Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Icy

  • Rank

About Me

  • About Me

Recent Profile Visitors

1,975 profile views
  1. The root problem is that wing players, specially wingbacks are always uncovered when close to the sidelines as teams defend too narrow, that is why center played always pass to the wings instead of trying through passes, because they see a totally open man open all the time. A single problem creates all these issues in a cascade of events.
  2. What I think we lack in this ME and that is common way to score is one on twos combinations between attacking players around and inside the area, that could be the "new" through balls in modern football.
  3. Most of us, who have been buying the game for over 10 years, will keep buying it regardless not because the ME fixes if they are all year long, but because the other features around the ME. I think the consensus is that this is for sure the best FM version in years in terms of realism and features (dev center, team philosophies, etc) and criticised mainly because the ME that has some of the same issues than past year version (lack of central play mainly) and that after the last patch is more similar to the FM19 engine with most of goals coming from set pieces, with wing players crossing to the defenders legs etc.
  4. In my opinion, part of the frustration specially for the old timers is that we get different messages about the ME development cycle that are contradictory. - In one hand, we are told after the March patch, that there won't be more patches as the ME team needs to work on next year ME, like if we were going to get a redesigned one. - On the other hand, a year/version later, we get basically an evolution of the last year ME, with some improvements, but with several of the same bugs/issues from past year, that looks more a patched version than a new one. So if the team is not working on a new ME but improving/patching current one all the time until the new release, why can't they just share the improvements as are they are done with new patches? In the past it used to be that way, with ME patches all year long, not until March only. Probably I have over simplified the development cycle, but it's the perception that some of us are getting, and that frustrates us a lot as the only explanation I can find is the one that disappoints the loyal fans, that is that if the ME is being fixed all the time, you can't announce it in the new version as brand new.
  5. Agree that it might be the root cause of the lack of central play but even with narrow defending teams, the attacking one should try through balls. It feels like the "control space" around each defensive player is too big so even if we see a hole between players in the 2D/3D, the attacking players can't see that the ball can go through it or is at least too risky so they go for the safer option, pass it to the wide men, that btw are always unmarked because the narrow defense.
  6. Probably this thread should be merged with the similar one to avoid us having doubts about on which one to post:
  7. I'd say this is related, my trequartista deciding to pass back to a wingback instead of either running with the ball, holding it or specially passing to the two forwards ahead of him for them to try to drible or play one on twos between the 3 players. It's like if players were too scared of passing through the center and are always looking for the totally open man, that is usually a wing player, even if the decision is too conservative. Besides that low risk decision making, I think that the other problem contributing to the excessive win play is that players on the wing are usually not covered/closed in, specially wingbacks/fullbacks. That is around minute 60. Crewe v Crystal Palace.pkm
  8. What was this? imho very wrong decission by my trequartista, that should either run and try to drible or try to play one on twos with any of the two forwards or to hold the ball waiting for the team mates. Worth uploading pkm?
  9. A few more games played and all looks good except lack of play though the middle and AMs being ineffective and having bad ratings in general unless they score. In that regards looks like have gone back to old ME but I guess it’s the tradeoff and current ME limitations, either no through balls or too many balls over defenders. Bad news to these of us that love the number 10 position but I guess it aligns with real life where creative 10s are an extinguish breed. I’ll try to adapt to play 4-3-3 or 4-4-2 instead of 4-3-1-2 or 4-2-3-1.
  10. 2 games played so far a not a single 1 on 1 chance from a pass over the top, and in general everything looks more like real football. Maybe still a few too much long range goals, but too small sample size.
  11. Where is the above 40 option? (I'm 44) I started with Football Manager in a ZX Spectrum in 1984 when I was nine and got really addicted to it to the point of my parents hiding the computer from me for days. Then I discovered CM Italy in 1995 and have been playing CM and FM since then non stop every year until now. I'll keep buying it until I die despite not being fully happy with the SI Games management decisions and PR in the last years, but I'll continue supporting them.
