pats
-
Posts
354 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Forums
Articles
FAQs
Online Manual
Support: Blocks
Support: Games
Bug Tracker
SIGames Manual (beta)
Profiles
Posts posted by pats
-
-
So inverted wingers are now available for AMR/AML positions which is a great news. What other new player roles or changes to existing roles are there?
0 -
2 hours ago, MBarbaric said:
problem with FM is that you never know if something is a bug or just poor performance ;D
Look at this defensive positioning. 4-4-2.
1. Those two strikers are two players less to start
2. the second line of defence (4 players) cover the width of 30 meters and they have support of the full back. Still, they just stand and watch
3. Unitll fm 17 (or was it 18?) you couldn't defend the center of the pitch because wingers stood so wid. Now the winger on the weak side is so far inside that he has 0 control of his flank.
sexy U8 defending
But that is how defending works IRL. Teams prefer to defend the center of the pitch by conceding the flanks to the attacking team. There is nothing wrong with the way FM19 is representing it in this version. It was wrong in FM17 where wide players hanged out wide all the time and attacking teams where able to penetrate the center with ease. I remember my whole tactics was based on playing through the middle and scoring goals like Pep's Barca. It doesn't happen IRL anymore. Teams just don't leave the center open.
0 -
On 04/11/2018 at 05:37, Experienced Defender said:
Team shape in FM18 and team fluidity in FM19 are not the same, though there is some correlation. In FM18, when you select a more fluid shape, the difference in mentalities of players having different duties is smaller than in more structured shapes. So, attack duties are less attacking and defend duties are less defending with fluid team shapes than they are with structured ones. For example, in the most structured shape, if a player with defend duty has mentality of 3, his teammate with attack duty will have, say, 15 or so. Conversely, in the most fluid shape, if defend duty has mentality of 5, attack duty should be around 10 (roughly).
This is exactly what I want to achieve in FM19. I want a very structured style where my defenders are very defensive (mentality of 3) and my strikers are very attacking (mentality of 15). I have enjoyed this style in all the previous FMs. Lots of real life managers like Conte, Mourinho, Ventura and many others play this style as well. With team shape gone in FM19, I'm not sure how I can maintain depth in possession between my defenders and attackers without messing up the defensive shape.
0 -
7 minutes ago, wicksyFM said:
What is this new ME you speak of
0 -
Any feedback on new ME 1916 changes? I won't be able to play FM for next 14 hours.
0 -
1 minute ago, szp said:
Okay, I've checked Bugs Forum and I found that the problem with lack of movement in final third is under review and I'm glad to see this. But I'd like to know if someone from SI is reviewing the crossing issue? If not, how can I report it? I have two fullbacks on support with "cross from deep" instruction and never seen them actually crossing from deep. No matter what, the try to cross from the endline (and get blocked most of the times).
Deep crossing is completely dead in the current ME. And if you want your fullbacks and wingbacks to cross more, you have to set them to attack duty which defaults to crossing from byline.
What should happen is that 'cross more often/less often' and 'cross from deep/byline' should work as what they say (in combination with your passing directness) on any duty (attack, support or defend). Right now the behaviour is hard-coded to restrict the amount of crossing. This was a quick fix after beta so I hope they will find an efficient solution now that they have time to work on it.
0 -
14 minutes ago, Double Indemnity said:
In practice, it doesn't feel like there is that much penalty. I actually do this to close out games, regardless of red/orange familiarity.
I know we human managers do that and it helps us close out the games, but the AI managers aren't coded to do that which puts them at a disadvantage.
0 -
9 hours ago, kingking said:
(Thank you S.I & FM Team for your work, I love FM19)
I see one massive problem for Top A.I Managers and there A.I Teams (e.g. A Liverpool, FC Bayern Munich, Man City) that no one in the whole forum has mentioned or even thought about....
FM 19 A.I Managers using 4-2-3-1/4-3-3. For A.I Managers and A.I Teams such as A.I Man City & A.I Pep Guardiola when they attack in a 4-3-3 they can only defend in a 4-3-3 shape or when they attack in a 4-2-3-1 they only defend in a 4-2-3-1 , this leaves gaps, space, reduces compactness and makes their defending worse.
real life 4-3-3/4-2-3-1. In real life when Man City and Pep Guardiola attack in a 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1, they defend in a 4-5-1, 4-4-2 or 4-1-4-1 because it improves defending, reduces gaps and space, improves compactness and shape.
