Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

82 "There's no crying in baseball"

About gonefading

  • Rank


  • Biography
    My first account on this page got banned for upvoting unpleasant, critical posts; however they claimed it was because I used an "alt". There has never been an apology from SI.

    ❓ What is a "shill"?

    ⚠ Shills (also known as astroturfers) are used to convey a fundamentally positive attitude towards a product, in order to manipulate the public opinion about this specific product. This is a legal gray area that is particularly popular with entertainment industry such as video game companies.

    ❓ How to identify shills?

    Shills tend to generalise and pick parts of a discussion that can guide them in their direction. You can recognise them by the fact that they always express themselves positively about the product, project their positive attitudes onto the entire user base (I like the product, so it is a good product that every other user must like), talk down negative opinions, ignore facts, advise contrarians to just deal with the state of the product and, finally, spend a lot of time reading and replying to posts on the forums — no normal user would ever do such a thing if he wasn't paid for it.

    They change their nicknames and avatars from time to time in order not to be recognised as a shill. Such accounts are often noticeable in the fact that they were created many years ago, or to the contrary, a short while ago, and suddenly show high levels of activity. They pretend that they are normal users who have years of experience with the product.

    💥 What is wrong with Football Manager 2020?

    • way too few goals per match / team
    • players not scoring enough goals
    • lack of variety in terms of possession and passing accuracy at both ends of the league table (way too compressed numbers)
    • small players with weak heading and aerial reach score almost as good as tall players
    • player morale system has huge flaws (sudden mood swings, player morale getting stuck)
    • random factors too extreme
    • lack of central play
    • too many goals scored via set pieces and headers
    • too many assists via set pieces and crosses
    • too many crosses
    • too many shots on target
    • way too few goals created by short passes
    • weak teams with too much possession
    • tactics do not really matter (just take a look at all these exploit tactics)
    • SI being like "¯\_(ツ)_/¯ — everything's alright and realistic" even if official OPTA statistics continually prove them wrong
    • ignorance, censorship and deliberate banning in the official forums by moderators; these methods are disgusting to the core

    Please don't get offended by this feedback and forward it to the developers instead.

About Me

  • About Me
    ☣️ An appeal to reason: Ignore shills!


  • Interests
    ⚽ 🎸 🎧 🎮 Football, music and video games.

