Svenc

Members
  • Content count

    2,327
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Svenc

  • Rank
    Semi Pro

About Me

  • About Me
    Germoney

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    Casino Calavera

Recent Profile Visitors

3,671 profile views
  1. Not such much the one one one, though those are often overrated, but the supply. The narrower you play, the more no angled balls you'll have to provide assists. Simple laws of physics, any angled ball unleashing a forward he can change the direction of the ball massively, giving the keeper little chance, whilst a centrally ball straight through the middle that's impossible and the keeper has "just" to rush straight out of goal to worsen the angle and deflect the shot somehow. This will be always modeled in some way or another into the game, flawed or no, as it aims to be a sim. Same that you can make it harder to score for finishers of any class and vice versa easy for weak ones. A realistic conversion for your top forward should be 1 in 8-9 shots and 25-35% of his shots on target, if you want to have a check whether it's a general issue or not. Finding instances showing bad finishes isn't hard, finishing in general isn't an issue, you can convert up to 1 in 6-7 total shots provided you're still playing against attacking teams exposing themselves. Whether in FM players miss too many one on ones through on goal is debatable, though. Same as whether there are too many and the way they are "missed", and there's some recognized issues I think anyhow. You won't face opponents that push up but also those who immediately drop deep when they lose the ball, so the narrowness has been an issue with many ever since FM 1787. If the fullbacks are manually tweaked to sit more narrow, or not getting much involved due to other reasons,this makes this more severe. Unless an AI manager has a huge bias or plays defensively, he from my experience won't play that narrow, so every time his team has the ball he may spread play and conversely pull your defenders all over the pitch, plus will have balls coming from all kinds of directions rather than straight through the middle exclusively. Best visible from an overhead view too, in motion the ball actually going out wide will push defenders there, otherwise they have a super small area to cover and always get a foot in. Maybe you can succeed overloading centrally areas with multiple players, but having it all coming off no angled through balls to a lone forward are the hardest to convert and probably should be. FM 2009 or 2010 or thereabouts had a big bug which caused the mostly two central backs to split, which some exploited by through balls played centrally in between them to an unmarked forward. However as he was immediately closed down, the keeper came out of goal too and due to the narrow nature, that was a harder chance to convert than the ccc+1 count suggested leading to frustration.
  2. The match stats of the reload (?) I reckon still suggests they may have found curious space, so if you want to have a look, upload, it's just the match no more. Those tweaks all have visibly effects asap, however if the structure isn't there (formations and roles!) that won't fix any holes, and pushing higher up also has drawbacks, such as that they can now pump through balls in behind your visibly much higher defensive lines, etc. It's mostly quite easy stuff, this match-up sounded like a particularly curious case and may have made for really good explaining. Do you remember your formation and roles and duties you started with? And what formation do they field (starting one usually doesn't change on a reload, mostly).
  3. I have my nemesis formations personally and some rare more creative player formations not used by AI can come up against AI manager formations that puts holes into it all all of a sudden (not by cracking which is a myth); the most curious combination was a two legged cup tie where in the return tie (first match was won by a big margin) a creative back line of LB ---- CB ---- RB was exploited big time by the AI manager fielding 3 central forwards, his prefered attacking formation apparently in an attempt to get back into the tie, which makes the outer two roaming in between those players and sitting into all that space between them. Not saying whether that's the case, just as an example. If you want an opinion why you were getting "outplayed" against that opponent, you would need to click on the result, hit save match and upload. Else it's 100% guess work as different AI managers do different things. You aren't to get seriously outplayed against weaker opposition (assuming it was) just cause though, never seen that personally, provided the team was fit etc. anyway. For what it's worth, FM 2016 can have a bit curious dynamics in particular if your team is still considered "one to beat", as AI managers can expose themselves big time, in particular if they go behind (just or unjust), so beating or at least scoring additionally against the big guys away can be easier than beating the mid-table teams at home, on occasion. Seen plenty of reported stories where freshly promoted sides immediately competed for nice spots the next seasons, in parts fueled by this, imo. Would be also nice to roughly state at what point of the match you made that "push higher up" change. Maybe it's an easy explanation and fix. It not always is, but judging by the stats and the unlikely scenario (table leader vs mid-table team) it may be.