A.I not intelligent Enough The A.I Managers and A.I Teams such as A.I Man City & A.I Pep Guardiola they are not intelligent enough to intentionally defend in 4-5-1 and attack with a 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3. Liverpool use a 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 but only defend in 4-3-3- or 4-2-3-1.
The User. Its easy for us to intentionally attack with a 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 but defend using a 4-5-1.. but not for A.I Man City & A.I Pep Guardiola
What can we do? How can we make A.I Managers and A.I Teams such as A.I Man City & A.I Pep Guardiola defend in a 4-5-1 or 4-1-4-1 but attack in a 4-3-3 like they do in real life?
The position familiarity between MR/ML/MC and AMR/AML/AMC needs to be treated leniently by the tactics module.
Secondly, the AI managers need to be coded the difference between compact formations and expansive formations. They must be coded to be more adaptable from match to match with regards to positions in their preferred formations. Rather than sticking rigidly to their preferred formation positions, they should know how to keep things tight or how to be more open without compromising the team mentality. Right now they do change mentality during a match but don't pull their AMR/AML/AMC back to MR/ML/MC even when they go cautious.
For example, if they are playing 4-1-2-3 DM wide to begin with and decide to go cautious during a match, they should pull their AMR and AML back to MR and ML to make it 4-1-4-1 DM and there shouldn't be too much positional familiarity penalty for those two wide guys. Guardiola does that a lot in real life.
Also, if a player is too good to be dropped or accomodated in the current formation, the AI manager should be coded to be more flexible to make slight adjustments. For example, Klopp in real life last season never changed his 4-3-3 formation but this season he is using 4-2-3-1 sometimes to accommodate excellent Shaqiri. I don't see that in FM right now.
1 -
5 hours ago, Hingis said:
freaking AI : you will find all the way to win and when a team is doing to good : you'll give them red cards and injuries ! And of course : when you think it's about to get in action when in fact you don't score goal : the same **** all over again : 50% of your shots are GOALS ! Yet the Human team with not that bad finishers have at best 1 ! I'm in a season when the red cards are the trend but none against the AI ! RIgging in my thing, RIgging to be the best ! AI YOU ARE A CHEATER
You have been explained in detail that AI doesn't cheat. But if you don't want to listen then keep these posts coming, we're having fun.
The game is not 'Beat the AI'. It's about simulating your style of management in a virtual world. Think what would you do if you were a real life manager. There is no fun in beating the AI.
0 -
2 hours ago, pauly15 said:
The Beta was great in a lot of ways, I remember being particularly wowed by natural passing play in the build up phases and through midfield. Which is why I found Neil's 'making changes to the ME needs to be carefully considered due to complexity and knock-on effects' hard to take, because this is exactly what happened between the Beta and 19.1...
There was a problem that got through the alpha- lack of central play etc etc- which lead to a change to passing directness in later ME's, which has undone the natural passing play seen in the Beta. From the outside, changes to fix the issues with the Beta seem like a panic buy at the end of the transfer window. A panic buy akin to swapping Busquets for Vinnie Jones because you've just realised Iniesta has forgotten how to play through balls!
Side question, is anyone not playing on balanced mentality, and if so, how ya doing?
Completely agree with the beta ME. It was natural with very few issues. But the tweaks made to 19.1 ME has made it play very ugly football.
As for balanced mentality, I played a whole season with balanced mentality + short/mixed passing combination. Couldn't create anything all season so had to be very solid at the back out of necessity. Played with a deep line and narrow defending. Only conceded from set pieces and few fluke goals. Nothing from open play or crosses.
0 -
26 minutes ago, Mr U Rosler said:
I defended the game earlier on and whilst I’m not seeing Tony Pulis football and have found it straightforward to play a nice possession game, I have to a agree the ME is not in a great place right now.
Corners are a mess, I’ve seen some weird penalty streaks including me being awarded 6 penalties is 3 games, this breaks immersion somewhat.
