Jump to content

enigmatic

Members+
  • Posts

    11,069
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

Everything posted by enigmatic

  1. If Rashford's determination to make the most of his potential and opportunity as demonstrated thus far deserves a 3 out of 20, I expect to see you in the Arsenal thread demanding the entire squad get their determination removed to 1 (with the possible exception of Sanchez if he succeeds in getting his move)
  2. Determination has other effects beyond the match engine, but none of them involve complaining about a change in position and only playing 53 games in a season at the age of 19.
  3. I think what's missing is for the ability to set ranges for players' attributes where there's not been enough evidence to nail down a particular value, but researchers feel reasonably confident that a player isn't notably aggressive, a set piece specialist, a dribbler, especially injury prone, disloyal etc. Ideally this would be a "top end" and "bottom end" starting value for attributes, which would achieve both the goal of not having some moderately-known players randomly given standout values that are obviously wrong, and allowing a bit more randomness in the starting attributes because researchers can assign "12-17" to something a player seems to be good, possibly even very good at but hasn't been seen to do regularly yet, rather than feeling the need to hedge and go for "13" (or leave it blank with a high probability player is randomly assigned a rubbish value at it) Sure, this is already aided to some extent by templates so a blank "marking" attribute for a CA120 defender probably ends up in the double digits and a blank "finishing" value in the single digits, but there are quite a few player attributes that aren't readily reducible to some common sense principles. So Rashford is someone that the Man Utd researcher hadn't seen enough of to feel confident enough to be sure whether his Determination is 17 or 11, because the guy has played an important role in some adverse situations and put a lot of effort into chasing hopeless long balls played out of defence but also been substituted with the team chasing a goal, and with luck, tactics, fitness and raw ability also all playing important roles it's difficult to make a decision on less than a season (at the time) of senior football. (Especially if it contrasts a bit with how he's looked playing junior football) On the other hand, leaving the attribute blank (which is probably correctly following guidelines) leaves open the possibility of Rashford having a Determination of 3, which is patently absurd for anyone who's watched his work ethic and body language in games where United have played badly. Not sure exactly how non-position specific attributes are randomly assigned but the probability of him getting an (absurdly low) 3 is probably about the same as him getting a (plausible but probably on the generous side) 17.
  4. You weren't a million miles away, but that was the one that finished It's the others that were more remarkable, like the cup match later that week that finished And this one below, which is probably the most bonkers scoreline I've seen in FM
  5. Would be genuinely amazed if someone can get close to the right scorelines for these three games, all between the same opposition in the same season
  6. That's generous. The game's code's ability to recognise completely standard situations in relation to promises is poor. No, I don't think you should be objecting to me not having made good on last month's promise to sign new players in a team meeting SI forces me to call on the first day of the transfer window...
  7. Surely part of the benefit of an editor is being able to scan through existing values and see where, in your opinion, the researcher didn't get it right? A ban on discussing values on the forum might be better, but a starting point might be wider realisation that for two young players with the same starting attributes, it's entirely possible (if not actively likely) that a player with excellent professionalism and ambition and few injury problems and a 139PA will have a higher ability level for most if not all of their career than a player with 149PA and a problematic personality or persistent injury problems.
  8. Plus the biggest things which affect development curves IRL is whether they're playing, and who they're playing for - neither of which could or should be set in advance...
  9. I think that would be an improvement. Getting rid of the assumption that any player, ever, would complain about not being instructed to play like a regular defender only with more emphasis on hoofing would be a start. Some players are very keen to be played in their most natural position IRL. A smaller number might be very keen on being a playmaker or target man. I doubt anyone, anywhere, has ever got upset about their manager not insisting they play a role where they do as little with the ball as humanly possible. Getting rid of that promise altogether because it's more often unbelievable than not (and the ability to actually have a proper conversation with players about their skills and your expectations is understandably nonexistant) would be better still...
