- Popular Post
Sneaky Pete
-
Posts
94 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Articles
FAQs
Online Manual
Support: Blocks
Support: Games
Bug Tracker
SIGames Manual (beta)
Profiles
Posts posted by Sneaky Pete
-
-
2 hours ago, Novem9 said:
sounds like not realistic tactic, but thanks for tips!
I mean, it's exactly what City do IRL under Guardiola, so it's pretty realistic.
1 -
Have to echo @limey150781 , this is definitely looking like a far better ME than the beta ME.
Far more risks being taken with the ball in buildup, good mixture of central and wide play. There are far too many passes in the ME overall, but I do feel like there's been a substantial reduction in the mindless keep-ball between CBs and GKs that plagued beta.
Wide forwards aren't quite cutting in as much as I'd perhaps like, but I've seen some lovely through balls pinged to my IFa attacking the channel already, which just wasn't happening during beta - definite improvement there.
"Cross More Often" roles remain too enthusiastic to mindlessly cross regardless of players in the box for my liking, but beyond that there's a good mixture of crosses and cutbacks, and crosses have a reasonably (low) completion percentage without it devolving into kick-ball-at-shin simulator like in FM21.
2 -
Bizarre. Both of those formations are very close - both in terms of shape, mentality, and instructions - to the stuff I use with my teams. Perhaps this is again a function of the disastrous underdog behaviour that's caused problems before? Saints and FGR are hardly prospective league champions, so the opposition might consistently be more willing to take risks with the ball against you.
1 -
2 hours ago, warlock said:
Yeah, even I have to admit that's indefensible. As well as being impossible to understand.
I probably owe @Sneaky Peteand @CARRERAan apology. I can only say I still haven't seen anything like it in any of my saves but I can't argue with those screenshots.
No apology needed - genuinely. I certainly could have been on better behaviour and very much respect that someone must play the role of Devil's Advocate lest the forum just become an echo chamber of ME moans.
For what it's worth I would be very interested to see how you are managing to avoid it, since the rest of us seem to experience it come Hell or high water. Perhaps seeing what you are doing differently - as I assume you must be - from the rest of us could help clue us (and the devs) on to what is going wrong in the ME when stuff like @yonko's screenshots happen.1 -
1 hour ago, fc.cadoni said:
Just to clear what Prevent Short GK Distribution: It's only activated if the opp GK has the ball to be pressed from a forward (most likely ST position); not the front line to press more opp defense.
I'm aware. However, without it, your team is often content to let CBs constantly pass the ball back to the GK against defensive sides that are simply trying to park the bus.
They also tend to allow the GK to distribute short, which is how the endless CB passing carousel often starts in FM22.
0 -
7 hours ago, warlock said:
Did I? I merely objected to his view that the match engine "is quite clearly broken" (his words) and expressed my own opinion to the contrary. He then mentioned a couple of specific problems and, this being the tactics discussion forum, I asked a couple of questions about his tactical approach, what his tactic looked like, how many players he used in the press. His reply was only to the effect that tactical discussion was pointless because SI have already acknowledged there's a problem. But all I can see in links is SI saying they'll look at it to see if there's a problem, which isn't the same thing.
This would be a reasonable critique if you had engaged with some of that stats I brought up. I don't really particularly care to entertain "well, in my opinion" as a response to the absolute smorgasbord of available (and presented) evidence demonstrating CBs with passing completion percentages and passes/game outside the bounds of the extraordinary, let alone the ordinary. Furthermore, if this:
On 26/10/2021 at 16:02, Kyle Brown said:Thanks all for the examples, it's genuinely really helpful. The issue is still with the Match team, but rest assured they'll do their best to make tweaks and changes soon.
isn't the devs clear-as-day acknowledging the problem, I simply don't know what is and someone will have to enlighten me.
I get that this is the T&T forum where "It's your tactics, mate" is the holy mantra - as it ought to be - but the ME does in fact have some peculiarities every year, as the ME is never (nor should it be expected to be!) perfect. It is reasonable to acknowledge those peculiarities where they occur, as it gives some indications as to problems that can be fixed by clever tactics, and problems that cannot consistently be fixed because they are inherent to the game. In FM21, for example, no amount of berating, cajoling, or pleading is going to fix poor header accuracy from strikers and awful crossing completion percentages - that's just a peculiarity of that particular FM edition. The same goes for central play in FM19-20.
