Cup final losing on pens, some could say this is the best season you've had in 20 years.

Beginning of next season you sign two players NO ONE would of thought possible due to the class of them ( Tevez and Mascherano) and what happened that season? you avoid relegation on the last day of the season and Pardew got sacked during it.

[Hammer1000]

Didn't this very same thing you're arguing about happen to West Ham?

Pardew took you up, first season in the premiership I recall you finished 8th or 9th and get to the FA Cup final losing on pens, some could say this is the best season you've had in 20 years.

Beginning of next season you sign two players NO ONE would of thought possible due to the class of them ( Tevez and Mascherano) and what happened that season? you avoid relegation on the last day of the season and Pardew got sacked during it.

Whats your point, that this COULD happen?

I've already gone over this more than once!

Like i said to Fraser, try reading the whole thread?

[digsy11]

Hammer don't patronise me mate, I've read this thread from the start and many others of yours. You're claim that this happening in the game is to random, my point is this exact same thing happens ALL the time in football and proved this with a fact about your own side ffs.

You've gone over so many variations of the wrong doing of the ME time and time again it's really quite funny when you come out with oh i've already gone over this! really, quite amusing Hammer

I honestly think you should try and stop being so blinkered to the points others make that you don't, or can't agree with for fear of realising that, infact, it's YOU that's the problem but no, lets all blame the game for being to random, for having a mechanism contrived to be against over achieving teams, for the time you don't have to play yada yada yada.

Seriously....