kingking
-
Posts
513 -
Joined
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Forums
Articles
FAQs
Online Manual
Support: Blocks
Support: Games
Bug Tracker
SIGames Manual (beta)
Profiles
Posts posted by kingking
-
-
We need an option to delete history and data such as inboxes, premier league winners etc to speed up the game and save storage of the saved game.
0 -
if you are 50 years on the game, it slows down dramatically because you cannot delete or remove certain data such as inboxes, players and managers history, league historys etc
we need to be able to speed up the game and save storage, we need some option that allows us to speed up the game if a user is 30 years in his save
0 -
Individual Training Position automatically changes to there playing position randomly
this is a bug
hope someone has reported this
0 -
I cant wait for future FMs where pressing and marking is improved
we need an easier way to choose what type of marking or pressing we want, lets improve the tactical UI for Marking and Pressing
easier way to implement types of marking (e.g. man marking the whole team, or only strikers & midfielders)
and types of pressing (e.g. positional pressing)
it will help the A.I and the user
0 -
The A.I uses shouts during matches
however they are very poor and reluctant to use shouts to improve their players body language when drawing, losing, or even winning..
the A.Is team players mostly have composed body language without the desire to improve it or motivate it when drawing, losing, or even winning..
there needs to be an improve in how A.I uses shouts to improved players body language during matches
i'm currently beating the A.I however the manager is not finding any way to motivate their players body language for a long duration of time.
1 -
53 minutes ago, Rashidi said:
Those instructions make no sense to me, the tactic is so symmetrical your instruction to tell them to focus play down the left is left to a lot of decision making. First you have wingbacks who have a lot of creative freedom, playing within a structure that tells them to take more risks with what they do, then you tell your team to rush their play on top of that you tell each player to be as wide as possible during the transition play. Now your initial positioning down the left flank tells the CWB basically to be so high up the pitch they will need really good passing out of the back. Assuming they do you are also telling them to take every chance to play a through ball. You have zero consolidation of the ball. How can they focus play when they are just running off aimlessly into the opponents half WAITING for the ball? If there is no one in that area to help your team mates focus play down the left, or if that Winger is not a viable target, they will go to other parts of the pitch.
Ok I am going to stop here, before this becomes a full blown tactical post. You even have a distribute to flanks shout...damn, even the keeper is told at to hoof there...quickly even. So basically you have just said, here guys kick the ball to the left and lets hope the Winger can do something with it.
Thank you for the feedback, i'm trying to fix my tactics and experiment with different roles etc
0 -
18 minutes ago, rdbayly said:
As far as I know, all focusing play down a specific flank does is increase the mentality of the players on said flank (e.g. higher starting positions and regularity of forward runs). Seeing as the highest individual mentality a player has is 'very attacking' ; is it not the case that layering further attacking instruction on top makes no difference? Maybe someone can correct me if I'm mistaken, but it doesn't actually change decision making of players to pass to that flank. Personally, I've found that having roles like Mezzala / DLP / AP on the same side of the pitch is a far better way to build up on one flank before quickly switching play to the other. This seems to be the meta strategy to break down FM19 bus parking. It's how I score goals like this:
shouldn't focusing on the left side or right side be MORE encouraged in the ME, for example if i told my team to focus on the left side, i expect 70% focus on the left side.
i believe if a team is told to focus on a specific side there should be a 70% or 60% focus on that side.
0 -
1 hour ago, herne79 said:
Whether or not there is an ME issue here, there is certainly a question of expectation.
kingking has told his players to focus attacks down the left therefore the expectation is they'll do just that. Yet results show the majority of attacks going down the right instead.
There may or may not be valid reasons why it played out like that - no space being on the left thus play naturally gravitates to where the space actually is instead for example - but there can be a disconnect at times between tactical instructions, expected results and what actually happens.
Another well worn example is: "my players keep shooting from distance even though I use work ball into box". Again the expectation is it's some sort of magic instruction that stops players shooting so often and when they don't then reality doesn't match expectation. So there is often reason why it happens but that still doesn't address the disconnect.
TL;DR I can sympathise with kingking's frustrations. There may or may not be other tactical or ME reasons why play actually goes down the right, but when it does we can be left looking at the screen thinking "huh"?
@kingking Are these results a regular occurrence? Does the focus often look like that? And looking at your overall system you are very one dimensional and symmetrical, so other than telling your players to focus play down the left, what incentive do they have to actually do just that when there is no difference in how you set up each flank (other than personnel) and construct your attacks?