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    FC Uninstalled

Recent Profile Visitors

577 profile views
  1. Favre used various systems, mostly the 4-3-3, but also variants of three-at-the-back formations and in some cases a 4231 with magician Belhanda as a classic number 10. Main System: 4-3-3 In Favre's 4-3-3, Dalbert was basically the only player with a crossing license; he helped creating bigger gaps in the half-spaces when he drifted wide on the left side. Belhanda, a true playmaker who was often used on the left wing, wasn't a real winger, but rather a wide playmaker in advanced areas, therefore I'd choose AP-su. Although BPDs sound like a logical choice for the CB spots, they're not what you need in a pretty riskless possession-based system such as Favre's Nice. Therefore just go with two normal CDs. On the right side, Souquet was a capable defender who was also pretty decent going forward, but he never drifted too wide and crossed only half as much as Dalbert. Based on this I would use him as a normal FB-su. Eysseric was more of a physical winger with decent passing who provided width, but rarely crossed, therefore I'd go with IW-su. Cyprien can be used as a CM-at or as a MEZ-at, I would go with the first because Souquet and Eysseric already provide enough width on the right side. However, when you notice that your players struggle on the right side, try MEZ-at instead. I chose the BBM role for Seri because he was all over the pitch, the engine of Favre's Nice; if you don't mind using two playmakers, you can also go with the RPM role. Koziello was the uncomplicated octopus responsible for the simple passes and intercepting opposing attacks through the middle. For Balotelli I'd choose DLF-at because he often attempted long shots and was capable of holding up play as well. The goalkeeper can be used as a normal GK or as a SK-de, as needed. Based on this, the system could look like this (I also added an inverted version which fits your actual team): Player Instructions I'd use the following player instructions in order to stretch the pitch: 1) WB-at and 2) AP/IF-su: Stay Wider You could also use a "cautious split block" (huh, it looks like I've just invented this term) by reducing the pressure intensity of your four or five most attacking players to "less urgent"; 1) DLF-at, 2) IW-su, 3) AP/IF-su, 4) CM/MEZ-at, 5) WB-at. I've never tried this myself, but it should theoretically reduce the amount of times your players try to win the ball high up the pitch.
  2. I'm trying to assist you here a little. It's been a while since I watched Nice playing under Favre, but I can confirm that Favre used a deep and slow possession system, and that's backed up by WhoScored's in-depth statistics. I can't remember all the roles Favre used back then, that's why I'll inspect the team instructions with a little help from the statistics on my hand. In order to keep it simple, I'll reduce the number of team instructions as much as possible because there are instructions which interfere with / affect other instructions as well (for example passing, tempo and final third; in this case I'd just go with the most fitting passing instruction). I came up with these team instructions: Mentality From what I've experienced, teams tend to build-up slower on a positive mentality while playing faster in the final third. The other way around with the cautious mentality; faster build-up, slower play in the final third. Kind of contradictory and confusing, I know. Hard to decide which option fits better. In case of doubt, just go with balanced and / or base it on your opponent. In Possession Much Shorter passing because it encourages patient, less direct possession-play; they've almost had as short passing distances between their players as PSG in 16/17. Very narrow because Favre's team had the highest amount of possession of all teams in the league in the central areas. This, coupled with the defend narrower TI, should improve the positional transition. In Transition Distribute to centre-backs because it encourages proper build-up. Hold shape for a patient possession-play. Regroup because counter-attacks would go against the system's philosophy. Only two goals in 16/17 resulted from direct counter-attacks. Out of Possession Defend narrower because they faced a huge amount of crosses which indicates that they relied on their aerial abilities in central defense. Much lower line of engagement and defensive line because they spent the most time out of all teams in their own half and the least in the opposing third. Based on your opponent you might up these settings a notch or two. Misc The statistics also indicate that tighter marking might be a useful TI from time to time, but I left it out because the percentage wasn't high enough to justify it as a "permanent TI" in my opinion. Same with play for set pieces. You might want to test these two instructions from time to time and see how and when they could fit. That's basically all. I might return with player roles and duties if I find the time. It would be half-baked if I'd try it off the top of my head.
  3. The funny thing is that these people, who put so much heart and soul into tactics theory, actually know that their expertise and know-how is rendered meaningless by the engine, but still continue to offer assistance — under the illusion that their knowledge might lead other users to the desired engine experience by a happy coincidence; that the intended implementation of the tactical idea will somehow become real in the circumstances. I respect and envy these people, the way they water their plastic plants. This is reverie and at the same time pure desperation.
