Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About fmnatic

  • Rank
  1. @Russell Hammant Do you need further clarification. By reading the comments , its unclear if the issue has been acknowledged and is clear to the SI team. (Your Guide above did not work for me).
  2. Ran into this bug in the release. Am stuck with all these schedules and no delete button. Further the solution posted by SI staff , when the bug was raised in the Beta , doesn't work as this list doesn't show there.
  3. Faced that crash multiple times today attaching all the dumps. ftp filename /fm/game-save/monfc_crash.fm 23rd Aug 2017 canadaian championship v/s FC Toronto. crashes if i give a tactical briefing and later i see a screen saying "this is not a suitable time for a briefing" . Then it crashes on continue (before the team selection for the above mentioned match.) FM 2018 v18.3.0.1069563 (2018.03.02 14.41.11).dmp FM 2018 v18.3.0.1069563 (2018.03.02 14.55.11).dmp FM 2018 v18.3.0.1069563 (2018.03.02 22.57.45).dmp
  4. No custom skins. It crashes on the inbox. I get a error message for the pre-match talk a stadium background and a "this is not a suitable time....". It crashes after continue and also if i try to save at that point. I get an error message about a dump file being generated.
  5. I'm getting a crash where i see a screen saying something like "this is not a suitable time for briefing" and it crashes when i continue. This after i already gave the pre-match team talk. It was persistent and i could workaround by not giving the pre-match team talk.
  6. @Robioto FYI @John_Yuki confirmed that other attributes were being nerfed in the newcastle tests.
  7. If i understand the flaw in the test correctly. Bluesoul instead of constructing a table of the value of each attribute towards team performance inadvertently created a table of attribute weighting i.e. the ability point costs of attributes. referring to the first table here: (Ergo bravery, heading, workrate have lower weighting while positioning, agility, decisions have a higher weighting.) https://strikerless.com/2017/12/16/fm18-labs-we-need-to-talk-about-decisions/
  8. @forameuss @EdL I found the original test too artificial , setting decisions to a fixed value and leaving other attributes as 10. The bigger concern is the newcastle tests carried out later. These seem to be free of artificial constraints. Not sure if the lowered other attributes is an issue here too. https://strikerless.com/2017/12/18/fm18-labs-the-final-decisions-results/
  9. Further a quick database search for players with decisions>18 shows this is accompanied by high other attributes (typically 5-6 attributes >17) in the database. So the underperformance of 20 decision team is not concerning. However the outperformance of the decisions=1 team , is really a concern. Decisions attribute tends to rise with age, so the older players may be underperforming. Being a member of the play the kids brigade, i may actually be gaining from this.
  10. I too shared this criticism of the test. Changing decisions in isolation may not be a useful test, if the match engine uses it conjunction with other variables. For me the true concern raised by bluesoul's work is not that teams with decisions 20 are performing badly. (This could just be the outcome of other attributes in conjunction with decisions.) For me the real concern is lowering decisions to 1 , across a real database team , creates a better performing team.
  11. The match engine could possibly just simulate future outcomes, and then go with a good/better outcome.
  12. While it is possible the decisions attribute is broken when simulating match results. It seems to work fine in the match engine. I checked my season stats v/s decision attribute. Guess what? the decision stat lines up perfectly with the number of key passes across the season for the player. (The technique and first touch attributes seem to help too.) My take is the test is broken in two ways. 1. It assumes better decisions is better for every player. This is probably not true. A player with high decisions is going to try some ambitious play , unachievable without high technique, first touch, passing attributes. I.e. the test creates armchair geniuses with no ability to actually achieve their decision. 2. Testing attributes in isolation is not a good idea. In the top teir AC milan team i am playing the max decision attribute i see is 15 . These players have an average of 15 for passing, technique, first touch. Compare with the test where avg attributes are 10 and decision is 20.
  13. The set piece creator, is really a slog to work through especially with the multiple types of free kick set pieces. Further the set pieces do not intelligently carry over when a formation is modified or substitutions are made. (I moved a player from CM to DM, and the whole set piece gets discarded.). Other than that i have noticed a mysterious tendency to end up with two people marking the posts, and i suspect duplication of other roles.(probably because a subbed on player , has a different role from the subbed off one.) I would like to propose an alternate way of setting up set piece tactics. This is two fold. 1. Player set piece roles - I should be able to just set the preferred roles for a player in different set pieces , this a priority ordered list. (and importantly is not tied to the formation and tactic) for eg. For a tall slow player with good marking For defensive corners-> Man Mark Tall player, Man Mark Small Player, Go Back For an playmaker in Attacking corners -> Offer short option, lurk outside box, stay back. 2. When creating a set peice, I should just be able to specify the set piece roles. This is the same as the current UI, except i would not specify the specific player.i.e. i would say 1 player disrupt wall and not DL disrupt wall. (this too is not tied to the formation and tactic, though i could assign a specific set piece tactic to a specific formation/tactic.) For eg. Attacking Free Kick indirect 2 players go forward. 2 stand with taker 1 disrupt wall At the time of the set piece in match, the players would arrange themselves according to their preferred roles and the players needed for the set piece tactic. (Perhaps aided by decisions attribute and the leadership of the team leaders/communication of the GK.) This approach would let the set pieces work with multiple formations, and allow setup of multiple set-pieces not tied to the tactic. This could be even be expanded to analytics and stats specific to each set piece setup.
  14. Haven't seen an DFK in 40 matches, and i got one just now. Glad that its not a broken.
  15. It could just be my save, and player form. Want to see if others are facing the issue.
  • Create New...