Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. It will play the game fine as long as he doesn't go overboard with he settings and doesn't do much else at the same time. Tip is to wait as long as you can for a sale before buying anything.
  2. If De Gea signs a new contract on almost any terms whether it is long or short, and doubles his salary, I will consider this transfer window to have been a success. Also, give Giggs a chance. We need someone to bring some sense of culture back to the club. Right now it doesn't seem like we have any kind of philosophy other than making money.
  3. van Gaal worse than we expected or Moyes better than we thought? Crude averaging can mask important data though.
  4. Much more balanced squad than previously. We were heavy on senior strikers and light in midfield, and also light on dynamic impact players. Looks like that has been taken care of. Maybe it would have been nicer to have brought in another defender, and maybe sell Valencia as well but that's difficult to do in one window. In any case, you can see the squad shaping up as a group of players that largely bring different qualities to the table thereby offering various tactical opportunities. Though LVG's man management skills are and always have been a concern. Would love to see Klopp coming in at some point. The De Gea situation wasn't fully resolved but I was always of the opinion that it was better to keep him than let Real Madrid keep bullying us. I've lost a lot of respect for them after this transfer window. Especially after the Valdes falling out and other clubs seeing an opportunity to overcharge us. Although, we'll have to deal with them in January again.
  5. While I don't necessarily disagree with your opinion, "half our goals" is less convincing when we consider that the raw number is in fact 2. I'd put forward another possible opinion: it might be better for a young talented player to experience many different positions in order to better understand the system and how the team/other teams plays rather than pigeonhole him early in his career. Michael Cox had a piece about building versatility early in a player's career in order for them to be more productive in their "proper" role when they have matured more. Most of the world class players around today are capable of playing in more than one position.
  6. I thought he was already at the club, pen hovering above the contract for the last few weeks.
  7. We're not getting Neymar. Because we're getting Ronaldo, Muller and Benzema.
  8. It should play fine (my brother has played casually with a few leagues on his 2013 MacBook Air 13"), but the battery doesn't last for very long while you are gaming on a MacBook (I would say cutting it by maybe even 70-80% depending on how you're playing). So don't assume you'll be getting 12 hours of FM. The other thing is, touchpad controls in the Mac version of FM are not designed the best and can occasionally be wonky. Hard drive space is also an issue but looks like you've taken that into consideration (but getting the 256GB and putting most of your stuff onto an external drive is much better value and a bit safer too). I would recommend that you try FM Classic as well as the standard to see whether that will play better. I've noticed that FM Classic is largely the same but less fiddly which makes it perfect for quick bouts during your commute or to flick back and forth from during class/work. I think people (who do have the best intentions mind you) need to just accept the idea that power is not something that everyone is going for, with different people willing to make different sacrifices. Especially when computing power has reached a bit of a plateau lately and modern CPU work is more about efficiency than horsepower, other important factors come into play. A high-quality display, good keyboard and touchpad, portability, battery life and brand recognition (so you know who to blame if something goes wrong) are all very legitimate reasons to get a laptop, even if they are less tangible on a spec sheet. Otherwise this thread would be "New desktop/desktop replacement advice". The machines that others have pointed out are excellent in terms of pricing and specs, but they are in a different weight class to the MacBook Air. Literally. There are cheaper ultrabooks and those are certainly comparable to the MacBook Pros and MacBook Airs, but of course those also do come with a corresponding increase in price. gareth, if you are considering the MacBook Air because of "non-technical" spec reasons you should definitely not be fooled into thinking that it is the only choice, and you might want to consider some comparable Windows alternatives: http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/test-centre/laptop/16-best-ultraportable-laptops-2015-uk-3265745/. The Acer brand sells some very beautiful laptops for example, the Aspire s7 having a gorilla glass outer shell and a full 1080p display instead of the 1366 x 768 resolution of the MacBook Air 11". People make the most educated purchases when given advice that suits them individually. There's a reason why we don't recommend the same laptop to everyone.
  9. Just took Rooney out of my fantasy team. Also, still waiting for us to resign Bebe instead of finishing up the Pedro deal.
  10. I have the one in the middle, with the 256GB drive. I'm used to something a lot bigger so I'm still working out a workflow for storage. Have played five-ish seasons without it slowing down much. Loaded big 5 leagues all three leagues down, plus watching about another dozen, on a large database.
  11. Thanks guys for the input. It is very useful to separate these facets into broad categories, and that does help a lot in terms of gameplay and how you pick forwards and set up your team. I believe that my points about nomenclature/overlapping, not being able to prove any of this (and the relative importance of the various attributes which was the original question - the influences cannot logically be equal. Plus, some stats appear to be universal modifiers so because they would apply to everything that a player does, they would not apply to any situation directly), and the mess in terms of scouting, training and newgens still stand but I guess I'm just going to have to live with that (though I am looking for a way to do some simple statistical analysis of some of the attributes to see if I can find any correlations that either support or disprove my view). Enjoy the game everyone!
  12. I just don't see how this air of certainty that you guys seem to have can be justified given how vague you are about how exactly the stats affect behaviour and results. What do you mean that some of you can "see more?" I'm not trying to sound argumentative but that was kind of my point - manufactured uncertainty disguised as sophistication. I don't want to sound like I'm bragging but I have a very high understanding about how context controls behaviour and outcome in real life, and a simulation cannot be more complex than real life. Although it can be more convoluted, in which case the aim should be to simplify?