The football played is mediocre, the visuals are so poor by 2018 standards its difficult to defend them even by those of us who argue it’s not about graphics. This is not helped by all round poor performance with even GTX 1080 graphics cards users reporting flickering, the visuals are dull with poor fidelity.
This is not a niche, kickstarter project, it’s a massively well established game, played by millions backed by a large publisher for whom it has generated large profits.
The development cycle seems bizarre with the Match Engine seemingly having to be built from scratch every year. This normally results in a dodgy release then a rush to fill holes in the match engine, a stable February update and then the whole process starts again.
There should be incremental improvements each year, but can anyone honestly say they prefer what we have now to the Match Engines in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, or 2018?
If someone had asked me when I was playing FM 2014 what the game would look like 4 or 5 releases down the line, it would be light years away from what we have today.
Whether its complacency, a lack of funding, a lack of ambition at the top, the good guys at SI being hamstrung in some way but this series has stalled if not gone backwards over the last 4 or 5 years.
The game is devoid of personality, star players and star managers just don’t stand out.
There’s no challenge in the game, it’s too easy to become financially powerful, sign top players, improve your team and win.
We’re a loyal bunch and forgive a lot, but I’m afraid this is a watershed release for me, I can no longer delude myself that progress is being made and the series is heading in the right direction.
I’m starting to feel I’m a bit of a mug buying this every year.
Couldn't agree more. I've completely stopped playing and won't be touching it anytime soon unless the ME improves. This is coming from a guy who has been playing FM since 2007 and has played FM17 and FM18 non-stop for 2 years. I was very patient at the beta release and my expectations were already low from this year's ME. I even wrote some nice things about the beta ME earlier as I was optimistic about the potential of this ME. But it seems the ME has gone downhill drastically after the beta. Mindless direct passing, poor decision making, lack of movement, lack of creativity, unrealistically accurate tackling are the issues which I don't think can be fixed easily. This has become an arcade game as the ME is producing same repeatative football for large userbase. I'm very pissed off at the moment as FM is my preferred choice of game. I have gone back to DOTA 2 for now because it doesn't insult my intelligence.
4 -
5 hours ago, kingking said:
I watch so many analysis of matches
Juventus played a 4-3-3 against united when attacking.. there wingers played a AML/AMR postion and stood above the CM
however when defending they dropped into a 4-4-2..
All i want is a modern representation of football where the manager can ask there players to defend in a different position (AML into a ML) then there attacking position
I have played like this in the current FM and all the previous FMs for that matter. It's NB very easy to set up like this. All you need to do is ask for help in the tactics forum.
0 -
4 hours ago, kingking said:
Yes you are right, i agree with you, i understand you can change the shape of your in-possession formation by changing the roles and instructions of your default out-of-possession FM Formation
however that approach is not the best because your in-possession shape is not very clearly defined (structured) as it should, also the approach is difficult and hard for the A.I and average FMer to understand and utilize.
I believe in modern football a manager has a formation when in-possession, and a formation when out-of-possession.
a better approach, for future FM.. to improve the game and maintain low exploitation, high modern reflection of football and make it easier for the user and ai to understand
is to allow the user to choose 1 of 4 basic formations when out-of-possession
- your default attacking formation (e.g. 4-2-3-1)
- 4-4-2,
- 4-5-1
- 4-1-4-1
I'm sorry but there's just no need for two different formations as explained in detail above to you. The roles and duties can easily achieve this.
The game is already becoming more and more arcadey with each version and this spoon feeding needs to stop at some point.
0 -
6 hours ago, Dagenham_Dave said:
For example, why would you want a defensive winger in the AML/AMR slot? It's an wide, attacking position, it makes absolutely no sense to have that as a thing. I'd bet my last pound if such a thing actually existed, you'd never use it.
Didn't we use to have a 'Defensive forward' role for the most advanced position? And that too with the 'Defend' duty? Don't we have a 'Pressing forward' which is basically just a defensive forward renamed? And don't we now have a libero with attack duty? I don't see any reason not to have a defensive role for AMR/AML positions. Many people have requested it already.
0 -
6 hours ago, bradjsmith said:
Wierd in rl Liverpool play the gegenpress and yet don't get an injury in game per game
Liverpool IRL do not gegenpress for 90 minutes. They manage their press during the game based on how they are doing. Man City play possession football so they don't tire because they rest on the ball. It's actually unbelievable how good they are on the ball.
