hyperion479

Members
  • Content count

    48
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

About hyperion479

  • Rank
    Amateur
  1. A few things, that I learned from reading the thread referenced above about a month ago (so all due credit to those posters): Two-footedness affects passing, crossing, tackling, and shooting (and maybe another stat I've forgotten). Because of this, two-footedness generally benefits certain positions more than others. For example, a two footed ST can finish opportunities on either side w/ power. A two-footed CM can distribute the ball more effectively to either side. A bit counter-intuitively, even a CD can tackle better on either side. That said, several other factors seem to have an effect on the benefit of two-footedness. For example, the width of your defense can affect which side of your back an opposing winger attacks; the tempo of your play can determine whether or not your CM has time to settle the ball and move it to his preferred foot; the movement of your winger can determine whether or not he cuts inside and puts the ball on his weaker foot. The match engine takes the foot a cross, tackle, shot, or pass occurs w/ and penalizes the success according to a players rating. So for example, Ronaldo may not appear the better player at initial glance at his attributes, but in the match engine he has a distinct advantage when it comes to a large number of situations (depending on tactics). There are a few difficulties with the system: (1) At least initially (w/ the installation of the 8.02), it resulted in dropping the stats given by the researchers. I believe it's been mentioned that in the future this will be handled by giving the researchers a better tool. (2) Understanding a player's talent via his attributes has become far less intuitive, which is the core of what a lot of people are complaining about. However, I do understand why the 20 PA is necessary. Because of the way the match engine handles these attributes, not "charging" them to the PA would result in a God-like Ronaldo and other similar players w/ CA and PA close to 200 and two-footedness.
  2. I can understand your frustration at these things, but you're misunderstanding what attribute ratings indicate. To sum it up briefly, a 10 for Kitson's crossing indicates a certain level of talent relative to other players. For example, he's not a strong winger like C.Ronaldo or Joe Cole, but he's significantly better at crossing than John Terry or Rio Ferdinand. But you're missing the fact that a 10 crossing rating doesn't mean he doesn't occasionally hit a 20 cross. Essentially, that 10 represents his average cross, which includes different crosses across the quality spectrum. As others have mentioned, this is affected by the players consistency rating, as well as other things such as game situation (up 3-0 in the last ten minutes your defenders are much more likely to relax), and number of opportunities. Personally, I think this is spot on. Just because Kitson is a 10 crosser and Rio Ferdinand is a 5 (just approximating, so don't hold it against me) doesn't mean that if you gave each 20 crosses, they wouldn't put in a few that were quite remarkable. You're also forgetting that other attributes can contribute to the situation leading up to the goal. What is your defender's positioning rating? Consistency rating? Teamwork rating? Maybe he didn't put himself in a position to get to the ball, or maybe he assumed another defender would help out, or maybe he made a mistake because he wasn't paying attention. What is the forward's off-the-ball rating? Creativity rating? Positioning rating? Anticipation rating? Maybe he outmaneuvered the forward before the cross, or maybe he found a gap between defenders, or maybe he just guessed the crosses trajectory better than the defender. There's a million possible explanations for each mistake, just as in real life. It's the same reason you can expect a Premiership team to crush a Championship side because on paper their attributes are dominating, but yet you occasionally find the underdogs pull one out. The more highly rated team (or player) doesn't necessarily win every game (or challenge, shot, etc.) because there's more to the sport than simply being better in one or all regards.
  3. Anyone kind enough to mirror the patch for the WWSM digital download?
