Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Negatrev

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This is something I've always thought would be useful, but as others have suggested, since it's not something that I've really seen happened in real competitive football, I'm not sure how valid it would be to implement it. The rule set involved to implement this would be difficult. You'd almost need some sort of position tracking option. Say assign a defender to the central defensive position nearest player x (perhaps with the caveat that he only moves if the player tracked is still in a forward position). What's certain is it's definitely a difficulty in the current set-up as if you only man-mark, you have players out of position when possession changes sides. If you go zonal, as OP has stated, you get a lag time when the players are not tracked.
  2. I hate that board announcement after winning a competition. They say you were always one of the favourites, but weren't you a third seed? Shame that you went narrow just in time for a promising wide player to show up!
  3. As I said before, this is your scouts report vs your coaches report (probably from your assistant unless you've changed responsibilities). It's quite possible that one is better than the other or the scout didn't see enough of the player. Staff aren't perfect and will often disagree.
  4. I'm not sure what to be decided on here? Some positions will benefit more from the ability to use both feet than others.It also depends on the roles you assign people. The most obvious way to view this is to pick a team who keep good possession and do one test on a central midfielder (best if he's the middle of 3, but it's not too important). Set him to one foot only, watch just 1 game against almost any team and watch the full match (not highlights). Then do the same with him with 2 perfect feet. You'll see the difference it makes in terms of the passes he attempts and completes as being 2 footed opens up his options more. The cost for being 2 footed I suppose is open for debate, but really it's your decision on if you want the individual skill or the overall versatility. From the OP's tests (small sample limitations aside) it suggests that perhaps for the way that he utilizes Soldado that for him, a striker that's one footed works better. But I certainly find my teams plays far better with a more evenly footed player playing up front (lone striker False 9).
  5. I don't record specific stats, so it could be selective memory. But if I'm playing a 1 footed fullback, I'll often try having my wide players attack on his weaker side (eg cut-inside instead of go wider) and this often seems to bring up the prompt 'been getting skinned all too often'. As I say, however, it could just be selective memory.
  6. The mechanic in real life is actually slightly different. In that to discuss a contract, you just need permission from the club a player is currently contracted to. So it sometimes happens that a player agrees terms with a club, but the clubs can't agree on the fee. However, in FM you must ALWAYS agree a fee first (as it is in all football games I've ever played). I'm not sure this difference in the mechanic has a huge impact on me. As I'd never let a club talk to my player before I've agreed a fee.
  7. This would only happen if you've not had a recent scout report, or you have a different level of ability for judging potential/ability between the scout who reported on him and the coach who's reporting on him (once signed). Players are always rated in comparison to your team, not the team a player is currently at.
  8. You still have to understand that yes, a player with both feet equal will have more options, but it can depend on the position and team tactics as to if it matters that much... ..As a GK, I think weaker foot issues will be rare, same with fullback's/wingers that DON'T cut inside and are defending against opposition doing the same. If your striker only ever gets deliveries from the same place, then it's less likely to matter if he's 2-footed. I often wonder how this could work (cost of training a weaker foot), but the current system seems to be pretty accurate (remembering that an individual player is unlikely to change 'footed-nes' as much as the OP has forced with an editor). I don't necessarily think that if a player learns to use his lesser foot more, it should actually affect the overall ability of his crossing/dribbling and so forth (especially on his stronger foot). But if it doesn't 'cost' in someway to improve a players weaker foot, why wouldn't everyone train up to be 2 footed? This is hard mechanic to make 'fair'. Maybe rather than using the CA, that the more 2 footed a player, the longer training takes to improve normal stats (as the player is going to have to learn everything with 2 feet not one)?
  9. I tend to put a note on the manager so when a loan comes in, I check the manager and see if I flagged him as 'letting me down'. However, mostly if you loan a player to a team where your coach reports says the player is currently at that divisional level, then players should get the game time.
  10. I think the key difficulties to identify tactical issues in FM are:- 1. Understanding when a tactic is just plain wrong! - This should be fairly obvious if you watch a match on full as you'll see why you keep losing the ball/conceding gaols/not making chances and so forth (analysing afterwards if possible, but harder to understand). However, unless you are playing FMC, this can be muddied with point 2 2. Understanding when a tactics isn't working simply because the team aren't familiar enough with it yet. This is a little harder to spot, as until you've played enough games to ensure the players are tactically familiar, you don't know if the mistakes made are down to lack of player ability, lack of player composure or lack of familiarity. Obviously if all the tactical familiarity bars are full, then it's less likely to be the latter. 3. understanding when tactics aren't working do to the oppositions tactics. This is both the easiest to spot, but also the hardest to rectify in a lot of cases. As you watch a game, you can see why a team is winning. Be it that they are parking 2 buses or pressing you really high up the pitch. This is where you need versatility of players/formation, as you'll need to make tweaks to counter/limit the effectiveness of an oppositions formation. However, knowing how a team is beating you and knowing the solution are 2 separate matters and this I feel is the most fun part of the game (more when your changes work, but sometimes even when they don't catastrophically!). Again, in these situations, unless playing FMC, familiarity can rear it's ugly head, as if your need to change your tactics too much in order to counter a team, you might make the right choices, but as your team are not used to playing this way, your players don't perform well. As Analog says, the key to matches in this game is understanding which of the 3 issues is present and finding the right solution. This situation is where a minority is turned off from the game as you need some level of knowledge here to be truly successful. You can't really just pick a tactic and blitz through wins unless your team is really that much better than other teams or when you're on a good run of form. However it's still important to be vigilant here as you need to be able to identify when this streak ends, so you can minimise any rut your team may slide into. My biggest achievement (in my personal opinion) in FM14 was taking a nobody team (technically level 11 but I started at lowest playable league with them) to an undefeated season in League 2. I had a 3 game rut before Christmas where I struggled to survive bore draws, then after the title was sewn up, again I was battling complacency to ensure I didn't lose. I wish there was a team talk option to encourage players that even though the title was sewn up, that it was worth attempting my goal! Sorry for the long post, I originally planned for a concise response.
  11. Playing devils advocate here, but it's possible 6 of the shots were after blocks/saves/tackling, so there was no key pass leading to it? I must admit I always believed that key passes were those before an assist or for a saved shot. However, maybe on the new system, key passes are linked to CCC's?
  12. Just a small piece of advice, you may want to allow ANY Home Grown (own club) players to be exempt from registration. Otherwise you may find lots of teams fail to build squads properly as they will keep having to sell all their 21 year old's that become too old for the next season and too many would retire before achieving their potential. Eventually this would destroy English football! If you exempt homegrown, you're still encouraging youth as they would be able to use their best youth academy graduates. I'd just managed to escape a long term save and now you've gone and given me the bug all over again with this idea!
  13. Please note my statement had a caveat. As OP stated their most valuable player is 100k and spending 200k per month on youth, this seems to suggest that currently a step back is needed (although waiting until after the youth intake might be worthwhile since they're still in the first season and might produce better value).
  14. I would suggest taking this hit and reducing the spend for youth facilities (unless you're producing the youth to outweigh the investment, it's not really worth keeping if it means you'll lose your job). The other option is deperately looking for a good parent club that pays you to be a feeder (although you won't get the 2.4m you need to steady the sinking ship).
  • Create New...