vukigepard
-
Posts
106 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Forums
Articles
FAQs
Online Manual
Support: Blocks
Support: Games
Bug Tracker
SIGames Manual (beta)
Profiles
Posts posted by vukigepard
-
-
1 minute ago, Broken_Record said:
The most simple answer would probably be something else than key highlights. Observing and reacting during matches should be a really important thing to do during both singular matches and also in a long run. And how do you do this if you're not seeing anything that is going on?
Ok, that's true, but that is why you have all that data to observe, in the end, it's not about what you observe on the pitch, but what is in the data, the pitch always was, and is, because this is a game, representation of that data and calculations. People who make op tactics and publish them, are very good at reading this data, and tweaking it to the point of almost perfection that is translated to the most of the games that people don't have to use anything else but key highlights. And that just can't be in any way removed, as the game is mostly values, data and calculations regarding those two, i really can not see any solution to that except rng, which i think is a very bad idea for a number of reasons.
So, spotting details is a great thing, it should help you during the game and also in the long run and it does, but it's also great that someone who doesn't want to do it doesn't have to, because someone else already figured it out and shared that with a tactic.
I think the retail version will be a bigger challenge, as that was my experience with all the previous fm's, but i think what you are asking for is border impossible because there will always be a superior-dominant way of playing because it is a game where something amounts to the greatest calculation value of lots of combinations, except if the randomness is a greater factor.
0 -
5 hours ago, Broken_Record said:
I mean it's fairly common to see them playing with key highlights
This kind of gameplay should never be successful but sadly it has been for years. And the second bad thing is that SI have even collaborated with these kind of streamers.
I don't care if you watch the game 90 minutes and micromanage, be successful or not if you can enjoy that i'm happy for you. But cmon, because i don't enjoy doing that i can't enjoy my game and be successful? The game loses it's value for a lot of people and that is hardly a goal for SI.
I'll put it simply, nobody cares if you are successful, if i am successful, how are you successful, how am i successful, if some streamer is successful, no matter if it's a hyper realistic simulation, it's still a game.
When it comes to SI, they are succsessful because the game appeals to wide range of people, both people who like to micromanage, and people that don't want any of that.
So stop being so selfish and let people enjoy the game in a way they see fit, without questioning if some random streamer or player can be successful in a way they enjoy it.
0 -
2 minutes ago, GOODNAME said:
I just saw a youtuber beating 8-1 with leicester city vs Barcelona in the super cup.
I saw Bayern beat them 8-2 irl. And if you actually compare Leicester city and bayern attributes in the game, you'll most likely see that they are not much different. Maybe that's the problem, not the tactics.
3 -
3 minutes ago, rp1966 said:
I'd like to see a lot of changes related to longer-term games. Not just in squad building, but in manager recruitment and a dynamic (very simple) world economy that can create more divergence from the initial starting db. Anyone who's watched games holidaying far into the future or who plays multi-decade games should know what I'm getting at there
On squad-building specifically the reducing of reliance of reputation vs attributes in the Ai choices could help a lot to make them play more like the human player - more of a moneyball factor. Likely to increase CPU use, but might make choices better and lead to stronger AI squads longer term. Also add more competition for high attr players.
Coupled with this, more willingness for players who have high rep, but are without a club, being willing to lower rep and wage demands to get back playing, so there are more better players available to the AI. This also applies to high rep managers.
+1
0 -
1 hour ago, Broken_Record said:
Making the game features more user-friendly was the first step. The next and logical step should be that the difficulty level of the game would be increased significantly, which would force more people to actually use these features and heck, maybe even demand human players to do some sensible things within the gameplay to be successful.
Yes, force me and number of people to play the game the way you think it should be played. Also make my fm experience miserable instead of joyful because you demand me to conform to the way of things that you think lead to success when the difficulty is up. Very logical, very good market strategy for SI also.
Seriously, do you people ever wonder that not all people want to play fm the same way you do?
As junkhead said, if you want to fix problems that are currently in the game, upload pkm's if you think that there is a problem.