  4. From my experience, the differences in personality between AI managers come across as quite cosmetic. We're able to research a rival manager's background in the form of previous clubs, preferred formations, and favored players, but when it comes to the actual game I know I rarely notice a difference in games that I would attribute to the manager. Occasionally the commentator's will remark about the opposing manager's halftime talk or an opposing manager will take a shot at some mind games the week before a match, but it's usually an exception rather than the rule. That's not to say that there's isn't a significant between AI managers, just that the differences are often lost on me. Personally I favor a lot of the ideas in this thread, especially Amaroq's suggestions, but mostly I would hope that SI works on drawing out the already existing personalities. It feels like FM could use more "story-telling" to it, letting you feel like you actually know the characters you're dealing with, both managers and players. Currently any individual can go looking for that story-telling depth, but it's outside the realm of the typical user's gameplay. It'd be spectacular to feel truly immersed in the manager's role to the point where you actively relate to the personality of the other managers and players around you. For me, the answer to this is a wider AND deeper array of media interactions between board, manager, AI managers, and players. Let the answers I give in response to the media and other managers or players affect my popularity with my board and fans. If I take on the persona of a Mourinho (who I personally love), let it show that fan's of other teams begin to resent my brash style and react with "here he goes again" thoughts. If a manager constantly signs promising youth, the media should remark on whether the coach or board is trying to mimic Arsene Wenger. If Barcelona signs a manager who plays defense like a 90's German national team, play up the resulting strife from the "overly" defensive football. Essentially I'm looking for more realistc interactions like the one I had about a month ago: I had an amazingly talented (but temperamental) star who's already signed a deal to move on because he's accomplished all he can at my club, which is frustrating but realistic. He happens to pick up a red in a game for two weak yellow cards late in the game so I fine him two weeks wages; he responds the day after and tells me that I'm taking advantage of him just because he's on the way out...and he was exactly right! I had to laugh because I felt the game had gotten that interaction perfectly right, and that there was plenty of depth and richness to my interactions with that flamboyant, temperamental star. Even after he left my club I found myself checking up on him because he felt almost like a real person to me after that. It's more moments like that which would add another layer of depth to the AI managers.
  5. Something else which should have an effect on higher clubs taking a chance on you: how long you have left on your contract and your salary. If both of these are relatively high, the clubs you're applying for might decide the risk of hiring you isn't worth the cost of paying the rest of your salary to your previous club. I'm not sure how much of an effect this might have, but it's something else to consider.
  6. Finishing the last few games of a season with my semi-pro team and deciding to call it a night. Then deciding to click continue a couple of more times and seeing the beautiful message that my board has decided to take my club professional. Ended up staying up half the night trying to sign all the great players that were suddenly interested now that my team was pro.
  7. Well thought out post and analysis, but I'd suggest that you're slump is due to the combination of the weather, English fixture congestion around that time of year, and complacency. Bad weather greatly hampers a more skillful tactic because crisp passes get blown off course or get bogged down in a slushy pitch. You might be able to get around this by changing to a more direct attack. But the bad weather also requires your players to exert more energy to get the same level of play, hence tiring them out faster. Combine this with the huge fixture congestion in the Dec to Feb months in the English schedule, your players begin to wear down. Combine this with the physical exertion needed to compete on four fronts, your players begin to struggle with the rigors and stresses of all the competitions. I would imagine that given a decent lead in the league, your players are willing to let a few games slip due to a less than complete physical/mental effort rather than wear themselves out beyond the point of exhaustion.
  8. I think several people have raised a very interesting (and probably crucial) point. To me, it seems the reason the regens have such poor CA is the fact that the AI is poor at developing young talent. Just as the AI struggles to recognize that at some point very talented, lower rep national prodigies should be playing ahead of less talented, higher rep geezers(as this experiment has pointed out), club AI rarely forgoes an aging former talent for a wonderkid unless the superstar hits the dramatic part of the decline phase. Granted, not all clubs/nations/managers should give the same opportunities to youngsters to develop. Similar to RL, clubs/nations that are struggling or underperforming should tend to afford youngsters more opportunities to break into the first team. And maybe as someone suggested earlier in this thread, managers should have a more distinct mentality in their team selections and transfers that biases them more towards certain age preference and development styles.
  9. Hallelujah, finally made it to the present. Like a great novel, it's all too captivating and hard to put down.