  10. I doubt anyone could tell the difference between a 190CA player (the highest possible under Mbappe's current allocation, which you used as an example of a problem) and a 199CA player without using an editor. IIRC Dybala - considered by most FMers who've signed him to be an unstoppable force of nature - has a PA of 180. To the extent CA is (i) a reasonable approximation of player abilities and (ii) influences other game mechanics it makes a lot more difference when their abilities are a similar level to the rest of the division they play in than when it's over 170 and so they tend to dominate matches regardless, and all the scouting and transfer mechanics rate them as amongst the best in the game Historically there are vastly more players that the PA system has overrated than wrongly prevented from having a PA in the 190s, and most of the examples of players being significantly underrated by PA allocations are late developers at smaller clubs rather than well-known talents FM prevented from having a random chance of being theoretically on the same level as Ronaldo
  11. Isn't this exactly how negative PAs used to work 15-20 year ago (back when it was -1 or -2, with the latter being a range going all the way up to 200)? Didn't the new system come in because this wasn't a very good way of rating potential? Personally I'd rather see negative PAs replaced by a "max PA" and "min PA" box, so researchers can set narrow or wide ranges depending on their knowledge of the player, the player's maturity, and whether there's anything about the player that justifies a particularly wide range (like being way more technically gifted than his peers but too small to make it unless he has a growth spurt which may or may not happen). But in the mean time, I'm not sure either that (i) the fact that Mbappe's potential cannot be randomly assigned to be 195 is actually a real problem, bearing in mind he'll be one of the best players in the game if it maxes out at 175 or (ii) introducing a non-zero possibility that the game generates an Oliver Shenton with higher potential than the potential generated for Mbappe is actually a realism enhancement.
  12. FMT's faster game play and reduced emphasis on adapting to new formations and training is also particularly well suited to experiments that people like to run with custom databases
  13. The roles actually offer a lot of flexibility in adjusting player's shape going backwards and forward *but none for lateral movement of central players* (bar 'roam' settings and decisions a player might make to cover space without instructions). A "cover right flank/left flank" instruction for DMs, MC/AMs to instruct them where to drop back (and possibly a "tuck in defensively" instruction on wide players and "stay wider/overlap" attacking instructions for MCs playing in a three) would solve most of those problems, and probably not be too difficult to train the AI to use occasionally and sensibly (get midfielders to cover nearest flank when playing with certain narrow formations against certain wide formations, basically). Whilst imposing more load on testers and AI designers to try to balance everything out, this seems possible to introduce without extreme exploit potential. Most of the rest of the question marks about formations would go away with a small AI improvement that drew offensive and defensive arrows on the pitch to reflect (i) the role settings and (ii) any additional boxes you'd checked like "roam" or "move into channels". You could probably even have a screen which draws an "attacking" and "defensive" formations based entirely on the prescribed roles, and it might make them a lot clearer to newbies than the paragraph of text. I mean, I rather liked wibblewobble's ability to be able to draw shifting triangles everywhere, but I get the arguments for those being overly prescriptive and easily manipulated - It probably doesn't help the discussion to conflate separate issues like the virtually all the forward roles being almost always reluctant to drop back to defend (which leads to 4-4-2-0 being a more accurate way of representing most RL 4-4-2s including the Juventus one. That's not a lack of flexibility, that's just questionable tuning of roles, much like the wingers defending too wide in the current version (personally I'd like most wide players in the AM strata to continue to stay wide and forward until a side is actually overloaded by wingers and most in the M strata to get in line and tuck in; at the moment their defensive approach is a bit too similar. Then again, that's an as-of FM17 development)
  14. One advantage of the existing setup (at least for lower division clubs with smaller squads) is that you generally get your youth intake at least a couple of months before the contracts of some of your players run out and the transfer window opens, so a high potential and/or reasonably developed youngster coming through can save you the need to renew/replace that backup player. Sometimes with people in the early stages of Youth Only saves the youth intake can help save their season midway through too. Or it can be incredibly frustrating if they're not allowed to play them because of squad registration rules... That said, probably more realistic to have the youth evaluation at the end of the season, even if only in playable/active divisions
  15. Wouldn't mind them speeding up the slow walk of the referee to the about-to-be carded player too (especially when he has a bit of distance to cover, and the card's only part of the highlight because there's a scoring opportunity from the resulting freekick)
  16. Even the standard Star Ratings based recommended teamsheet with "include shortlist" (and the ability to manually remove individual shortlisted players because they're too dear or low priority) would be nice.