0 -
1 minute ago, Daveincid said:
wait....you won 4 - 0 vs Charlton...you see? it's OP....SI need to do something
He also got 2 AWAY goals vs Blackburn, SI, how could you allow this to happen 😄
1 -
15 minutes ago, Mars_Blackmon said:
Literally no one in this thread asked for that. And if it was mention, it certainly wasn't from the majority.
also people shouldn't have to rely on the editor to make fundamental changes to the game. In an unbalanced way i might add.
My whole discussion in this thread last night was with a person wanting to nerf the attack, where you remarked that you have no idea what was even debated.
On the second part, they should if specific minor group asks specifically for their flavor of the game. As I said, i'm almost perfectly happy with the game, and so are the people playing the beta that do not bother coming to the forums, this thread, and so are the majority of people in feedback thread. Only when it comes to this specific thread raised for this specific problem some people have, where there is 56-44 in favor for the game being to easy in a poll with so much skewed options that demean anyone who thinks the game is not too easy. And then, you have people that come here, post holidayed klopp tactics designed to break the game who don't want to bother with tactics as a proof that the game is easy.
0 -
1 minute ago, Mars_Blackmon said:
Who asked for that?
Sorry if i didn't understand you correctly. I'm hearing a lot of nerf the attack ideas for the past few days. Fine tuning the aggression of the ai is something i do not have a problem with, and is also something that can be done via editor.
0 -
1 minute ago, Mars_Blackmon said:
Or they could just fine tune things. It's not really rocket science.
Are you ok with half of your league sitting back defending for 80 minutes?
That's not the experience i am having in this fm, they do hit me on the counter and i am playing a top team. My results are exactly in line with real life. Fine tuning by nerfing the attack or buffing defence means thing like Messi not getting realistic numbers in this fm, like he didn't in previous versions. And when he doesn't, it just screams rng and that quality doesn't matter. Now it does. You having a set up that makes you Klopp on steroids is not something regular AI does, it's all you. You can fine tune the problem yourself if it bothers you.
0 -
7 minutes ago, Dagenham_Dave said:
That's the problem, the 'too easy' brigade don't want to entertain 'other ways to enjoy the game', they want the game made exactly to their own specifications, despite there being 101 things you can do to make the game more challenging. It has to veer on the easy side for it to remain accessible to the majority, and difficulty levels simply won't work.
Exactly, well said. I am quite experienced with fm, i've been playing it since 2011. I know, as it is a game, which i played for a long time, that you can set up a killer tactic if you try hard enough or just search the forums whatever fm it is, and i like that part, as it allows me to have fun with things like progression, team building, seeing how the fm world develops in the future, how the leagues get stronger or weaker, how i can influence that, to develop and find great players, play with some restrictions. The tactics part is the static part of every fm, and it hasn't changed much over the years. I don't want to hamper my chance of enjoying the game by having to constantly change something and get frustrated when i want to progress in a way i want and get 5 seasons instead of 50 like i usually do. I don't want to take out anyone's enjoyment out of game either, and the current fm certainly doesn't limit you from doing micromanaging, or playing the way you deem realistic. The game has all these features for a reason, and there is no right way to play it. Very offensive specific tactical approach too good for you? Don't use it. Very specific offensive tactical approach-good for me, and where is the middle ground? Middle ground is not me not having that option while you get your dose of imaginary realism which you can have anyway.
1 -
I'm very happy with the state of fm21, especially compared to fm19 and fm20.
Match engine is finally something i can enjoy with the rest of the game. Number of goals scored by AI is realistic, and i'm glad goals aren't mostly set pieces anymore. I'm really hoping attacking isn't nerfed and defence buffed, the game can finally be to everyones liking because it allows you to not get frustrated as much as versions before. I like the direction where the fm is going, it's not quite perfect, but it the nearest it has even been.