One other point - overlap left is possibly useless to you in that set up. Overlap increases your fullback's mentality a little and tells your wide players (not central midfielders) to hold up the ball a bit to wait for the overlapping fullback. Yet you are using a CWB (attack) so his mentality is already extremely high; a Winger (attack) at AML - which is again a very attack minded player (you r eally want him to hold up the ball?); and the Positive mentality which increases everybody's Mentality even more.
The results are regular, often they ignore my focus on attack, my incentive is to focus the attack towards my AML who is faster then my AMR
I will try and change the roles to make my AML/AMR hold the ball more
I will remove the overlapping instruction since my CWL/CWR has an attacking mentality
0 -
23 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:
This doesn't sound like a bug at all, but rather in how you set up. What did you choose? "Exploit Right Flank"? Whether it does get exploited depends on how you actually set up, tactically. Your roles, duties etc will all still determine how well that flank is set up and whether you're actually dangerous when attacking down that flank. Or maybe they do try and exploit that flank, but there's no space etc, so you don't see very many highlights of them attacking there?
Either way, that's where the tactics forum can certainly help.
I will experiment around a bit... maybe i have to lower tempo
0 -
I give up, going to report it to the bug forum, though it probably won't be fixed anytime soon since noone notices
The team don't listen to simple instructions of which side to attack,
I Tell them to attack on the left wing.. they don't listen and they mostly attack on the right wing
In real life teams are capable of listening to simple instructions such as which side to attack on and which man to mark.
The ME will never be fixed tbh. there are to many bugs
I'm Man City.
2 -
We need a feature where we can praise a group of players for training. it is unnecessarily tedious to individually praise 15 players
1 -
4 minutes ago, Rashidi said:
I just stick an advertisement out cos I don't like using staff search, feels like I am cheating
fair enough the advertisement feature is actually a nice touch, I will use that
i would still suggest to improve the staff search for future fms
I will make a feature request in the "FM Feature Request" forum
0 -
One flaw is that it is difficult to find good under 18s or under 23 staff members
when searching for staff there should be a separate option to search for staff that want to to manage for under 18s or 23s
0 -
SI Staff members don't even play the game themselves because many of these bugs don't even need to be posted by us, they are easily identified just by playing 1 season or 2
another bug i found is salary restrictions despite great finances.
I'm man city with amazing finances, however my wage salary is capped to low and i struggle to get top players.
0 -
We need different pressing styles and have an option to implement it easier
- man to man press
- zonel press
- inbetween passing lanes press
- 1-1 press or multiple-1 press
0 -
There used to be a bug where the wage limit for clubs like city was set to low (350k) despite how good the finances was, most good players ask for 450k-500k
is the bug still present?
0 -
-
I'm not the only one facing the Strikers "False Nine" Problem it has been reported before
The Problem.
The ST (False Nine) acts as a ST (Poacher) during the Final Third
ME EXAMPLE
Red Circle. The False Nine acts as a Poacher during the attacking phase.
What should happen.
The False Nine should act as a Roaming CAM
1. Position & Movement.
- Defend like as CAM (Support)
- Attack as a Roaming CAM (Support) during Build-Up and Final Third
2. Roam Around, Move Into Channel. To create space, support team-mates, and help create more options for player on the ball during attack
3. Hold Up the Ball. To allow players behind him and around him (AMLR/CM) to move forward
Messi acts as a CM and Sometimes a CAM during Tiki Taka days of being a False 9
0 -
FM is the only popular rpg/simulation where the users do not know what elements of the game actually do
No one can clearly and confidently define what certain elements do such as such as tempo, play for set pieces etc... there is no proper definition on what it actually does in the game such as
high tempo = more runs, more dribbling,
High Time-Wasting = Less Runs, More Holding Up the Ball
The tactic system needs a guide
4 -
(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?
0 -
41 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:
With ideas like gegenpressing there are benefits to defending in a 433 etc. 442 is the most popular way of defending, but not the only way.
Definitely scope to keep improving the TC now that the three phases are presented individually.
True
31 minutes ago, Dagenham_Dave said:That's how FM achieves the same results though, given it's a computer game, and not actually real life.
My advice to you, for what it's worth, is to try and simply enjoy the game with the tools you have.
Fair enough mate I will let this discussion rest , hope everyone has a nice day and enjoy FM!
0 -
40 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:
The main reluctance to agree with you is because you arent quite getting that what you ask for already exists. Its hard to get your head round... But you have to.
