Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

SD

Members+
  • Content Count

    403
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About SD

  • Rank
    Amateur

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    Tottenham Hotspur

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. The winter update is approaching and I might do an at length post on Spurs players, but in case I don't there's something that I would really like to address. Harry Kane's downgrade to natural fitness from 18 to 13. In game, the natural fitness attribute affects three things, in order of importance. - condition recovery between matches - recovery time from injury - rate of decline of a player's physical attributes - due to things like injury, age, lack of playing time, holiday. Now, I don't necessarily disagree with his overall downgrade in the physical department, but the one to his natural fitness is completely unwarranted. Whenever he isn't injured, he usually plays every minute for both club and country, and without giving the impression his significantly off his best. What that does to his likelihood of injury is another story, but you don't see with him the type of dip in performance for example Dele has shown against Soton and Boro. Kane had his fair share of injuries last three seasons and every time he returned sooner than expected for that type of injury. Now I realize whether he was fit for the CL final is a big point of contention among Spurs fans, but the forecast for the earlier January injury he picked up against United was early to mid March, and he returned from it mid February - going on to score against Burnley, Southampton, Arsenal and Dortmund away. I will grant to you that an early, Rooney-like physical decline is a possibility due to the sheer minutes and beating Kane puts his body through. But at the same time it's hard to tell how much of Rooney's decline was due to playing in the PL from the age of 16, and how much was due to his lifestyle. The counter-example for that is Milner, who Kane resembles a lot more in being a consummate professional, who's also played an insane number of minutes in the PL and has had his fair share of injury problems, and yet is still kicking at the age of 34. And either way, the latter of the three is least important of the attribute's roles. As it stands Kane has a lower rating than someone like Rose, who struggles to start two consecutive games. Ndombele too, but his rating is the work of the Lyon researcher and it may still to give a definite verdict in his case. I would argue his injury proneness is not particularly high for a player who plays as many minutes as he does, but that's a harder argument to make in light of his recent hamstring tear - which is his first muscle injury in his professional career, all other injuries were impact injuries going all the way back to his metatarsal injury in his development years. The game already drastically increases the likelihood of injury for players with a high match load, his high determination, workrate and bravery for an attacker already increases the likelihood of finding himself in a bad challenge, representing him with a high injury proneness on top of that only double dips into the reasons for his recent injury problems. I think a very low injury proneness(2-3) but with a recurring injury to his right ankle is a better representation, because as it stands, in-game Harry constantly gets tight calves and hamstrings in pre-season which is not true to real life.
  2. Son looks unchanged from last year, which is really a shame. And I don't understand why the Spurs researcher insists on giving Dele high ratings at ST, he's never played what can be described as ST in FM terms. Second striker is his most advanced role, which in FM is at AM position. And it looks like the Lyon researcher did a terrible job with Ndombele's physicals. 16 Str is way too much, 14 Agi and 15 Bal is way too little. He doesn't seem fast enough to warrant 15 Acc/Pac either, but this one's not as much off the mark.
  3. Haven't bought the game yet so no access to Beta, how do players like Eriksen, Son, Dele look in terms of attributes compared to last year?
  4. Can't say I've noticed that, but I think it's an excellent addition. Everyone's been asking for late bloomers based off a few outliers, when "early decliners" are even more common in the real world.
  5. I think I'm on the same page with you here. I believe that in the real world there are far more players with high "strictly-footballing potential" and a big part of the reason why some make it while others don't are personality traits that are not strictly related to football but are otherwise just as genetically determined. But because these latter personality traits are hard to assess period, even more so in a 17 y/o with zero public profile(not to mention the ethics of that), researches are forced to over-state the difference in footballing-potential between the players who make it and the ones who do not.
  6. Note that in the system I envision PA would still be fixed at game creation, anything else and it's no longer PA. Just that in my time on these forums I noticed youngsters negative PAs are far less controversial than the fixed values of older players.
