Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About tkg

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. The other thing to bear in mind is how the vast majority of differing difficulty levels are typically achieved in other games. It's not often done by boosting or reducing the "intelligence" of the AI but by adding handicaps to the player or advantages to the AI. How do you think this would be achieved in FM? Because I suspect it would be things like: User controlled players recover slower than AI Morale being impacted more for human players more injuries than AI teams AI that is less willing to sell to you rather than other AI teams. Stat and morale boost to all AI controlled players That doesn't sound like something that would go down well with the vast majority of users. Obviously I'd like to see the AI improve, such as being better able to develop youth and react to tactical changes in a more effective manner. But that would an improvement across the board, not something that needs to be locked behind a difficulty scale.
  2. Nah, this was just a simple tactic I threw together to see how a lower-block would work out: I'm going to try out the suggestion above to use Play out of defence to see if that impacts it. Having a few other little niggling issues with the ME at the moment, trying to figure out whether they are issues with the ME or just me Anyone else having issues with Deep Lying fowards (support) not really getting invovled during the build up phase and instead sticking quite hard to the opposition's defensive line? Even though Firmino is being set as a DLF(s) and has the Comes Deep to get the ball PPM he doesn't seem to drop deep to collect the ball very often at all. I've found that my forwards are only getting around 17 pass attempts per match! I don't know if it's a knock on effect of that, but decision making when dribbling also seems quite off. Players seem to routinely dribble into a wall of opposition players rather than slow down their run and look for a passing option (when there are available). It doesn't help that the Dribbling stats on the analysis page only shows successful dribbles as opposed to showing failed attempts too. So the only way to analyse your failed dribbles appears to be to comb through every lost possession clip until you find the right ones
  3. That's interesting if that's the case...though it would be a little disapponting to not be something that player has more control of. It's also a little odd as I played a lower defensive line, lower line of engagement and standard pressing intensity against them and they continued to use the split CBs. Whereas they employed a relatively high block and press against my backline and we didn't split. Yeah, it was dead ball situations I was looking out for, still no split from my team at any point. I've isolated the relevant passes in the screenshot. Real Madrid always split from a reset, even when the GK decided to distribute to the fullback instead. Notice that he always distributed to the farside FB when taking from the left, and the nearside CB when taking from the right. It's impossible to tell, but there are 3 match events directly on top of one another from that position. So they always moved the ball out on their right hand side.
  4. I've noticed in several of the pre-set styles that the CBs can now be made to split when playing out from the GK. A really cool feature that I'm glad has been incorporated into the ME! The thing i'm uncertain on is what instruction, or combination of instructions, actually causes this behaviour to occur? I've currently setup a new tactic that uses distribute to CBs and take short kicks but when playing out from the GK (SK wit Support) the CBs (a BPD,CB pair) aren't splitting like I had hoped. They are staying narrow to recieve the ball like they always have in previous versions... So i'm pretty confused as to how to go about getting this new ME behaviour to happen when using a custom tactic. Anyone got any ideas?
  5. I'm interested in knowing where you got that data from? I'm looking at the Whoscored data for Serie A 16/17: Torino scored 17 goals where a cross was registered as an assist. Their total assists were 54. This gives a 31.5% cross assist rate. This was 1% above league average. The highest cross assist ratio belonged to Atalanta with 48% of assists being crosses. Inter Milan attempted 1204 crosses, which equated to 31.7 crosses per match, which was well above the average of 20.4 for that league. That said.....don't forget that whoscored doesn't include corners/freekicks as crosses whilst Football Manager does. Now I'm not saying your data is wrong and mine is right. At least not until you tell me where your stats come from so I can verify for myself But what is important to remember is that different sources classify events differently, making direct comparison an inaccurate means of analysis. You have to adapt the data from one source to match the other.
  6. It would take a little bit of extra time but comparing average points across the simulations would be a better indication of the relative performance of each AI team than the league positions. Your results do seem to match up with my own simulations though. Man Utd, Chelsea and Arsenal typically fared better than Man City, Spurs and Liverpool across numerous simulations. my personal impressions are that the match engine currently favours more defensively orientated play styles. I also wouldn't be surprised if the assist chart for Man Utd indicated a relatively large portion of deep assists from within their own half, relative to the other top teams.
  7. Haha yeah, Stoke and Burnley are passing machines compared to their real life counterparts The main points of interest for me were: That there are more passes overall in the ME - Every team except Man City enjoyed a higher pass count That the drop in pass count beteween the top 6 and the rest of the pack isn't as noticable in the ME. That the overall variance of pass rates is much lower/tighter in the ME. I've noticed a few people mentioning that the current ME feels a bit arcade like and that teams that are usually dominant don't feel quite as superior as expected. I think these pass rates may be a contributing factor. Though they are probably more of a symptom than a direct cause.
  8. Yeah, very true. Though what this indicates is that defensive/weaker teams are attempting a roughly equal number of passes with less time on the ball. Normally i'd expect less time with the ball to result in less passes.