The formation within the TC is your defensive formation... If you want to defend as a 442, use 442. When it comes to attack you need to be creative with roles, duty and instructions.
Attack duty gives the player a higher base position than support, and defend duty is lower still. Attacking players will also be quicker to advance in transition... So this is how you create your attacking shape.
If you monitor the av pos w. Ball and w/o ball you can see two very different shapes (if you use the right roles and duties)
20 minutes ago, RTHerringbone said:@kingking the reason people are disagreeing with you is because what you're after just isn't required.
In real life, teams don't instantaneously morph from one formation to another as if they're using teleporters - that happens in transitional phases. As many have pointed out, the basic formation you choose in FM is your defensive formation and that doesn't mean that you'll rigidly retain that structure when you have the ball.
You guys are right i completely understand you can achieve 2 different formations through roles and instructions, however..
achieving 2 different formations through roles and instructions has limitations
- The A.I Struggles because it is complex. A.I doesn't achieve the benefit of defending in a 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 when playing a 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 because they don't have the intelligence to choose the right roles and instructions.
- your shape isn't clearly defined and isn't strongly shaped, its hard to tell what shape the team is going for sometimes.
- Sometimes Managers in real life don't operate like that, instead they tell there team to have a clearly defined shape such as 4-4-2 when defending instead of operating through roles and instructions .
0 -
13 minutes ago, Spedding said:
This is a feedback thread for fm19 can we keep it that way this is a feature request
I was giving feedback towards the FM19 ME and it concluded with a suggestion which a feedback can end with.
i am surprised about the the reluctance or anger towards this suggestion when it reflects modern football and how managers create tactics
Maybe we all have a different vision of how SI wants to improve the tactical system.
i thought we all wanted to make the tactical system have depth, be realistic, whilst making it user friendly for the A.I and User (e.g. tactical styles, player roles)
0 -
3 hours ago, pats said:
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.
4 hours ago, pats said: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.
5 hours ago, RocheBag said:Of course there is. You put him on attack duty. That's literally what roles and duties are for.
5 hours ago, RocheBag said:Why are you so convinced you lose the advantage of a 4-2-3-1 by playing the players at MR/ML? They can attack just fine from there.
5 hours ago, RocheBag said:...what in the world.
It isn't a workaround and it isn't "changing position". If you want the player to play like a MR then you play him at MR. Obviously.
In what universe do you play a player in one position, and then complain like he doesn't act like hes playing an entirely different position.
There are two options for a reason. They shouldn't act the same. It's up to you to choose which one you want.
The current system can be improved, we can add more depth and realism in the tactical system by doing this.
Suggestion
Have 2 formations during the tactical creation.
Your attacking formation when in-possession
- 4-3-3
Then allow the user to only choose 1 out of a 4 basic formations when creating the out-of-possession phase
- your default attacking formation (e.g. 4-2-3-1)
- 4-4-2,
- 4-5-1 (3 CM,ML,MR),
- 4-1-4-1 (1 CDM, 2 CM,2 ML/MR)
Reason
- Modern Football. Managers in a team instruct there team to have a Clearly defined formation when out-of-possession that is well structured such as 4-4-2 or 4-5-1
- Defending Benefits. Teams want to attack using a 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3, but maintain the amazing defending benefits of 4-4-2 or 4-5-1, because it is a solid shape that doesn't leave any gaps.
FM Current ME Limitation
You can change the shape of your in-possession formation by changing the roles and instructions of your default out-of-possession FM Formation but that isn't efficient because
- The A.I miss out of the defending benefits of having a 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 when out of possession. The A.I and User miss out of the amazing defending benefit of having a strong 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 when out of possession which teams that play 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 do
- Shape is not clearly defined and maintained. The Shape created through changing roles and instructions are not clearly structured or defined, you struggle to tell what formation you have when attacking.
- Lacks depth in the tactical system. Without the option of selecting a solid, structured formation makes the tactical system one dimensional, it lacks depth and doesn't represent modern football
Benefit
- Modern Football. improves reflection of modern football
- improves tactical systems depth and realism whilst maintaining low exploitation, . Improves Depth and realism in the Tactic System
- Improves A.I. because they can now utilize the benefits of having a 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 formation when defending.
0
Football Manager 2019 Official Feedback Thread
in Football Manager General Discussion
Posted · Edited by kingking
Ah ok newgens are a necessity, i guess fm in nature will bloat due to players retiring and becoming coaches..
no complaint here then