Seeing Messi finally score realistic number of goals and actually be better than the rest of the players is where i know the game is more realistic than before, as it means that player quality matters. Regarding the using of unrealistic ultra offensive tactics, i have no problem with that, each to their own liking, it doesn't do anyone harm. People that played fm for years and years know the game in and out, all the tricks behind it, and then moan that it is too easy. As you can see, for lots of people, it isn't too easy and they get either realistic or worse results when they are not using super tactics.
Tl;dr: I enjoy the game now, and it would be very disappointing to have the fm19 or fm20 experience again after this beta. Minor fixes and it's all good to to.
5 -
21 minutes ago, RioImmagina said:
Correct. You can create this tactic easily, starting with a standard 4-4-2 and step-by-step tweaking roles and duties. In the second year you will dominate.
We're not talkin about a very absurd tactic like a 4-0-6 or a 1-2-4-3, something that NO ONE would do IRL. We are talking about a very easy to achive 442
It's really hard for me to understand when an experienced fm player that has played probably 1000's of hours of different versions has a suprised pikachu face when his tactical set up proves to be good and effective, and then goes on to the forums to complain about the game he spent his good portion of life being easy. You already know all about the morale, form, types of attributes that you need, what is a good tactical set up, how hidden attributes work, what ppm's are useful, opposition instructions, roles, how the ai plays, how to build a team. And if you want to be just average with that knowledge, that is a problem, because at that point, there is nothing left to make you good except fishing for exploits.
And at that point, all you are asking for is more rng, more randomness, that the result from certain play style could go either way, and that is a very bad idea that has frustrated a lot of people in fm19 and 20
1 -
1 minute ago, dannysheard said:
Fair enough.
I’d presumed the better players would want to see difficulty levels introduced, but it seems most of them don’t.
Apologies for turning into a keyboard warrior at times 😀
No needs for apology. Difficulty levels could potentialy appease everyone, but i don't think SI will ever go with that approach
0 -
9 minutes ago, dannysheard said:
This is the problem, though.
Lots of us find the game way too easy. Not just one season or one save or one version. Every time we play it.
With a wide range of teams and a wide range of sensible tactics.
You have mastered the fm, congratulations. After a lot of different versions, you got good, your tactical knowledge increased, you know exactly which approach will be effective in the long run and work in fm. Enjoy it.
I do, i have played every version from the fm11 to the present and after that long i have learned what works and what doesn't, now i can fully enjoy that, and enjoy the ME. It's a game overall, when you master it, you find different aproach to enjoy it if you can't otherwise, have different goals or move on. For example i am more interested in influencing the fm gameworld, creating good players, improving a bad league than i'm in tactical matters.
But not everyone, not even in these polls where there is a specific group that has this problem opposed to majority of people now enjoying the fm playing it, wants the game to become harder, or to think of their Fm as their secondary job that becomes a chore if you want to become good.
0 -
1 minute ago, dominoes012 said:
The main barrier between the difference between teams is not intelligence, it is technical skills. You're pretty much saying that the players of Everton are not smart enough to learn how to play like Liverpool when in actuality they might be and most likely are. The barrier in real life is most of us aren't born with the god given talent of Mohammad Salah or Sadio Mane. Richarlison cannot become Mane because he loses the ball randomly cannot dribble as well as him, isn't as clinical as him and so much more. It doesn't necessarily mean he isn't on Liverpool because he doesn't understand or cannot understand their tactics. Coaches, new players all learn how to play under a system and many thrive just like Diego Jota this season and many fail just like say Divock Origi.
If you relate this to football manager it means Richarlison does not have the stats to consistently perform as well as Salah and as far as understanding tactics there is a hidden attribute called adaptability in the game which lets a player adapt to tactics/surroundings/teams/new countries.
Everything you wrotes equates to Richardlison not being able to play in a geggenpress like Liverpools because it requires you to be more prolific/better dribbler/better ball control etc etc. So again, i repeat, if he could, he would he Mohammad Salah. So, why are you then agitated when you choose yourself to play a geggenpress where you expect and want someone to perform like Salah and then get exactly that.
I'm out for the night so i'll try to break my thoughts to simpler logical parts to explain.