  9. i agree that shots/goals are likely a key metric, but my reason for looking at passing was because of it's role in style and strategy. When we talk about playing like a certain team or style it's rarely in regards to shot counts. Whereas passing length, direction, urgency and position gives a greater feel for how a team actually plays and it's individual characteristics. If all the team in the ME are passing in the same manner, then the result (imo) is that we see less difference is styles of play. West Brom and Barcelona become one and the same, stylistically.
  10. I've collected the data for 3 simulations so far, all for the premier league. The overall average number of passes is 135% compared to real life (whoscored data). 135% of passing overall isn't too outrageous, but as my chart indicates the increase isn't spread uniformly across all teams. Weaker teams tend to have a much higher pass rate than real life, upwards of 175% for example. Although it's only 3 simulations and not full seasons i'm seeing quite a tight range between the simulations, suggesting to me that although additional simulations will increase accuracy I likely won't see a dramatic shift from what I've already collected. For example the average passes pg in the premier league this season (upto match week 11) was 449.7. My 3 simulations came to 581,587,572 (avg of 580) Studying the specifics of these passes is naturally much more time consuming. My analysis so far seems to suggest that weaker teams or defensive setups are able to pass far too readily in the defensive and middle third. Interestingly i'm also finding that these increased pass rates aren't as highly correlated to possession as you would expect. It's entirely possible for a team to have 40% of possession in the ME but attempt in excess of 600 passes per game.
  11. In regards to question 2, this is why it's important to run numerous simulations and focus on various events within the game as opposed to getting too caught up in the outcomes. I've got numerous simulations running (all fully simulated) but I've only gone as far as taking them up to game week 12 so far (in line with real life). For that reason I don't care too much about the fact that Southampton are top of the league in one simulation or that Liverpool are 15th in another. What I do care about however are things like the passing rates: I've added a bug report related to the above, which gives some insight into the significant difference in passing numbers between the ME simulation and real life. Some of the AI manager limitations you've highlighted aren't particularly insurmountable, such as throwing on more attacking orientated players from the bench when chasing a game. i'd imagine that those kind of AI manager improvements aren't especially inhibited by the ME itself (as opposed to pressing behaviour of players), though it's perhaps foolish of me to assume as such
  12. Nah the numbers of offside calls in the current ME are higher than real life. IRL you are looking at 1-3 offside per game for the majority of teams in the premier league. The current ME is capable of blowing those values out the water with certain tactical setups. It's a good thing that comprehensive includes them though, at the very least for making more people aware of the issue in the ME It's a shame that they don't include a offside per game statistic within the team stats section for competitions. it would be so much easier to highlight the issue than having to go through individual match stats.
  13. Bear in mind that I specifically said I don't think there are too many crosses The system is far too complicated and inter-connected to just dial down one thing and not expect other unintended knock on effects etc. The cross accuracy is off, but as we've seen from the data the expected assist rate is roughly correct. What do we think would happen if the accuracy levels of crosses doubled, bringing it roughly in line with real life? My suspicion is way too many cross assists. That implies to me that there are other issues that would need to be improved upon at the same time. Perhaps defender positioning, changes to the ball's flight, increased difficulty in controlling a ball received at speed...etc. etc. Barring a few issues i'd say crossing is in relatively good shape overall. The ability for weaker and more defensive sides to rack up exceptionally high pass counts is a little more concerning imo
  14. The accuracy values for the premier league are closer to 20-25% I'd say there are some issues with crossing at the moment, accuracy being one of them (since it's sitting at around 10% in the ME), but I'm not convinced there are too many crosses. The OP also raised concerns that the proportion of goals as a result of crosses is too large. From his stats he scored 35.7% of his goals from crosses and conceded 27.9% as a result of them. The current assist rate for the premier league from crosses is 34%. So we have approximately the right number of crosses and right number of cross assists...but less than 1/2 the expected accuracy and a couple of really annoying bugs. Potentially a sticky situation for the developers as they might fix the bugs and open themselves up to a chorus of people complaining that crosses are too effective again, a sentiment they've likely grown very used to the last couple of years. The joys of game balance!
  15. Are all of your 34 crosses per game actual crosses or crosses as defined by FM? This season (IRL) the average number of crosses per game, in the premier league, is 19... but you can't stop there. You have to factor in the 5.3 corners and 10.4 free kicks per game too. When you include those values you quickly get beyond an average value of over 30 crosses per game (which is the average for the ME according to my findings so far). One other thing to consider is the widely known issue of crosses that are being fumbled/brought over the line by the keeper. These resulting corners are almost all going to be counted as crosses too. Once that bug can be rectified you'll likely see a reduction in the number of crosses per match (assuming no other changes impact it of course). Your choice of viewing mode (key,extended,comprehensive) could even play a factor in your perception of how frequent crosses are compared to other in-game events. For example, I like to know how my team is playing out from the back but even on comprehensive i'm unlikely to see >50% of my keeper's initial passes. It's normally only if that event leads into another event, that the game deems more significant, that i'll actually see them.
  • Create New...