It is every bit as nonsensical to blame nothing on the ME as it is to blame everything on the ME, and in trying to avoid the latter we must be very careful not to fall into the former.1 -
On 29/10/2021 at 10:41, DarJ said:
I'll have to disagree with this only because you're playing a very top heavy formation, all you will end up doing is congesting the middle.
This doesn't necessarily have to be the case, although it is definitely a risk. You can absolutely create a central overload, but since there will typically be 2 CBs + 2-3 midfielders in that area, you have to commit a silly amount of players to the central area to overload it consistently.
It's much easier to consistently overload one of the half-spaces. An IF-A+Mez-A on the same side paired with e.g. a WBs and a DLFs will pretty consistently create 3-on-2 situations where the FB and CB are wrong no matter what decision they make.
0 -
13 minutes ago, warlock said:
You say the ME is broken, but you offer no information about why you think so. Show us your tactics, tell us what you've tried to solve the problem
I already told you - it's an acknowledged issue with the ME by the devs themselves, as evidenced by several Bug Tracker threads that are literally chock-full of examples of the problem and have multiple dev comments acknowledging the issue. See e.g. this thread.
Can it be mitigated somewhat by the right tactics? Of course. But fundamentally there is a very big issue with CBs and how the press does (or rather, doesn't) affect them right now.
2 -
1 minute ago, warlock said:
Why are they not being pressed?
Because the pressing system fundamentally doesn't work properly in the current beta ME.
Even if you set pressing to max and tick "Prevent Short GK Distribution" - hell, even if you put individual pressing triggers on every opponent CB - your players will sit back and not consistently press the opposition CBs. Your CBs will similarly not be pressed consistently.
If you check the Bug Tracker forum you'll see that this and CB passing behaviour are both known and acknowledged issues that the ME team are trying to fix.
4 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
2 minutes ago, warlock said:In your opinion. In my opinion, there's little wrong with possession in game. I never play for possession, I play to win games but if I can get 55-60% possession without even trying I genuinely don't see what the problem is.
You don't see the problem with CBs - even CBs with single-digit relevant technical and mental stats - handily completing 100+ passes with 98%+ completion every game?
That's the root of the current possession issues in the beta, for the record - it's CBs just passing the ball back and forth between themselves and never being pressed.
That doesn't mean that the player can't get possession - after all, your CBs will do the exact same thing - but it does mean the pressing system doesn't work properly and CBs very clearly behave in a way that has absolutely nothing to do with reality.
11 -
16 hours ago, RTHerringbone said:
SI never confirm specific ME updates in advance. It's on their radar but they won't commit to fixing specific issues as they're usually really hard to fix. They will, however, be working on it.
I mean, this one they kind of have to fix. The ME is quite literally broken so long as this is an issue.
0 -
FM22 has some very clear issues that the ME team are obviously working to fix, and if you just compare them right now FM21 probably takes the cake.
However, there's just no question that the new animation engine has given the FM22 ME (and future MEs) potential that is leaps and bounds beyond what FM21 could ever accomplish. There's just fundamentally some stuff this ME can recreate that no preceding ME ever could.
2 -
3 minutes ago, LucasBR said:
I might be wrong here but if a player has good finishing stats consequently it should have a good free-kick taking and vice-versa, no?
Not necessarily. The two are correlated, in the sense that they both tend to presuppose good technical ability, but that correlation is far from perfect.
I wouldn't want Pippo Inzaghi taking any free kicks for my team, for example.
1 -
19 minutes ago, UI_Riven said:
Yes, the match engine currently is screwed... When you watch the game on "full match" mode, you'll realise the AI CB and BK just pass the ball around without ever attacking. It's probably gonna get fixed before the full game releases
This is unfortunately it, yeah. If you have a gander at some of the bug tracker threads you'll see CBs are regularly completing 100+ passes each at close to 100% completion.
I trust it'll be fixed before release but right now your best bet in terms of possession is probably pressing high with a formation that has more players in the striker and AM strata than the AI has CBs.
2 -
27 minutes ago, SebastianRO said:
It all boils down to what you enjoy about football manager. FM22 is a welcomed QoL improvement over FM21 and that's a nice positive. For me and other like me, match engine is everything. I could play this game without media, social aspects, etc. All I care about is the match engine, as that is the only thing that can really keep me immersed for hours. This is the reason for why I spot these things in a heartbeat. If you enjoy more aspects of the game, with not a huge focus on match engine, then you will probably love FM22 and can be more patient than me in waiting for a "fix" to the match engine. I for one, have just loaded up FM21 and play it until an update / full version comes out for FM22.