  12. 2D comprehensive at the start of the game, once I see how both my team and the other team are playing, I tweak the tactic if needed and then 2D extended. I can't stand 3D as I find the representation very poor and full of weird animations, also with 2D I can see better the tactics and players movement.
  13. The problem for me is that mentality affects everything and it's not easily noticeable in the tactical interface. For example: Attacking mentality=higher risk, fine. But, it also means, faster build up, longer passes, higher pressure, width, etc when we have already separated settings for these and these settings are not absolute but relative to mentality. What I would do to make it more obvious is to tie the sliders, so if you go from a defensive to an attacking mentality, the passing, buildup speed, width, and pressing sliders (any any other related one) would move themselves to the right absolute position instead of you having to guess that the same pressing slider position means a different absolute thing depending on the mentality you chose. There is some indication about it if you read the slider text, as you can see how despite not moving, the test description changes a little bit, but imho is not visible enough. For new players that is specially confusing, as for example not touching the pass length, they see a totally different thing in the game depending on the mentality you chose and it also creates extreme tactics, where they move from defensive to attacking mentality and also raise at the same time the width, passing length and build up speed, width creating a totally extreme tactic when they just wanted the team to be a little bit more attacking.
  14. For me it's the other way around, most of my goals are scored that way (btw my strikers score plenty of 1on1), but that it benefits me doesn't mean I'm happy, as my tactic is based around short passing controlled attack, while most of my goals come from counters exactly like you showed in that video, and it's always a pass from one of my wingbacks that are not specially good passers.
  15. Quick background: I took over as Crewe manager, developed a 4-3-1-2 tactic, positive mentality, short passing, narrow and central play, both wingbacks on support, midfield trio is DLP and two mezzalas on support, AMC as AP support (all roles tried tried), forwards are AF and DLF attack or support (similar to @Rashidi one for what I discovered later in his youtube channel). First two years promoted to League 1 and then to Championship where I'm a middle table team for two seasons. I'm having a great time, developing young players from the academy or buying only under 23 players to develop them and then having to sell some due to bad economic situation, similar to Crewe in real life and historical philosophy. The tactic works well, strikers score even on 1 on 1, midfielders do as well, my two wingbacks are great performers, etc. My goals come both from controlled game, or from counters (deep pass usually from my wingers or mezzalas to the strikers that get on an 1 on 1 and score). My only issue is the AM or number 10, that is a position I love despite being used less and less at the top level. I have tried different players and roles (AM on support, attack, Avanced playmaker on supprot, attack, trequartista, etc. And the result is always the same, total inconsistency from any player slotted there and low ratings in general. If they score once in a while, usually from a rebound, they get the 8, else they usually get a 6.6 or lower as they are barely involved in the game, other than a few passes from time to time to the wings and some defensive help. I thought that maybe my problem was that my AMs were not good enough for the level I was in, and that one day I could develop or manage to sign a great one to push my game to the top. Then I decided to do an experiment, to edit my AM and set all the positive attributes to 20, plus consistence, big games etc, and played the same game three times, vs another middle of the table team. The results were good, I won the three times, scores were 1-0, 3-1 and 3-2, but in all three, my edited AM was still irrelevant and got a 6.3 rating. the main difference I saw is that with the 20 acceleration, speed, agility and dribbling, he tried to dribble way more and ran with a ball a few counters, his speed and agility were noticeable in the game, his passing was not dangerous at all, not a single through pass to the strikers. It was for me a nasty surprise as it means that for some reason, the ME will play the same no matter who i put in that position. I decided to try another thing, I edited one of my strikers to all 20s setting the AM back to what he was, and in the first game the edited striker was noticeably better, receiving the ball a lot, being a constant danger, having multiple chances and scoring 2 goals for an 8.2 rating (after missing a penalty). So... does it mean that the current ME won't use a number 10 as I think it should? Of course I know that 3 games is nothing statistically talking, and that this test should be run hundreds of times and still wouldn't be relevant but... I really hoped that a top player at the 10 position in a 4-3-1-2 would make a difference and I'm disappointed that it doesn't seem so, on the other hand the maxed out striker was noticeably better. What do you guys think? worth a long test recording all the data, saving pkm etc? our would it be a waste of my time?
  • Create New...