Jump to content

goranm

Members+
  • Content Count

    120
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

77 "There's no crying in baseball"

About goranm

  • Rank
    Amateur

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Yes. SSD's are expensive and people on a budget still go with the option that loads up your system in 40 seconds instead of the 2 to 3 times more expensive option that loads the system in 5 seconds.
  2. Fifa is also heavily criticized for that, especially Fifa21, so it's not like Fifa gets a pass, so I'm not sure what you are arguing here. People can be unhappy with the progress of both games.
  3. Well I'm a mathematician by profession, so stats and figuring out how black boxes work are interesting to me. But I understand if numbers are difficult for you
  4. Not with a very high degree of certainty with that one particular example, however I've ran hundreds of such examples and what was said is consistent with what I've observed.
  5. It's not bizarre, the ME and weather prediction models work on the same principle, they're both a system of equations in which some, but not all variables take random values. Both take fixed numbers as input and produce an output, they don't produce the same output every time the same input is fed into them. So by your argument weather prediction models wouldn't work. It proves that the random part of the ME isn't very influential for the final result. The probability for a 50/50 match to go to the same side 37 times in a row is practically zero. Even if one side has a 90% chance to wi
  6. I've never said that medical trials are conducted with absolute randomness, don't know where you concluded that from. And no, you don't need to know how much uncertainty is involved to run tests, otherwise studying black box events and reverse engineering, and in general the study of any kind of random or apparently random phenomena would be impossible.
  7. One game doesn't, but 38 are telling, even if they're the same teams The probability that in a 50/50 match the same side wins 37 times in a row is essentially 0. Even if England was a 90% favourite, the chance that they would win 37 in a row is just 2%.
  8. I'm not claiming that it works like that, you've misunderstood something (I just realised this might have been a reply to OP and not me, but I'll leave it here). The entire point is to show that the ME is independent of the viewing mode. OP can change viewing mode as much as they want in one set of 100 games, and in the other set of 100 games keep it on only full throughout, or only on key throughout. If their claim is true, there should be a noticeable difference in the number of CCCs between the two sets of 100 games that can't be explained by randomness. But there isn't going to be one.
  9. Except what I'm describing is how for example medicine is tested against a (side)effect that was random and one that wasn't, or a placebo effect, or how weather prediction is done. The same medicine goes into 100 different humans with 7000 different organs which follow the same basic rules yet we know how to differentiate between random and non-random effects, and we are able to tell with which probability distribution does a random effect happen. Similarly, for weather prediction we plug in the same initial conditions (same teams) millions of times into a computer model (the ME), and this mod
  10. There is a way to prove you wrong (or maybe right), but you have to do the work: play the same match 100 times on key highlights without changing anything (maybe let your assman control the match) and keep all the data (result, stats and performance). Then play the same match 100 times on comprehensive/full without changing anything and keep all the data. Then compare the two sets of data. If averages are similar over both sets of data, for example in both cases you win around 60% of the time, you're wrong. If there is a significant difference that can't be explained by randomness, for example
  11. There are no guides in the ME AI & Tactics bugs forum.
  12. Clearly you have not understood anything I wrote because this is not what I'm saying at all. Edit: I find it a bit troubling that a mod or an admin edited my post and removed the two sentences in which I criticize a moderators dismissive tone and SI's standards for appointing mods, without notifying me that they've edited it. As far as I know, I was not breaking any rules, and as far as I know, mods are not beyond criticism.
  13. The low conversion rate of strikers converting CCC's and otherwise close range shots literally has the tag known issue in the bugs forum, hence a bug recognised by SI devs. I find it very bizarre that any mod, let alone a mod for the tactics forum, would deny this. It's one of the most reported bugs in the forum as well. It would not make sense to you, but it's not non-sense. Plenty of players are playing the game in the way that OP is describing, i.e. they only view the key highlights of a match. The OP is essentially saying to not prioritize the ME over other aspects of the game. And
  14. What the OP is saying doesn't have anything to do with creating tactics that work. It's about the depth of the game outside the ME. You're dismissing what they're saying by framing it as complaining, when they're not, and not knowing how to play the game, when you have no idea how good they are at the game, all under an SI badge. The ME has bugs, it has some bugs that get fixed and it has bugs that have been around for a while and continue to pop up. No matter how well you know the game, that isn't going to change e.g. the inability of strikers to convert clear cut chances. This is the most ob
  15. I don't understand your reply at all. How is this a "rather" to what you've quoted? What OP is saying is fact, not an excuse: FM20 ME at its launch had some of the same bugs that FM19 had at its launch and at its final version. The next iteration of FM does not fix all bugs of the previous, nor is it reasonable to expected such a thing. Allegations of ME bugs? No, these are well documented in the bugs forums, that's why we have a bugs forum specifically for the ME. How can such a dismissive reply come from someone with a SI badge?
×
×
  • Create New...