  4. The great thing about Sergi Roberto is his versatility. Versatile players with such a good technique are also very rare. This combination makes him an extremely interesting and rare player who would complement any squad very well. However, there is no area in which he is truly world class. It's rather the unusual overall package that makes him stand out.
  5. First and foremost, it should be said that guides are ultimately only advice. In this case, they are an aid in creating a balanced distribution of roles. Whether guides like this are really that helpful is debatable. After all, I've never seen measurable evidence of that. However, you can also win with an unbalanced role distribution and tactics and much of it ultimately depends on your own player personnel, your opponent, form, morale and pure luck; with the latter two being the most important aspects. There's a reason why the most strange-looking, unbalanced tactics, also known as exploit tactics, are that successful. They don't follow any serious logic. It should not be forgotten that tactics under the hood are merely sliders that increase or decrease the likelihood of certain behaviours. Some random constellations, which theoretically make no sense at all, produce extremely good results, while other, detailed, well thought-out constellations end in a catastrophe. That's just the way it is. A good starting point is often to recreate the playing style of an exciting real life team. Video footage and statistics can help in this case. I also recommend reading up stuff on football sites which offer tactical write-ups. While there is no guarantee that it will work, it's at least fun, expands your horizon and could also be a good start to get a feel for the interplay and interaction of tactics and roles. All you can do is trying to play the game in a way that gives you a feeling of some kind of joy. Personally, I've never used plug and play tactics as I feel like I'd miss the actual meaning of the game if I did that. Football Manager should ultimately be about inspiration, ideas and creating and leading your more or less ambitious team.
  6. Once again apples and oranges are compared. Playing shares should always be judged in relation to possession of the ball. It is logical that a team that has a lot of possession carries out an action more often than a team that has less possession. If the picture is put into perspective, Manchester City is one of the six teams with the least amount of crosses in relation to possession. The team with the fewest crosses is Norwich, the ones with the highest Sheffield United and Burnley; as a side note. Ball possession-oriented teams tend to avoid crosses for the most part, as they could often result in the loss of the ball. So it shouldn't come as a surprise that somebody wants to reduce the high percentage of crosses performed in the ME.
  7. Based on this, I can give a personal assessment that largely contradicts the citation. Before you feel offended, I remind you that this is only an opinion I have formed based on the statistics and impressions I have personally collected. For me, there is no measurable evidence to suggest that significant work has been done in efficient ways. The workload may have been extraordinary, but it seems like it was not very efficient. In my assessment, there was a noticeable deterioration in many important areas. This circumstance merely shows how limited the AI is. A statistically compressed bunch of AI clubs, most of which play similarly and offer little variance, with the result that tactical instructions from the user have no influence on what happens on the pitch, reinforced by the parameters that force an extreme randomness. This is also an admission of the imperceptible progress you praised in your initial first lines. I can understand why users feel powerless. There are simply too many invisible, random factors that make it impossible for the user to understand why something is not working; the degree of randomness is extremely high, while tactical guidelines have little effect due to the general uniformity of the AI. So it is logical that it is not even necessary to manipulate the game to make it more exciting. Conversely, this means that more power must be given to the users by programming the AI in such a way that it differs noticeably from AI-controlled club to AI-controlled club and that there should be way less compression of the available playing styles, strengths and characteristics because they make it impossible to counteract the current circumstances with well thought-out management and logical strategies, which are adapted to the available player material. I would also never say anything bad about my product; I want to sell it as well as possible, which would not work if I admitted that it has one or two flaws. It's wonderful that passion is involved; unfortunately I can't judge that and it doesn't matter anyway. Anyway, I'm curious to see how the code under the hood will do in the next few years. In any case, I notice that the euphoria within the SI team is almost uncontrollable. This must be a sign. But I am not able to estimate what kind of one. Right now I'm philosophising about how an opinion about a thing can be professional if it comes from the creator of that thing. Such an assessment is actually only valid if it comes from professional outside sources. Some things we create in life are so sophisticated that we cannot even understand them ourselves. But they are sophisticated. Because that is all that matters. This will probably remain unanswered just like this one. It's okay, I'm extremely patient. At least other users will be able to read it with a certain degree of acceptance.