It's very interesting how people can have wildly different issues with the same ME. While I acknowledge that there probably is too little central play in FM22 compared to FM21 (and real life), FM22 is a far more enjoyable match engine for me than FM21.
Why? Cutbacks. Wide players in FM21 are utterly moronic and simply will not cut the ball back properly 99% of the time, preferring to cannon it off the shins of a defender every time.
In FM22, I see goals that simply never happen in FM21. A recent highlight had my DLP finding my RW with a deep diagonal ball, with the RW then making a point turn on the byline and passing it back for an onrushing CM to slot it into the bottom corner. In 700 hours of FM21 I have never seen that goal, despite using the same tactic and the same team as in FM22.
4 -
Mfw @PhilT's clock has long since counted down to zero but the Beta isn't here yet
0 -
I don't hate your 4-2-3-1 but would definitely make a few subtle changes.
Specifically, I would flip your midfielders (so the BBM can underlap the Ws) and possibly change your LB to an IWBd.
This way you still get the defining 4-2-3-1 double pivot in possession, while your Ws provides width, and your BBM becomes an extra man in the left half-space or box proper.
I also suspect @Jack722 is right about Maxi Gomez and would consider a switch to DLFa or TMa - particularly since you have runners from deep in your AMa and BBM, so you want Gomez to provide some kind of hold-up play for them.
0 -
7 minutes ago, Tsuru said:
a Treq with a Poacher on a 4411
I actually like this combination quite a lot too, but ironically it's because the poacher does a lot of DLF-like stuff in the buildup.
He obviously stays high, but unless he has PPMs or TIs to do so he doesn't go running the channels willy-nilly, and unlike the CFa he's not going to try all sorts of weird stuff with the ball.
0 -
3 minutes ago, jdubsnz said:
Not sure if AF is the right pairing for a trequartista?
I generally prefer DLFa with TQa. That way you'll see the TQ release the DLF into space and the TQ overlapping the DLF when the DLF comes deep.
I'm not a fan of CFa with TQa - it can work with exceptionally intelligent players, but a lot of the time it results in "too many cooks in the kitchen" phenomenon since they both have basically limitless creative freedom.
0 -
22 hours ago, jdubsnz said:
Any thoughts? Creating lots of chances but not putting anything away
It looks like Caputo is consistently isolated and your team is struggling to find him. Many of the Italian teams play 3ATB and I find AF tends to be an absolutely awful role against these teams - CBs in FM21 tend to just sit AFK in their own half when their team has the ball, so countering against them can be super hard with a single striker.
"Very Narrow" also seems like a recipe for frustration against 3ATB teams, especially since wide players in the AM strata already sit very narrow when their team has the ball.
Late edit: I would also consider moving Damsgaard to a more central role and finding a pacier player to play that IFs position for you. I might be biased by watching him IRL, but Damsgaard IMO is not quick enough to play on the wing.
1 -
1 hour ago, Haribo1681 said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't WBsu only hard coded to 'get further forward' and 'run wide with the ball'?
You are correct. The problem isn't WBs' hard-coded instructions, it's that you can't recreate the off-the-ball movement (which you do want) of e.g. a CWBa or WBa without also getting the mindless crossing.
I'd love to be able to recreate a Jordi Alba/Dani Alves-type fullback that absolutely legs it up the pitch like a mob is chasing them and is constantly looking to get to the byline, but currently FM simply will not let me do that without also tying me to the utterly cancerous "cross more" hardcoded instruction.
2 hours ago, Tsuru said:So the role itself exists, but we don´t see anything similar in AML/AMR positions.
Yes, this has been a gripe of mine for several FM editions. The WM roles are fantastic, but they sit too low in the defensive phase for some pressing systems. Adding more or less exactly the WM role in the AM strata would be huge for the game - if for no other reason than finally giving us an AML/AMR role without "dribble more" that isn't also a weird specialty role like AP or WTM.