  4. It's a given innit. And yet Fifa Manager's announcements were also taken for granted, on its home market anyways, until they didn't come anymore. It's tough to compare as CM/FM has always been an established brand across Europe, and the publisher's treat these games differently (Sega has cut down and restructured for the mobile / PC market significantly, at least for the time being... and as such Total War or FM franchises are some of their European mainstays). However that series too wasn't axed because the sales went massively down from what was publicly available, the series always had its main market by far in German speaking territories as Fussball Manager as sort of the de-facto successor to the Anstoss / On The Ball series with the main dsigner of that in behind. Still manager games are a niche in the grand scheme of things, in comparison to Fifa it's tiny, and there's a trend towards mobile / MMO or browser kind of stuff, it's also cheaper to develop. Fussball Manager used to sell around 200k copies each year in Germany and there hasn't been anybody yet to invest there in another management series proper (licensing issues, I know I know). It says a lot that FM is pretty much the only traditional commercial management series left, some indies or small-scale projects excluded. Plus in marketing speech FM xx / PC may have entered what Sega's portfolio honchos may treat as one of their cash cows now --probably not planning for significantly investment as there's little massively growth to expect for them looking at Sega's annual reports of the latest years' that are released each spring, but something they may milk for as long as profitable. Which, can well go for a long time to follow mind as long as there isn't another massively restructuring in the works. One of such saw EA almost axing Fifa Manager in 2005ish already, as they had shifted their focus on consoles, that they never got the growth targeted into European markets which where taken by CM/FM probably didn't help. At their numbers there would be some life for SI even after Sega though and they are branching out into mobile markets and MMO too. Ok Sega, now please green-lit Alien:Isolation 2, please (don't I wish, sigh). Any death threats for MilesSI so far? If somebody receives those over 30 bloody bucks, you know what a messed up world this is. ;-)
  5. Did they change how that worked, because previously match prep was temporarily boosts to player traits. Pretty good point by MBarbaric, on the defensive end, apart of ME limitations, manager customization (Both AI and ours) has been far more limited to what's going on in possession. I can relate to why this is done, there is also a lot of hard-coding clearly, like in this version where the full backs defend super narrow to help containing central threats (which naturally leaves out more space wide). If this was some kind of more customizable, it would be likely one hell of a balancing job. If you watch patch notes and the various times when PaulC still communicated stuff on public, it is kind of revelead that his manually tweaks to d-line positioning or centre back engagement etc. can have huge knock-ons on player decisions all itself, like an increase in long shots, etc. On the more recent Fifa Managers the hugely limited Fifa engine taken didn't respond to anything, always direct attacking footaball of the arcadish kind by both sides, but you could draw two kinds of "movement arrows" from default positions though, both with and without the ball. As lots of play was kind of inherently geared towards belting the ball to the central forwards, the Fifa AI simply always picks the guy next to the goal and belts it to him, and thus central areas were the most of the threat pretty much always, you'd micro-tweak the back four to all sit completely narrow and had a CM joining them too and had a better defense than any opponent across the shop (naturally on the attacking end you could tweak this as much that you'd score like 5+ goals on average a match always with the most average of players, making it all a bit pointless).
