Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

Svenc

Members+
  • Content Count

    4,941
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Svenc last won the day on November 4 2016

Svenc had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,142 "Here's Johnny!"

5 Followers

About Svenc

  • Rank
    Youth Team

Biography

  • Biography
    "At the end of the day, all we can do as humans is create a tactic which dominates possession, creates clear cut chances and gets shots on target." -- perceived football wisdoms of an eternally to be frustrated Football Manager.

About Me

  • About Me
    Germoney

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    Dishonored II

Recent Profile Visitors

9,536 profile views
  1. Disclaimer: Reason for me posting this is that I want the AI of this game to become ever more intelligent. However, with more intelligent AI.... See, the reason this only ever goes in the AI's favor is nobody even bothers with similar ideas to this for long enough. Back when the AI tactics barely protected ist own attacking Corners (good times, sigh!), with Leicester I had made half a season out of "rigging" the AI. One of the clues what was going on purely stats-wise is the oft much higher percentage of shots to shots on target for Leicester, but in terms of data the game offers, that's it. Blame Match Of The Day and all that crap putting so much importance on shot Counts on a spread sheet (at least they have introduced xG, but too little too late). That's all folks.
  2. A part of the issue is what the game calls a "clear cut Chance". At least you scored not once but actually twice -- counting 9 finishes that would be classed "big Chance" in actual football analysis in this one.
  3. Where the perceived randomness comes in (assuming it wasn't one of those games where every other shot goes flying in, re: long shots) is the AI, though. In the real world of football, this result would have turned heads. Every other manager would be eyeing what Everton were doing and trying to copy that a little. Furthermore, somebody may have figured out something long before Everton. Something at least a little more deadly than the mighty threat of apparently scoring zero Goals on average. It's just one match sure, but it seems doable, after all. In FM, that doesn't come to pass. What's more, the Everton manager didn't specifically set up to exploit a found weakness likewise, as the AI cannot do that… this too is about random chance, the opposition squad and the manager's attributes. So in a sense, the game world invites occasionally random swings, plus it promotes complacency when managing too. The result can be heads getting scratched. Just like here.
  4. Problem is, as soon as a team drops off against an attacking side (it may be yours), that's an insta domination of both of those by total default. Improved feedback may not tell players exactly where they are going mediocre to wrong, which would make the game too easy (at the end of the day, this is all about increasing the chances of scoring against a specific opponent) -- it may give them hints however that there may be something that could be improved at all. The CCCs and half chances were meant to solve this, but SI's subjectivity and glitches aside, it's obvious nobody knows exactly what they even are meant to encompass. That leaves players with the body language type of feeback, flagging forwards as frustrated/nervous once the scatterbrain approach of throwing bodies forward doesn't work and / or the crucial early/opening goal doesn't come. Even for something as simple as figuring out how many shots would be from genuinelly created from space and open play -- it's a lot of work and clicks to do that.
  5. Yeah, there's a reason why FiveThirtyEight's ranking has them sitting on top. And make no mistake, this City season would be reported as "getting rigged" by quite a few FM Players -- in particular considering that at the same time, Liverpool win Matches in sequence whilst barely having their final shot advantage. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/soccer-predictions/premier-league/ As do raw xG rankings have them sitting up top. https://understat.com/league/EPL/2019 Nevertheless this may also be another case of what we've been arguing for so long: FM's data just isn't sufficient to cover it all (and that may not be the case even with something aping xG). Because whilst raw xG Rankings may look fine, there may still be (defensive) issues if you digged a little further: https://statsbomb.com/2020/03/how-much-do-manchester-city-need-to-overhaul/ Nevertheless, I'd personally bet on them getting back into a closer title race the next season -- I've actually seen a few bookies listing them as favorites. Also, FM is still in need of more intelligent stats than what it has had now for so long. Plus, the data it has needs to be interpreted smarter, e.g. no final match reports arguing a side was "superior" simply because it had more shots to show on a spreadsheet come the final whistle, and so on.