  17. With match engine updates, I completely understand why SI don't want to address major, match changing issues that need very careful balancing like the current compromise between wide midfielders helping their (too narrow) MCs out and watching fullbacks that might overlap, which is currently skewed far too much towards the latter having been skewed too much towards the former in FM16. Getting the balance right is tricky, and a mid-term update that radically alters how the engine handles midfield play also annoys players by wiping out tactical edges they've spent a long time tinkering with tactics to achieve. But I'd have thought a more conservative match engine update that fixes stuff like goalkeepers - even good ones - insisting on conceding corners stretching for crosses that are obviously going wide should be achievable. Net effect: some less silly replays and maybe one fewer corner a game (and no tactical effect whatsoever since nobody bases their tactic around trying to go wide of the near post). Same goes for making players a little more likely to follow goalkeeper distribution or corner delivery instructions (understand that players aren't robots and don't always deliver the ball in the manner they're asked to and sometimes there's even a good reason for not rolling the ball to the fullbacks, but Joe Hart lost the #1 role at City for less persistent ignoring of simple instructions)
  18. I take it none of your Swedish players will repeat Zarzo's impressive feat of staying with you from the lowest playable division to Champions League success
  19. You appeared to be arguing that a player could obstruct a keeper's view and not be offside (which I don't think is true fwiw) I pointed out that contrary to what others have said in the thread any attempt to play the ball, regardless of whether it has any effect on the ball or other players, automatically brings offside players into play
  20. As I understand it, if your striker makes a play for the ball he should be given offside even if he doesn't touch it or deceive the goalkeeper in any way. That rule was updated at the beginning of last season.
  21. Bjorn Heidenstrom was one of my favourites. Unlike the overrated youth stars and best players in the small European leagues, there appears to have been no reason whatsoever for the Leyton Orient researcher to get so wildly excited about the range of football talents possessed by a 29-year old Norwegian journeyman that started just three games for the club and didn't score. Since this thread has come back from the dead after five years, I'd be interested to see which players named as not quite making it actually turned out pretty well after all. Kasper Schmeichel named above, for example, is now an established international with a Premier League winner's medal...
  22. Surprised Barcelona's Sergi Samper hasn't got a mention yet (although I guess it's enough of a burden being the next Xavi without adding to it..). No set piece ability, but he's nailed the bit about decision making, range of passing and being too good at reading the game to need any pace, and he has a fair bit of room to grow.
  23. Depends what you mean by "minnow nations". In one FM17 save I'm running, the third best soccerball player in the world is a Yank
  24. Ian MacDonald's Brasyl - a very weird book - does include a bit with former Brazilian goalkeeper Barbosa travelling into alternate universes to see worlds in which he didn't concede Ghiggia's winner and get blamed for the Maracanazo...
  25. That's one of the few things about match ratings that's right. It's supposed to be a record of how well somebody is performing, not about how understanding you should be about them consistently losing challenges or passing the ball straight to the opposition because the opposition are much better anyway. If your players get good ratings in cup defeats against higher division opponents, it should be because they won loads of key tackles and headers, not because the opposition had an off day in front of goal and registered a smaller victory margin than they should have done. Imagine if they were relative to players' ability and you had a defensive partnership consisting of one defender consistently getting 8 out of 10 for failing to win headers and tackles because the ratings are sympathetic towards him for not being anywhere near good enough to play at this level, whilst your best player continually gets 5 out of 10 despite consistently winning headers and tackles and not making mistakes because the system gives him no credit for the performance because players he's up against are rubbish and still often score. How on earth would you assess how your players were doing and who was the weak link in the defence? If we look at match ratings given to players by various sources IRL, Jamie Vardy generally didn't get awarded 8 out of 10 for running around a lot and not remotely threatening the goal in his first season because he was only considered a rubbish player for little Leicester, and he didn't generally get only 6.8 out of 10 for scoring the winner and causing the defence all sorts of problems in the middle of his second season because that's the least you'd expect from the league's top scorer when playing against the defences of mid-table dross like Stoke and Liverpool. Sure, there's a lot more pressure on the manager and the team to get good results now, but that's not reflected in the assessment of individual players.
×
×
  • Create New...