Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About Sampsiceramos

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. It has gotten somewhat better, from the games I've played. Basically, the completely idiotic "ME WIDE TINY BRAIN ONLY ALLOW CROSS BALL" behaviour has been curbed somewhat, which was what infuriated me the most on beta, and the quality of crosses seems somewhat higher, among other things because players cross from better positions. That said, I still see 45-55 crosses per game with a strategy intended not to cross a whole lot. Even accounting for the differing methods of tallying it's still 2-3x what I feel like I should be seeing, but I honestly feel like it's a pure and simple result of the completely broken central play and off-the-ball movement in the final third, which we probably won't see fixed before 2020. We're seeing 50+ crosses against parked busses in this ME because the current iteration of the ME simply doesn't allow for any other way of consistently creating chances against deep-sitting teams. The ME is probably pretty good at this point if you mostly play low-reputation sides, but I still think it's fundamentally unenjoyable to play as a high-ranked team in FM19.
  2. Players in the current beta ME aren't making bad runs or running down cul-de-sacs because generally, when the ball gets into the attacking third, they're not making any runs at all. People aren't complaining about the quality of runs, they're complaining about the absence of runs. And for the record, the current beta ME would have Pep's Barcelona crossing into an empty box 50 times per game. Not really much of a simulation by my reckoning.
  3. Striker movement has, to SI's credit, gotten significantly better. There's a world of difference between F9 and DLF movement patterns on live and on beta - it's the first time I can remember the F9 role consistently behaving remotely close to how it does in real life. Of course, other attacking players are very far from adequately exploiting the space created by the new movement patterns, and through balls in central areas still appear to be a small Siberian hamlet outside Irkutsk, but in isolation the supporting striker roles look leagues better now. Unfortunately, this is all completely irrelevant unless the absurd number of crosses we're currently seeing is fixed. @optimusprimal82's post on the beta forum sums it up pretty well; 50+ crosses per game with sub-20% success rate for teams specifically told not to cross very often is the norm in the current beta iteration and kneecaps attacking play fundamentally.
  4. I think the stats speak for themselves. I know FM counts crosses in a somewhat different manner than IRL, which does lead to generally higher crossing numbers than IRL, but even accounting for corners, cutbacks (of which based on observation there are vanishingly few, I might add), 45 and 49 are too many, and 69 and 74 attempted crosses are flat-out outrageous for a team that doesn't have "pump ball into box", "hit early crosses" and passing length turned up to 11, never mind a team with wide players specifically instructed to cross less.
  5. Those crossing numbers are, to put it bluntly, preposterous - but unfortunately not out of line with what I'm seeing in my own beta games. There are two basic issues before we even start discussing the issue of player movement off the ball, as I see it: 1. Players overprioritize space out wide, both when selecting passing targets and when dribbling. IFs and IWs who receive the ball with space to dribble are more likely to cut towards the byline like a traditional winger than go inside - and this goes even for players like Robben who might as well have a peg for their non-dominant leg. Additionally, players are far too willing to attempt a cross with their weak foot, even when said weak foot is terrible, or they outright have the "avoids weaker foot" PPM. 2. Players completely lose the plot once they're out wide and have the ball. It seems borderline irrelevant what team settings are, whether they have players in support, and perhaps most egregiously, whether there are even any teammates in the box. If they have the ball wide, 9/10 times they're going to attempt to cross it - and right now the frequency of blocked crosses is arguably too high to boot. Players routinely cut back upfield from wide positions in real life, but in the current beta ME this simply does not ever happen. Once they have it out wide, they're going to go towards the byline, they're going to cross whether it's on their weak foot or not, and more often than not it's going to hit the first defender. Combine these two issues with the wonky off-the-ball movement described by OP in this thread and you've got a recipe for 30+ crosses per half despite being told to cross less.
  6. Watch a game or two on Comprehensive Highlights and you'll see players consistently **** the ball away for no good reason as soon as they get it in the wide areas of the attacking 3rd; regardless of TIs, PIs, ratio of teammates/opponents in the box, etc, players are hard-wired to yeet the ball into the box ASAP when they get it wide. What @optimusprimal82 said in his excellent post is spot-on accurate, and his post in the Beta forum sheds light on other, arguably even more worrying, stuff about the movement of wide players.
  7. It hasn't changed, per se, but the idea of pinning back the defense has always been around, and has always been particularly relevant for top sides that are going to face a lot of packed boxes. You simply cannot consistently create space behind the defense against teams that defend with 8-9 men in the box, so you take the space you're being given and use it depending on the squad you have available: if you have a Shrek-sized target man, you take the space a deep and narrow team is giving you on the wings, whip in crosses, and hope Shrek wins a header or three; if you have a team with wingers and midfielders that can slot it in from the top of the box, you take the space you're being given in front of the defense and force your opponents to either come forward and close down your players or give up the "golden zone". It's true that your striker might not look very involved in the play when you use him like so, but that doesn't mean it can't be incredibly effective. The risk of your striker becoming isolated is also somewhat smaller when you have multiple players in the AM strata, and will generally be winning the ball back far up the pitch. I'd rarely advise you to play an AF as a lone striker in a deep 4-5-1, for example, where the risk of him receiving the ball and having absolutely no options is far greater.