  8. "peptheking****si" — that's how you named your screenshot. I'm by no means a SI enthusiast, but this thread's intention is questionable, especially because there are shortcomings on your side when it comes to basic football knowledge in a positional sense. You blame the game while your are not able to translate the roles and duties aspect of each position into the game. You are not omniscient. You act totally arrogant, but there's no need for it. Your TIs aren't that bad. A bit too extreme in terms of passing, pressing and the engaged high line. No need for quick GK distribution. Maybe use default dribble instruction. The roles and duties are a pure mess. Of course, the Silvas are capable of playing as playmakers, but they are also very potent half-wingers—the mezzala role would be a perfect compromise in this case. Back at Barcelona, Pep mainly used four playmakers: Xavi, Iniesta, Messi and, on rare occasions, Sergio Busquets, but they never acted as playmakers in the same match altogether. It always depended on the opponent and the conditions. My advise: Try to reduce the amount of playmakers you want to use at the same time. Two playmakers instead of four would be a good start, preferably in different stratas. You have seven attack duties. That's just too much. Try to get rid of at least four. They won't help you getting possession football if there are no balance factors. Possession-based football requires support duty players who will try to support your attack duty players. There's no way around it. Your BPDs are taking too many risks which leads to higher chances of loss of possession. I'd get rid of at least one and use normal CD-des instead. I'd also use an IW instead of a normal winger. The traditional winger's tendencies are too one-dimensional for a "Sané emulation". Last but not least: Always make sure your players and their abilities are tailored to the instructions so they are able to follow them.
  9. That's still a myth. We could collect 1,000,000 saves of a season in order to check the amounts of goals scored per match and we'd end up with 10 to 25 % less than real life scorelines of Top 5 leagues. In my latest save Bundesliga teams scored about 2.35 goals per match. That's 0.8 less than 18/19 in real life and 0.2 lower than the lowest recorded real life average ever, 2.58 in 1989/1990. The all time average is 3.05 and the current season is at 3.25 so far. The scorelines I get mostly match the low-scoring scorelines of the early 70s in the English Football League First Division. The all-time average of the BPL is 2.97. The scorelines need to be higher if anything. At best aiming for a solid range between 2.70 up to 2.95 with very rare occurrences of seasons with higher and lower average scorelines in the range from 2.30 to 3.35 across all European Top 5 Leagues, because that's were the main focus should be. Maybe SI's data stays true to real life when they compare their in-game stats of lower leagues in addition with real life scorelines, but that would be a huge distortion. People mainly play in major leagues, and that's were the main focus should be, yet again.
  10. Hello, Beni150! First of all, the fact that you are competing for CL football with Leeds is already a great achievement. It has to be taken into account that goals in this year's ME rather tend to result from set pieces, regardless of the style of football we are aiming for, and the open play is extremely wing-heavy anyway. To combat this I recommend to play without the traditional winger role completely and use inverted wingers or inside forwards instead. Therefore I don't see any reason to use inverted wingbacks, because, unfortunately, they don't really make it possible to force play through the center. The play through the center is a core component of possession football if you look at the systems of Guardiola and Enrique. There are of course possession-based systems that try to integrate wing play, or wide play. Examples of this would be Borussia Dortmund under Lucien Favre 18/19 or Löw's rather extreme "spam cross tactic" WC 2018 (which horribly failed). Such hybrid systems are intended to enable counter attacks via the wings in addition to possession dominance—they aim for the golden balance. Based on this, I would make the following changes: DLF-su instead of CF-at in order to prevent the striker from getting isolated IW-su on the left (he will still look for crosses if opportunities arise) IF-su/at on the right RPM on the right instead of Ap-su for a more fluid connection between defense and attack WB-su/de on the left CWB-su on the right remove Overlaps remove Play Wider (and play even narrower to improve patient passing by reducing the distances between players)