  6. Really good point shirajzl. Though I think the likelyhood of conceding soft goals has increased dramatically if you expose yourself. Anything that happened on the interception was a bit toothless on the last couple iterations indeed, but I've had plenty of matches against attacking AI in this one where they racked up their shot counts against us dropping off and denying space whilst they got undone either on the counter directly or by a ball over their advanced top pulling them everywhere, up to conceding a goal every 2nd shot of us in total. So that's good development overall, but even better would be if the game could actually replicate a match where say Bayern full of starters fail to record a single shot against 2nd tier opposition for 40 minutes (which happened last season), but that's likely some iterations and rewrites of modules of the ME, in particular the defending ones, off. It's just that it has become a bit of an unfortunate mix-up in between exploits and how many players may approach the game. There's always been a large section that simply thinks winning the battle in stats (possession, shot counts) would be a good sign in itself which it naturally isn't, as soon as an opponent drops off to spoil you'll dominate stats by default, and it becomes a matter of what the shots then actually look like. Even if they know that is not how football works, a stats based computer game must, so a lot of people steer towards attacking tactics, dominating stats = more likely to win. This is also fueled by bad myth that the match engine itself was a statistics sim and the play arbitrary set pieces showing how goals are scored. You see those on the Workshops. The most common exploit in the FM 11/12 era was intriguingly exactly the opposite, never exposing a thing and frustrating AI, always keeping 6, 7 players behind the ball on defend duty or forward runs never and keeping wingers / forwards up the pitch. In a sense it was a blessing, as it meant less "cheating AI" and scripted match theories as defenses were always always packed. However that only worked for 90 minutes because the forwards could walk through their markers to pick up through balls so weren't reliable on support to score at all, causing widespread frustration when fixed. So both the current Workshop stuff and download tactics influence some which fuels individual frustration, and going by current development, that might increase. AI only plays that exposing when it is desperately to push for a goal, looking at some recent matches, not even AI Wenger at home against AI Watford had all his guys pushing upfield from kick-off. Pretty basic stuff, but if you field risky, expect risky is perhaps the best thing you can say by now without knowing where FM 2017 and onwards are headed. =)
  7. What was the "big" targeted change in between 14 & 15 anyway? Part of the problem is, first and foremost FM creates a world that is self-sustainable and in which you may participate in if you want to. If you don't fine, it runs on its own and is supposed to operate how football would roughly. So within the parameters of AI teams, lots of stuff just wouldn't crop up. No AI manager would take the worst team in a league and apply a formation that overloads the final third with players and play a high line high risk attacking game 90 minutes. Yet if you did that on 2015, maybe not for all teams on every run, but with a bit of luck and a good run whilst individual results could be all over the shop from heavy beating to great wins (a randomness that could be interpreted as a strength given the scenario mind), you were not totally unlikely to compete for Europe, rather than having a relegation fight if you played what a manager oft may do in real football (or the AI managing instead). On 2016 you're still more likely to get heavily burned for exposing poor defenders. Best addition in recent years, though SI seemed to have forgotten to tell the top dogs that they should watch out for heavy through balls exposure in the process too. This can't be all created around tweaks to the match play, it needs to take into account what managers may be doing too, including AI. Eventually that has a heavy bearing on what is going to transpire, naturally. If you can convert every 6th overall attempts made for months if given some space, which looks similar to counter attacking sides of past, i.e. Villa a couple of more successfully seasons ago, finishing can't be all that horrible, same as overall decision making, and tweaks on that front would also go two ways. Arguably there's a couple of formations that AI should react to either way, such as the 4-2-3-1 narrow overloading the centre of the pitch (personal nemesis of mine but also very effective against no DM formations in particular), so things appear tough. If you stay within those parameters, outside of the more obvious bugs everything can be quite fantastic, if you obsess and throw stuff, on occasion it doesn't even have to be wild, it can lead to very odd things, such as the channels a couple years available against like 90% of AI employing four at the back for three central forwards to flourish in. What looked a semi regular attacking formation could not be defended. I think it's quite a way to go though still, technical attributes in particular still don't seem weighted all that heavily in the success of very basic things, such as passes (based on extreme editor experiments). They could really stress test defending, like what happens if you field multiple false 9ish types dragging defenders everywhere or employ formations that inherently overload (yet still are used by AI too). Set up a side with 7 players always making forward runs for 90 minutes of the entire season and see how they cope. Problem is, if it's tweaked on those accounts, most of the AI setups may struggle to score at all anymore, sigh. Maybe they should go the route Total Club Manager did on its first couple iterations, no matter how you set up, both teams would always load up as 4-4-2 into the Fifa engine taken, and similar to PES Management or LMA or whatever was around back in the day nothing you clicked had much bearing on the style of play that would transpire. Balancing problem solved -- game over.