0 -
2 hours ago, Mr U Rosler said:
Picked up the game last night.
After reading the doom mongers on here I was a bit concerned about the match engine, but a rudimentary 433 (DM/IF’s), Balanced mentality with a nod towards a possession game (1 notch shorter passing & lower tempo) saw my non-league Stockport side average 65% possession, 75% pass completion with a good variety of goals including some nice through balls down the middle of the pitch.
No sign of excessive long shots, strikers are scoring at a nice rate and a mixture of attacks.
A pretty decent representation of a competent side, employing a sensible formation and mentality with basic player roles.
I think most people reporting ‘hoof ball’ are employing a more attacking mentality which we know affects tempo and passing range (although perhaps a bit too much this year) perhaps exacerbated by a tactic which see’s too few good passing options (i.e. players in space).
Stockport being part time, sometimes we only get 2 training sessions in a week so although I’ve had a good look around the training module there’s no point me interfering with that at the moment although I’m looking forward to getting stuck in to that when we go full time.
Main downsides so far is far post corners are not being defended. Also, I’m finding in-match visuals not quite smooth, slight jerkiness, just perceptible enough to be annoying. (not my GPU, it’s still present when I lower graphical settings). Both quick fixes hopefully.
With some impulsive venting on this thread, I think it’s important those with favourable opinions post here to make sure SI don’t throw the baby out with the bath water under a weight of often poorly informed negative opinions.
If you are enjoying it right now, don't forget that the game has reached this stage after a lot of tweaking and fixing based on the feedbacks since the beta was released.
0 -
- Popular Post
2 hours ago, Dagenham_Dave said:Seriously?
Your attitude towards other poster is absolutely terrible and your personal attacks are getting tiresome. I don't know how you are still allowed to post.
Everyone has different level of knowledge about FM and football in general and people can have different opinion than yours'. Learn to accept that.
20 -
Does 'frequently waste time' TI has any effect on overall passing urgency or is this instruction only active when play is not active?
0 -
Can someone confirm if the direct passing over the top in short passing and low tempo setting has been tamed? This is very important for me to help decide whether I'll enjoy and continue to play FM or not.
0 -
15 minutes ago, Neil Brock said:
No 'tweaks' or changelist, just the full game. Which will require a download. And will be different from the Pre-Release Beta
Will it use the ME1913?
0 -
Will there be further ME changes from 19.1 in the full release?
0 -
No problems with penalties for me.
0 -
These were the issues with 19.0 imo:
1) AI teams not able to challenge human gegenpressing teams.
2) Not enough ground level through balls.
3) Not much variety or patience in wide attacking play. Teams playing possession football need to patienly overload the wide areas to stretch narrow defences instead of running to the by-line and crossing.
The ME team has taken the feedbacks seriously and tried to deal with all of the above issues which is commendable. But now we have the knock-on effects in the other areas of ME and the issues in 19.1 are:
1) Too many direct passes even on short passing TI. Specially in transition.
2) Less patient build up play even on low tempo short passing style. You only need to see how many passes city's and Betis' defenders play among each other IRL. How do I replicate that in FM?
3) Not much variety or patience in wide attacking play. Teams playing possession football need to patienly overload the wide areas to stretch narrow defences instead of running to the by-line and crossing.
That's it. I believe the balanced ME is not far and we are nearly there. Although I also understand it may not be easy for the ME developers to balance this otherwise they would have done it by now. So I hope we both (userbase and developers) can find a compromise somewhere between.
I'll try to upload pkms if I can to help the developers.
3 -
The teams are playing direct passes in transition no matter what passing length is set in the TIs. As soon as they win the ball back they look to launch direct counters even if you don't want them to. Also the ball is being constantly switched from one flank to the other even if you don't want to play like that.
5
Football Manager 2020 - Feature Announcement Blogs
in Football Manager General Discussion
Posted · Edited by pats
When the play is in the final third, an inside forward will be looking to get into goal scoring positions off the ball (Salah) whereas an inverted winger will mostly be holding his position by staying wide and cut-in from there. (Sane and Sterling)