  11. I wouldn't worry too much about the AF getting isolated. The AF loves scoring goals, but he's also capable of creating space for others since he drifts wide when the opportunity arises. The Poacher on the other hand needs a lot of support—it's more of a situational suggestion if you need more vertical directness in the final third, which you might need against even stronger sides. The defensive wing-back on a defensive duty is a pretty careful role. The main purpose is providing width and protection from counter-attacks on the wings. Think of Abidal who played for FC Barcelona, he was utilised in a similar role. With the help of wing-backs your opponent is less likely to focus on half-spaces because your central players will rather stay narrow while your wing-backs try to stay wide—your IF and especially your AF will benefit from this. As Experienced Defender said, you could lower your line of engagement in order to improve vertical compactness. This will make it harder for your opponent to hit you on the counter-attack. Against stronger opponents you might consider lowering both, your line of engagement and your defensive line, a notch.
  12. Hello, Koennn! Let's take a look at your first tactic. If I understood you correctly, you want your striker to score more goals, prevent over-the-top through balls, dominate possession and play through the middle. Team Instructions The first thing I'd do is untick Higher Tempo and change it to default. It's uncharacteristic for possession football. Because you're playing on a positive mentality, your attack duty players will try to play riskier and faster passes anyway. I'd also remove the Distribute Quickly instruction. If you want to play possession football, there's no need to rush the build-up. Change your attacking width from Wide to Fairly Narrow. This way your players will stay closer to each other which will help you gain more possession and more successful passes. Optional: Include the Focus Play Through the Middle TI in order to force more central play. (Note: This version's ME was heavily criticised by a lack of central play, so there's not a lot we can do here.) Roles and Duties Use two normal CD-de instead of BPD roles for a more patient build-up. Your Offside Trap instruction will profit from this, too, because there's a higher chance that your centre-backs will stay at the same height. Turn your left winger into an IF-su in order to lower his goal-scoring desire. Use your striker as a an Advanced Forward or as a Poacher so he can be your main goal-scoring threat. Use your left full-back as a WB-su in order to provide more support down the left. Optional: Use your right full-back as a WB-de in order to provide more width and stability down the right. Optional: Try van de Beek as a normal CM-su from time to time (he's a hard worker, but he's not the fastest up and down the pitch). I don't have the time to look into your other tactics, but I hope this will give you some new ideas.
  13. Terrible ratings do not really hurt user numbers. EA's latest FIFA releases are the best proof in this case. Once you have a monopoly the quality doesn't really matter at all anyway.
  14. Yeah, this is just a part of the community. A part of the community that shares the same views on the game as pretty much every other part of the community found on other platforms - because the community is not limited to the satisfied users who spend hours battling all critical views and never question anything. What is the community? The community is, ultimately, the visible part of the community — and that feels ignored. It's simple. If the opinions of the community were really that "incredibly useful and insightful", the game would make great progress quickly and the users would be very happy. But that's not the case. The Metacritic and Steam user ratings suggest that the game gradually regressed - and has been doing so since 2013/2014. The trend of the last three years points to stagnation. Just because something is working doesn't automatically mean it's working as intended. You'll get this "it's broken" statement from frustrated users who feel like their input isn't valued at all. It's natural for them to get very vocal as a result. The ME is rather flawed and users simply can't enjoy it because of the reported things that no one seemed to take care of for this edition. And the last edition. And the one before that one. … Yes, FM is the most realistic simulation of football out there. It's bold, comprehensive and complex. Sometimes it feels larger than life. But it's the only football management simulation on the market. There's simply no competition anyway. There should be no excuse for stalling progress in the here and now. Exactly, it could be better, but it looks like, at the moment, that the opinions of users, the reported bugs, the passion and the ideas, do not matter at all. At least at the moment. A roadmap is a good thing. I think any company should have one. Maybe share it with the community? I can well imagine how difficult it is to handle a game of the scope of FM and that you are looking towards the future, but wouldn't it be wiser to focus on the presence, too? I cannot imagine how you will cope with the difficult tasks of the future if you postpone the difficult tasks of the present. I'm sure there were lots of areas where FM improved a lot. However, user critics indicate that the pace and quality of progress within the last six to seven years wasn't good enough. It would be a great thing if providing knowledge and feedback helped improving the game, We'll be looking forward to it. This is not a problem for me since I didn't have high hopes for this version anyway. One could say I'm used to disappointment in this regard. But I can imagine that others did have those hopes and are now much more disappointed than before. I would rather guess people are still playing this game because they don't have alternatives, but this doesn't automatically mean that they're enjoying the idle state of progress FM has made in recent years, especially this year's ME. @Neil Brock
  • Create New...