1.You copy liverpool playing style (game allows it)
2. You tell the players to play like liverpool (game allows it)
3. They play exactly like liverpool (game allows it)
4. You get results like liverpool (game allows it)
You're blaming the point no. 4 and asking for nerfing the attackers and game not to allow it, but missing the 3 points above which gives you the final result. I have no problem with any of those points because you can control the points 1-3, and indirectly 4.
0 -
4 minutes ago, dominoes012 said:
I don't think you realize this but when you say X Huesca player cannot/should not perform like Mohammad Salah you're actually proving my point in that he should not and that the match engine should try to reflect that. Instead you see screenshots of Richarlison Calwert Lewin and his 3rd striker all get 50 goals. Do you actually think these 3 players are that much better than Mohammad Salah in real life? In real life all 3 of these players combined might not get Mohammad Salah's amount of goals but that isn't the whole point as in Football Manager you're trying to find ways to make your players into stars. So even if one of these players gets 50 goals for a season you're absolutely ecstatic. However what we're seeing is that you can get Joe Blow to get 50 goals or you get strikers on your team to severely outperform what is realistic every single season and as you progress and your team gets stronger this probably increases.
To the contrary, i'm saying that if they could play geggenpress irl like they could in the game, they would have pretty high numbers. But the thing that is unrealistic is not them scoring 40 goals a season by having the best tactical system right now, but them being able to play that system like they are liverpool players, which they can't, otherwise they would. So you don't want to limit the possibilites what they could play, but want to limit the results of that play. Seem's much more logic to me that everton can't play gegenpress like liverpool, than everton playing liverpool's geggenpress and expecting different results than liverpool. Because if everton played like liverpool, they would be liverpool.
0 -
1 minute ago, dominoes012 said:
You absolutely can tell any player to play like a specific player in real life. If they cannot perform or are unwilling that is when the club replaces that player and the coach that is put in place looks for players that fits his tactic. Leeds before Bielsa compared to Leeds after Bielsa is not even close. Man city before pep and man city after pep are completely different teams. You as the coach dictate how you want your teams to play and get players that can fit. The only difference between X player that plays like Mohammad Salah and Salah himself is quality and that is reflected by salary and stats. So while Leeds can have a team that performs similarly to other attacking players the reason they cannot have Man city's roster is because of money to buy the exceptional players. You can tell any Huesca player to play offensively and if they're too slow, too unfit, too unwilling to fit your philosophy at the next transfer window you get rid of them or you bench them and you get a player that can fit your tactic
I like the place where we came up to. Ok, so you can tell your player to play in a certain way to play offensive, but they're too slow, too unfit, to unwilling to fit. So are you then playing offensive because you told your team how to play, or how they are actually playing? That is the difference i wanted to point out. Playing the geggenpress and telling random players to play it is not the same, same as playing offensive. Problem here is that you can play geggenpress in fm, even if you couldn't with those players irl, and get the results that would come from viable supreme geggenpress irl, which is actually fine by me as i can either chose to play it or not. But i don't want the attacking nerfed because of it and have fm19 and 20 all over again.
0 -
7 minutes ago, dominoes012 said:
I don't play with gegenpress and am I understanding you correct in that you're saying I shouldn't play with Huesca in an offensive manner and expect realistic results because it would be unrealistic to play offensive with Huesca? Have you heard of a football club called Leeds United? They play no matter what vs any team in the world the same exact way their manager has taught them to play. They do not drop 5 in the back and defend when it is a strong team. The whole point/premise of the game Football Manager is that you as the manager can play however you want in whatever shape you want and you expect to see for the most part realistic results. I can play with no center backs in my formation if I wanted to and play with 5 strikers that is not a bug or an exploit. However if I were to do that I would expect the opposing team to score many goals vs my team. People want to see consistent realistic results with occasional upsets. That is the entire game of Football Manager and I really do not see how you don't understand this concept. Just like whatever tactic/way you want to play and you want to see accurate results, I do as well. That is currently not happening to many people which has resulted in this thread and I am trying to explain that to you as plainly and as easy as I can.