  13. I understand this perfectly; these variables are only too true in the real world. However, glaring problems occur in the reasoning when you consider that given that this is a computer simulation, 1) how many categories of stats there are in the game, and 2) the computational power that it actually takes to consider all of this context. The second is a matter of speculation but I don't believe that the game can calculate so many variables at once, in almost real time. You listed finishing, composure, decision-making, technique, consistency, temperament, footedness. Obviously you add in the context - however many variables there are during a given moment on a given match day. You have the field, the time, the location, physics. Then you have the other players. The goalkeeper and the defenders and any teammates around them. And obviously random chance. Given that each stat has at least a scale of 19 and assuming that each point makes some measurable change in the calculation, that is something upwards of trillions of different outcomes that may occur just in a finishing move. There are not enough animations in the game to make this happen (and don't forget the sim matches), and not enough computational power in a regular computer. Plus, let's not pretend that we don't see very similar things, if not exactly the same action patterns occurring multiple times during a regular season and from this we can infer that the calculations that are being made in the game are not as complicated as we like to think it is. This brings me back to point 1. If I was a good programmer knowing that there are a limited number of animations, I would do anything I could to reduce the number of variables required for a move. Or use a random number generator and modulate it by blocking large chunks of the map and player locations into "context", then using those key stats. I believe that the game developers, and many of the members here are confused about complementary variables versus overlapping variables. Complementary variables add to the power of a modelling equation. Overlapping variables reduce power. To use an example, let's say I am evaluating how good a restaurant is. I make a list of criteria for the restaurant to be judged, and I have one category for the yummyness of the food. Then I list a second category, which is how dope the food tastes. You don't need both, even if I can argue that they mean slightly different things. This is how I see the stat of finishing. It is either a problem of the name of the stat, or the game is using multiple counts of "similar enough variables to be considered the same" in a single calculation, which is scientifically inaccurate. In terms of the naming of the stat, "finishing" does imply that the player is able to not just shoot, but to score. I believe that it is named this because it includes scoring with your head and hence it is misleading to name it "shooting". The problem with using stats that differ so much in specificity is that it puts a huge burden on the real world scout. I highly doubt that the excellent team that scout for the game are given any clear instructions on how the stats actually interact to form a player's overall finishing profile (otherwise this would have been leaked I'm sure). To do this, it requires that the scout almost become a professional psychologist - to know how good a player's decision making is, composure and everything. That's no problem, I believe in their ability to do a great scouting job. The thing is, if a player has great decision making in the penalty box, but poor decision making outside of it, what number do you give this guy? You give him a low one of course, and you artificially raise his finishing and composure stats to make up for it (different to having a high finishing stat that includes decision making in the box). OR, you could have his decision making high, and lower everything else. Which means, that the stats are arbitrary and based were there the player's performance in the game is reasonable, as some scouts readily admit to doing. So, this means that looking the stats is actually pointless, because it is never clear what weighting each stat adds to the calculation and whether some of these stats are even taken into account at all. The result of this is that the difficulty of this game is artificially modified by this "mystery" aspect. It is uncertainty masked as sophistication. As much as I enjoy this game, this aspect is punishing and it is not of our own doing - like a blue shell in mario kart. At least the blue shell knows that it is a jerk though. This has implications all across the game. For example, Rashidi1 just updated his excellent guide for training. It is certainly helpful. However because of the (admittedly theoretical and mostly likely just my own personal) problems with how stats are done, how do we know which stats we should be training? It's obvious that these stats are weighted differently given their CA load. So for example 2 in finishing is worth 1 composure etc. Paradoxically it means that if I want my player to finish better, I should be training him in technique rather than finishing. That's reasonable, but how can I tell for sure given the whole bunch of variables that you have listed that control scoring, that it is his technique that is failing him? Another problem is newgen creation, but it's too late to get into that for now. Basically, all I want to know is which stats and manipulations do make a difference, and which ones are voodoo magic. It's ok that doing something in a game or in real life doesn't necessarily achieve the result that we want, but it isn't ok when it is not due to randomness but simply taking advantage of an artificially constructed ignorance. It's also a little dodgy when experts come out and try to help us play better when even they have so much trouble communicating to us 1) what a context is, and 2) which stats are used in which context. There can't be that many as I have pointed out. Sorry, rant over. I love the game and I'm still playing it anyway. I've just lost faith in the way stats are done that's all.
  14. I believe that the senior members are correct in asserting that stats in isolation do not matter, and that events in the game are due to a combination of multiple factors and also taking into account the situation. To be honest though, I do sense that after years of this type of discussion a lot of them have developed some level of cognitive dissonance regarding this matter. The broader explanation makes sense. However, the further we get into this issue and offer more explanation regarding this line of thinking, I can see cracks appear in the logic (from ontological, psychological and practical perspectives), and negative implications regarding tactical construction and training later in the game. It is hard to ignore the mental gymnastics that some members go through to explain all this when somebody asks such a fundamental and basic question. In the end, it always boils down to "the stat doesn't actually mean the stat, you have to look at a whole bunch of other stats and if you are lucky we are going to bother to list five or six stats that may or may not come into play depending on the situation and we either have no way to prove this definitively or cannot speak about this publicly". You can understand why this will lead to confusion and frustration.
  15. Would be overkill for FM but not for video editing. It's also a little bit of future proofing given that everything just seems to be more RAM intensive these days, but CPU power has not improved as rapidly as it used to.
  • Create New...