  6. It's not the duties, as linked to in my previous post, it's what is effectively being encouraged by pushing every single Player up, in particular against an opposition obviously sitting deep. I don't disagree with the shots -- it's just that if you went all experimental on this, the game has always been a case of: garbage in, ocasionally garbage out. With knap's for instance, for all the success and general results (which nobody doubts), you could have gone 60 shots without scoring way before FM 20. Mind you, this a game flaw. Arguably, it's actually a design flaw, what with the game pretending to simulate actual management. However experimental/illogical/unrealistic/overly aggressive tactics have always tended to make the game look even "funnier".
  7. Just a guess (2nd half of post, in particular the set piece part). Plus another tactic that sees no defend duties outside the centre backs applied 24/7. That kinda stuff has always lead to further… curiosities. Arguably the bigger issue still is the winning run with a subpar Team, rather than a one-off match, but heh.
  8. And yet, a lot (not all) frustrations expressed can be oft traced back to just that kind of thing. The download sections for instance are usually filled with tactics that basically a) see no defenders outside the centre backs and b) have nobody occupying the centre of the pitch, which usually has an effect both on defending (speaks to reason) as well as attacking (no much space created if everybody sits atop of each other for lotsa additional set pieces / crap shots). And depending how the AI lines up, (and how powerful the set piece exploits are) this can get quite nasty indeed. This has been going on ever since the "collision avoidance" which forces players to run around markers, rather than ghosting through them. Prior to that the schtick was it to have a fistful players always staying behind the ball, and launching balls towards isolated attackers, which was too efficient due to that "ghosting". As it is: garbage in, occasionally garbage out. Not my problem though.
  9. 1) Surely the first port of call was Looking at what those Ai was doing differently (SPOILER: It won't be rocket science though SI have received suggestions in the past.) And connected to 2) This isn't true as an universal experience as the AI drops a good amount of points, usually -- as recorded and complained about by many (in this very thread, by the way too, highlighting how even top Team shot conversions can be quite subpar). In particular if it doesn't have worldy squads to begin with (e.g. not PSG style squad Quality dominations in Ligue 1)...
  10. It's logical insofar as the AI in these games can be this defensive, they only ever work shots from Errors, Long shots, set piecees, etc. as they are too defensive. Your Team makes Errors in These other Matches as well. Some of them may cost you Goals too. However, if AT ALL you concede a Goal against overly defensive Opposition, it will in tendency Always be from Errors, Long shots, set pieces and so on. Emphasis on AT ALL. edit: sorry again for the random caps, Edge is a ****** browser with the worst Auto correction I've seen ever.
  11. Also how the AI (tactics) operate still, probably. Take the perception of "Only ever losing due to bad luck, a worldy strike, an error etc. instead of the player being outplayed " If the AI Plays at ist most defensive, that's all it's ever going to win by. That's just... logical. That said, if there's anybody in internal testing who goes with the "game is unfair/cheating/rigged" theory, I'd demand him to be kicked out the door promptly. He's wasting coder's time and is holding the game back. All SI MAY do is invite some of the better posters who insist on such theories to come in. And check why they feel that way (see above) and perhaps do something about it where reasonable -- obviously disallowing the AI from ever using "Let's park the bus, house and SI Offices in front of our Goal" tactics may not be realistic.
  12. And for as long as that suspicous is there the game wasn't playing fair, it never (overly) will be. https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/116071/Analysis_Game_AI__Our_Cheatin_Hearts.php
  13. It also has multiplayer components though, plus the game is marketed as the "most realistic football sim game on the market". Now if Johnny McFootballfan consistently gets Huddersfield into Europe first Season or smashes the Ladbroke Premiership scoring 6.x Goals average, that'd probably make the game look worse than Fifa Manager. No, wait…
×
×
  • Create New...