I am saying that having a team made specifically for a particular tactical approach and playing it in a different manner is no much more unrealistic, non rational as that is the style that suits the team best, and the manager is, as you said, is not a moron. But that would also then mean there would be lots of styles available, but choosing anything but one that suits your team best makes you a "moron". If you set up exactly the same tactical aproach as Liverpool with Huesca, that IS unrealistic. Because you can't go up to Huesca striker and set him up as Mohammed Salah realistically, you can tell him to do exactly the same things as Salah, exactly where to move, how to shoot, how to think, but the realistic part is that he will be not be Salah, or Salah like during the game, but probably doing nothing like you wanted him to do. So you get the player that is fit to play as you like. So no, if you have a team like Huesca, it can't realistically play offensive or geggenpress against Real Madrid, or Leeds, or Manchester City, you can call it that, but it isn't, because their team is set up to using their strenght because manager is not a moron. When you can play geggenpress, you have a team that can play geggenpress, when you don't have a team for geggenpress, you can "play" geggenpress in fm. That is unrealistic, not the result behind playing geggenpress which depends on your team being able to play it. Leeds as seen this season, is playing their offensive football and have 3 wins in 8 as a promoted team, so not bad at all, Liverpool game could have gone any way, just as any fm game you play geggenpress.
0 -
20 minutes ago, dominoes012 said:
I am getting unrealistic results but they are positive unrealistic results whereas in real life you would get punished with negative unrealistic results which means you lose. However sometimes you win just like Leeds United which can be used as in example here. They put on a thriller vs Liverpool but lost but in the times they win that is the real life dopamine/happiness you get as a fan which just like football manager is why you perhaps want to play offensively. However if you play offensively every single match and you win more than you should which is happening in the current match engine, your happiness gets diminished returns because it happens so often and you do not get satisfaction. Leeds United doesn't play gegenpress vs every single team and destroy them 6-1 which is happening a lot in the current match engine.
Then you choose the approach that grants you more happy points and a bigger dopamine kick, you can choose whatever you like as you have many tactical options besides gegenpress. I'm perfectly happy with my doses of dopamine and serotonine when i play this specific tactical approach and you would want that option completely out of the game. See, the thing is you can choose to not press like prime liverpool and have their transitions if you feel like your team is not good enough for that or think that is exploiting. With attacking nerfed, I can't choose to have my unrealistic approach because the results would be "unrealistic", but you can have your unrealistic approach to gegenpress first season huesca with "realistic" results.
0 -
2 minutes ago, dominoes012 said:
The problem is that football manager is made to be a game that tries to simulate results extremely accurately almost like real life. When it is unrealistic that what is the point of playing this game. Developers have put in their life's work determining contracts, stats, abilities of players so that they can get the most accurate information to provide an accurate picture and game for everyone to enjoy. When the game is unrealistic that the game is simply unfun to play. That is the whole basis of Football Manager lol.
Yep, and when you play it unrealistically, you get the unrealistic results. If you play it in a way that real life teams play, you get expected realistic results. I see no problem there. Training huesca to play gegenpress fluid offensive football and them being able to play it efficently is no more unrealistic than you choosing to play that way which they realistically can't with that team (otherwise they would play like liverpool)
0 -
1 minute ago, dominoes012 said:
We do know how it would turn out if lower tier teams played in an aggressive offensive manner. Do you think the real life managers of football are morons that for some reason have not discovered wow what if we took our team as Fulham and played like Manchester City? Obviously they are going to lose to Manchester City if they play like them because the players at Manchester City do everything better than the players At Fulham. It is not an exploit to choose to play a certain way as in every single video game there is a meta there is something that is stronger than others. However when that something gets much stronger than everything else to a certain point the developers need to balance the game which is essentially what we are asking for here. How is this hard to understand for some people? No one is bragging we want some game balance. I don't mind losing 8-1 if I choose to play as Fulham with my current tactics versus Manchester City because that means I have to adjust my tactics to win. However currently I can play whatever I want and still win which is the problem at hand
You've missed the entire point, Fulham, with all due respect couldn't choose to play ultra attacking fluid football against manchester city whatever they did. You, in fm, as fullham can choose to play ultra offensive football against manchester city, there's a difference. If you don't have a problem with your right chose to play something that is impossible irl because you can, why do you have a problem with the consequences being unrealistic.