  7. I think part of the problem is the design decision to restrict variable PA to young players and the lack of tools to properly represent the uncertainty that comes from translating researcher's PPA into omniscient FM PA. Debates aside, I think it's unlikely the devs will move away from the PA system for practical reasons, they already have in place a network of researchers who do a more than satisfactory job, and building anything more complex from scratch would seriously stretch what you can expect from unpaid volunteers, both ethically as well as practically. Personally I'm in favor of loosening the PA ratings and having most players have variable PAs in the database(to differing degrees), while also making CA progression both harder as well as more random. Within the same game-world those PAs would still be fixed at the point of game creation. What would change is people's perception of the job researchers did with those players, it would essentially acknowledge there's a margin of error in their work. For me, the ideal system would have instead of a fixed PA, a PA range, a PA anchor value(where not redundant) and a distribution pattern(out of a few pre-set ones). Using Spurs players to explain how I envision that working in practice. Winks - 23 y/o, established player and too old for variable PA in the current system, but still a player who even his fans cannot come to an agreement on his ceiling. You could represent that by assigning him a PA range of 150-160, with a linear distribution. Foyth - 21 y/o, young enough for negative PA, but personally I feel he's someone who will either turn out to be elite or a running joke. You could represent that with a PA range of 140-170, but with a U shaped distribution. His PA will average out at 155, but on any one save it tend to be close to one of the extremes. Harvey White - 17 y/o, unknown player to most except Spurs fans. Hasn't showed enough to justify assigning him a high PA, but at the same time has showed anything to completely rule out he'd ever be a world class player in the game. To this player you could assign a wide range of say 120-170, with a bell shaped distribution, anchored to a value of 140. At game start, this player will most of the times be generated with a PA around 140, with a moderate chance being close to either 130 or 150, but also a slim chance of hitting the world class range of 160-170. Now, progression would still add another layer of variance to all that. Even if the PA system is left as it is, you can loosen up the PA assignments if you make progression more random, with the added side-effect that it would also bridge the huge gap between the human player and AI.
  8. It's encouraging you mention position, because I think the issue is particularly exacerbated for some positions and looking at the problem at a whole database level will conceal the extent it's affecting gameplay. In the original database both CA/PA are not spread equally between positions, so for example whereas top strikers have PAs/CAs in the 180s, top fullbacks are situated in the mid 160s. This is not even a tendency, it's a hard rule. There are literally no fullbacks, centre backs or defensive midfielders in the 180+ CA bracket, and it's been that way for at least a decade now. So while is well possible that when newgens are generated the PA spread is skewed towards attacking positions, but it's still not a hard rule the way it is in the original database, so in just a few years after game start the best players in the aforementioned positions will almost always be newgens. What's an immersion-breaking nuisance in case of attacking players(too many Messis), it becomes an almost gameplay-breaking issue for the affected positions, once you notice it. And you will notice even if you don't look under the hood, it's hard to miss that several years after game start there's a bunch of newgen fullbacks that are a tier above TAA or Robertson or Jordi Alba.
  9. Arsenal must have a hidden modifier to make them Arsenal.
  10. @plcarlos Looking good, sir. I have one question, where is Eriksen? You haven't sold Eriksen, have you? Someone with his professionalism and natural fitness should still be at his peak at 31.
  11. To add to what the previous posters have said, your Counter TI may also play a part. Your team will still occasionally counter without it, what it does is it decreases the threshold for them to attempt one. Now, counterattacks are high-risk/high-reward plays, that can result in high-quality chances but more often than not result in lost possession, often leading to a counter opportunity for the opposition when the turnover finds 8-9 of your players committed in their third. The trade off might be worth it if you are the inferior team and chances are hard to come by, but the more you dominate the game, the less worth it it becomes. Think about it this way. Say counter gains you 4-5 quality entries in the final third over the course of the match. But due to it's risky nature, the turnover also gives the opposition 2-3 counter opportunities. Now, when from open play your team already has 20 such chances, that's only a 20-25% increase, whereas the defending team who might otherwise have 2-3 chances from regular play, gets an 100% increase. TLDR: it's not to say you don't gain anything from the Counter TI, but depending on the circumstances the opposition may gain more, relatively speaking.
  12. The DLF dropping deep will generally create space for himself between the lines, but whereas in real life the opposition defender will sometimes choose shadow the DLF to deny him that space, that pretty much never happens in FM. That's not to say a DLF is ineffective, it's one of my favorite roles and he still pulls defenders out of position to an extent when they try to close him down after he has already received the ball.
  13. If you have the pace, and Man Utd does, the TI can certainly be useful against teams who play a high d-line or push up their fullbacks. I'd say your left IW and AF are in a good position to exploit those spaces.
  14. That's a fair point, it's definitely affecting the whole team, what I was questioning is to what degree can an improvement of that magnitude can be put down to the TI's synergy with the tactic or that role in particular and to what degree on other factors - squad quality, form, opposition tactics, variance. My guess is that opposition tactics also played a big part, the OP mentions both were inferior teams so there's a good chance both were set up defensively, sat deep and pressed little so there was little space available to exploit. To me instructions like Pass Into Space or Run At Defence/Dribble Less are rather situational and not core elements of a tactic.
  15. Could have something to do with it, in that if your DLF lacks pace he cannot contest balls into space and he'd be better off receiving the ball at his feet. But I still think it's mostly due to randomness, I doubt that instruction has that big of an effect on the performance of any one player.
×
×
  • Create New...