3 -
6 hours ago, Johnny Ace said:
It's a piece of cake to win the possession battle when you have a much better team than the opposition, that's why Barca smashed teams then, they had a phenomenal team. I'm sure they used to get like 70% in some games but that's pretty difficult to achieve in FM, I won't say impossible but it's close, possession in FM is worked differently to real life
You're kind of burying the lede here, though. @guttea makes a very reasonable point that IMO points to a huge flaw in the available FB/WB roles in FM21 - there is no fullback role that comes high and wide, dribbles aggressively, but isn't mindlessly looking to cross at the first opportunity. Your best bet at recreating Dani Alves/Jordi Alba is probably a WBs with "Cross Less", but that still won't necessarily get as high and wide as quickly as it should.
IMO "cross more" as a hardcoded instruction needs to be removed from the game entirely. It should remain as a toggleable option, absolutely - sometimes you do just want your winger to ping in 400 crosses for your target man - but it has no business whatsoever being a hardcoded instruction for any role in the game. That just doesn't reflect modern football.
This is particularly problematic because of the recurring issues with wide forwards sitting very narrow in the attacking phase - it's genuinely very difficult to create width like Man City/Liverpool/etc do in real life without it resulting in a crossing fiesta.
0 -
13 minutes ago, Haribo1681 said:
That’s really good to know - I think he’s rated as ‘accomplished’ at CM so definitely worth a go.
I originally bought him to be a combined creative and goal scoring threat from AM but he never really took off in the role and I picked up other CMs in the interim so gravitated towards playing 4-3-3.
Do you think he might be potentially effective as my right-side CM, playing as a CMa alongside an APs?
I think he's likely to be much better as a CMa than any other role in your current setup, yes. He's basically tailor-made for the role, if you ask me. 15 str, 15 bravery, 17 aggression, 17 OtB, and 16 anticipation; Zaniolo was born to attack the box and get on the end of crosses and pullbacks.
IMO the reason he's putting in mediocre-to-awful performances in your current system is that the IFa is an individualist that needs to be able to trounce his man in a 1v1, and Zaniolo just doesn't have the raw pace and trickiness to consistently do that against top-level defenders. Someone like Leon Bailey would be the archetypical player in that role for me, rather than a brawny but intelligent plodder like Zaniolo, even though Zaniolo is undoubtedly the better footballer overall.
In general you have to remember that "attributes across the board" are nowhere near as important as "attributes required to fulfill specific role in my system".
0 -
13 minutes ago, Haribo1681 said:
Yeah, it's frustrating because his attributes mark him out as being an excellent IFs or IFa, but he's been totally ineffective - I was hoping to encourage that particular trait and see him trying shots from around the edge or using his 'makes late runs into the box' trait to get on the end of crosses, but he's never really done either much or consistently. It's a strange one (and probably down to my tactics), but he just hasn't ever really turned up as I'd hoped.
Do they, though?
IMO he lacks one completely critical attribute - acceleration, which is frankly outright bad for a title-challenging team at a mere 13 - to play a goal-seeking role on the wing.
For me Zaniolo has to be a central player or a primarily creative player. In my experience FM's ME really punishes wide players - particularly ones with attacking roles - for lacking pace. They need that burst to slip past the CB/FB, and at 13 acceleration and 15 pace Zaniolo is actually slower than many defenders in the league.
3
*Official* Football Manager 2022 Feedback Thread
in Football Manager General Discussion
Posted · Edited by Sneaky Pete
Any programmer worth their salt will tell you that, if this is the case, then that in and of itself is a huge issue and warrants considering a refactor.
Being a "work of many years" is generally not a positive quality, as far as code goes. What constitutes good programming has evolved exponentially over the last couple of decades. 15 years back we didn't have Git and "unit tests" were a city in Fukuoka Prefecture. By virtue of its age alone, irrespective of whether it was written by very competent programmers, much of any 10+ year old code is likely utter garbage that the programmers involved would kill to be allowed to refactor.
Because, in the same vein as my response to another part of your post, it would be written according to modern standards and best practices, rather than being 10+ years of cobbled-together tech debt-infested FrankenCode. And just to make it clear, this isn't a hit job on SI or their ME team at all. I'm sure they're very good at their jobs, but that's just the nature of the business. Software products generally get harder and harder to maintain - let alone expand - with every year that passes since their inception because you inevitably accumulate tech debt, scope creep, etc.
Edit: And just to be clear, as with every other business, Sports Interactive faces the unenviable issue of "what makes for good code" and "what makes for good business" often being completely orthogonal to each other.