0 -
6 minutes ago, Dagenham_Dave said:
This is why it's better in the bugs forum. That big an exploit needs to be patched, ideally before release.
That poor AI that has to endure all the exploiting which we specifically choose to do or not to do by playing a bad team in a way totally opposite of how they realistically play. First we don't know how they would play if they played like in that specific tactic setup as they don't. They could be loosing 10-0, or maybe they would play a lot better than right now irl. Second, if we have them play in a way like they do irl, we get realistic results as Daveincid posted.
If you want complete freedom, like being able to select to play ultra offensive football with a team that clearly by any logic would never do, why would you be mad about the generated, simulated, not real life results from a generally non possible play style regarding that team that comes from that freedom. If this is left like this, you are not limited, you can choose whatever you want to play like, but if it's "fixed" some people (like me, and from the polls i see a lot of people, like 43%) can't enjoy the bit unrealistic but very joyful experience that a specific 1 tactical style and approach that puts you above the AI.
4 -
No, finally we have a fm that has an enjoyable ME, that is very fun to watch. You, as a human, have the advantage to make your team play like you want them to play and finally do that. Now, the reason you are winning "too easily" is because AI can be to passive. To prove my point, you can see average goals scored by AI teams in league, it's a bit below the normal range but near the average . You as a human stand out. The fix for that is not to nerf attacking play or improve the defence, it's only to make AI more attacking than it currently is. And for that, anybody can make a custom database. If you do touch the ME, vice versa is not possible, and that's the reason why the game shouldn't be harder as a lot of people, like me, don't want it to be, and why it can be harder if you want it without limiting yourself
1 -
The real question isn't if the game is too hard or too easy, the question is can you do what you intend to do and want to and will the effort to do exactly that result in accomplishing that (it's not only about will you win, but how will you win).
For me, answer to that question is no, and when it comes to that, i find this version inferior to previous versions, a quick fix could be to be able to customise some features (you think penalties are getting missed too much, add a option that improves the penalty scoring rates, if a player wants that and thinks that is right and scores are unrealistic, why should anyone care? It's the same about game being easy, you could ramp up the injuries, the bad run effects, the complemency, but no.
The game has enormous potential, game besides me is excellent, and it's a shame that we need to argue about these things when it's easy to fix that and the game to be to everyone's liking
2
Do you want the full release to be harder than the beta?
in Football Manager General Discussion
Posted
I'm not winning all the time, and even if i was, it has nothing to do with you or the way you play, or the way you think the fm should be played. Even the option to delegate everything tactical to assistant manager suggests that this is a game that could be played in a number of ways, you can set up variety of goals you want to achieve, or things you want to do. Because you enjoy tweaking tactics and micromanaging and that is your main interest, doesn't mean it should be my point of enjoying the game and that i should be what, devoid of enjoyment and success because i don't want to play the game in a way you snowflakes want and think it should be played specifically taylored for your and yours only liking. I already explained why there will always be, as for all fm versions, something that that has bigger calculation value in a combination than anything else, 1 approach that will give results most of the time, and that's how it is for every game except if the randomness is a greater factor. For someone who is a experienced fm player, of course you are good in the game with the same foundation where you sank 1000's of hours. Learn to entertain yourself in some other way in fm or move on, real life is quite challenging for itself.
AI could be better, it isn't right now, and nothing constructive has been contributed
But no
"The game should be played in THIS specific way to have success as this is how it was meant to be played"
Disgusting, i hope the mods close this thread as it's been nothing but pointless flame wars for a few pages now without anything constructive, including my posts.