  8. I think you're trying to fit square pegs into round holes with your lineup in a couple of places. I don't think your strategy, structurally, needs major revision (in fact it's a lot more balanced than a lot of what I see people post), but there are a couple of points I would take a look at: 1. Have you chosen appropriate roles for Özil and Ramsey? The AP(A) role dribbles a fair amount, and does so quite aggressively, something that I don't think suits Özil's game. Similarly, Ramsey isn't really a complete, all-action midfielder so much as he's a withdrawn AM. I would try Özil as an AP(S) and Ramsey as a CM(A). It may seem like fairly aggressive role distributions, but you only have one fullback with an attack duty, and you have a dedicated holding midfielder. 2. What's the thought behind the supporting-role striker? You're Arsenal, so a lot (most, in this year's FM, it seems) of teams are going to well and truly park the bus against you. Having your striker drop deep so Bergwijn can attack the space behind him sounds great in theory, but that presupposes your opponents aren't just retreating to their own box as soon as they lose the ball. I would strongly consider giving the AF role, or a role that makes similarly aggressive runs, to your striker so he can pin back the defense. This should create space in front of the defense (which is where the space is going to be against low-block teams) for your CM(A) and your IFs - I just don't think you're consistently going to find space in behind, which is what the IF(A)/CF(S) duo is looking to manufacture in the first place.
  9. Are you on a streak of any kind atm? On a lossless streak in the league stretching double-digit games with Liverpool atm and just had two matches in a row after the patch where Arsenal and Palace respectively well and truly parked the bus on me. Not sure what Emery lining up at home with Elneny, Xhaka, and Torreira in a triple pivot and fullbacks that won't go forwards is about, but the absurdly and unrealistically defensive AI formations were an issue last year too, so not really too surprised.
  10. I'll address these point by point: 1. CBs still behave somewhat wonkily with a HB and a back 4. They split somewhat wider, but certainly do not behave as they really should. 2. Midfields seem appropriately compact in the defensive phase of the game. 3. IWBs now have all three duties available, and are not locked into any other PIs than Roam, IIRC - which makes excellent sense given that the role by its very nature roams from its position all the time. 4. The Carrilero and Mezzala roles work very well, although it's kind of frustrating that the Mezzala is locked into risky passes. The new Carrilero role is particularly nice because Carrileros will actually defend as central midfielders are supposed to in narrow formations like the 4-4-2 diamond; these now look far more realistic in the defensive phase and generally seem less vulnerable to overloads on the flanks when Carrileros are used in the two central midfield positions. 5. The Segundo Volante works roughly as described, but the attack duty is locked into shooting more often, which is an absolutely dreadful PI given the incumbent state of long-shot mechanics.
  11. This, right here, this is ****ing it. This is the stuff that makes the game borderline-insufferable to me this year. Just have a gander at it for a second: Mata is perfectly warranted in taking the shot. He's not (at least visibly) tightly marked, he's right at the top of the box, and he takes it with his strong foot. The only factors that should noticeably be impacting shot quality here are Mata's mentals (which if memory serves are more than adequate) and the fact that he arguably takes it rather quickly. Still, while not a quality chance necessarily (in terms of xG), this is absolutely a situation from which I would expect an excellent player like Mata to test the keeper. ... and he puts it out of touch via the right sideline. This shot is so off-target that off-target isn't even an adequate descriptor any more. The player might as well have been aiming at something in an entirely different dimension! It's a nifty little guessing game at this point: is he having a crack at goal, or trying to put a crack in Mars' polar ice caps? Mind you, this isn't something that happens infrequently, either. This isn't some freak bug. Egregiously, outrageously awful shots like this aren't common - but they're not uncommon, either. It beggars belief to me that an issue like this has slipped through QA. @shadster If you haven't already, I definitely think this is one for the bugs forum.
  12. While I generally echo the sentiment that you have all the same tools at your disposal as the AI does, and that any issues with your fullbacks are almost certainly tactical/player quality ones, I do have to chuckle heartily at the thought of Adama Traoré ever getting 25 assists. He has to be the real-life footballer with the greatest gap between technical skill and footballing intelligence; the definition of all flash and no end product, he doesn't so much dribble into cul-de-sacs as the hungering void of his lacking football intelligence creates cul-de-sacs wherever he goes. Perhaps a discussion of how high pace plays out in the ME is warranted if this is reproducible, and not simply a gross statistical outlier - there is certainly no world in which Adama Traoré should be producing like this.
  13. I'm not intimately familiar with Talisca's stats or PPMs - could he be getting a low rating because he's getting into the box now, but losing all his aerial duels? You also have to make sure that crosses are arriving in a way that your player in the box can actually win.
  14. Which is exactly why I said "unless you close down high" - the fact that it's counterable doesn't mean that the pattern of play isn't unrealistic. How often do you see Stoke come to WHL/Old Trafford/etc and neatly pass the ball around their backline until pressured? Never - it's too risky. They keep the play far away from their own box and then retreat into their own half quickly as soon as possession is lost - but they don't pass the ball around at the back for ages. Edit: And there's a marked difference between "setting up defensively" (say something like a 4-5-1 DM with a pretty conservative mentality that looks to hit people on the counter) and "literally digging a trench in your own box and filling it with 9 players for 90 minutes". Teams of Anderlecht's calibre will do the former, but must say I have very rarely seen them do the latter, even in tense European games against big sides.
  • Create New...