  8. Without tweaking some, defensive mentalities naturally push hugely off (deep line). But I find it reasonably easy with a good side to hold onto leads by keeping players a little deeper going defensive and recycling the ball, you'll see it in the goal spreads what I did do in this save after taking leads. This was as basic as they come on full speed never obsessing about a thing, setting up a reasonably attacking setup and one then to hold onto leads, just switching. Naturally with merely average teams every week will and should be a tighter contest. Also on lower leagues you should see much more errors eventually settling ties and worse pitches may make it some harder to retain as well. I would never get carried away by a random match, one-off anything freaky could happen, I conceded 3 dfks on another save in a single match which was lower league actually, and how about own goals and actually bugs. Additionally if you have already shipped some, things can totally fall apart as own players mostly react badly outside the super determined (actually had de Jong getting pushed at 1-4), and the opponent growing in confidence. This must have been the only match during that run where at all we conceded late, clearly an AI on the attack, so every time your team drops the ball they'll have a go and stretch you some. Previously, easy to defend, none of the full backs on aggressive duty to stretch, plus obviously keeping things narrow. AI play more attackingly or defensively, think of the 4-2-4 in older iterations you can sniff from miles away considered a "comeback bug" by some. There's not meant to be a right or wrong approach but sitting all deep and dropping off will naturally invite pressure into your half when an opponent is on the attack. On the formation widget we have by now we can see whether things change (attack duty players typically push some up, as the right hand central midfielder in this widgets). Personally actually wish the thing was a tad more sophisticated, as arguably the AI does still weird stuff that was sorted by totally entry level guides years ago such as isolating attacking players sometimes. On topic, FM 2017 should get rid off the assistant in-match advice arguably entirelly, it's all about stats and nothing else. Maybe they can keep that in, but make it apparent that it is just that, such as the guy pointing out stuff that sticks out, i.e. passing percentage drops below x, here, take a look. Whether that is an issue then is for you to decide. If FM's ass men would have assisted Rainieri last season he would have had quite some busy schedule. Wasn't aware of that but suspected this would lead to weird dynamics it as typically you'll have it pushing wide areas late in a match, so hopefully this will get fixed. It isn't set to exploit as such, though, wasn't even back then with the set piece stuff from which you could get centre backs making tons of goals and deciding tons of additionally tight matches in your favor every season. Even if you never carved anybody open, in comes the corner, kaboom.
  9. Thing is, a lot of one on ones are quite overrated, just think about the term, "one on one", implying that their is a battle between two going on, and every side being able to anticipate, the keeper actually has a chance of narrowing angles and making it harder to score for a start, all he needs to do is to deflect it, whilst the forward has to trap the ball at pace and control whilst getting the shot reasonably on target. In real football those are converted at no more than 1 in 3 or 1 in 4 rates, and the narrower the supply the harder to convert. It's a dramatic situation which is why it ranks so highly by gut feeling but depending on the supply it's hardly the easiest chance you can create. Not arguing FM is totally accurate, but that should be the aim. Also it's actually always easier against opponents who play high lines actually and push up to find space. Even if that doesn't result in a one on one, it immediately has the entire defense on the back foot (hence users traditionally posting the many 30 shots no goals screenshots, oft failing to break teams down teams sitting ducks without noticing, as we don't have stats showing which shot was off set pieces rather than open play, and CCCs can be anything). These lead to goals directly, despite not showing up as a CCC at all, opening cans of the space City never had on any of their shots. For all the crossing thing, it's still possible to concede consistently less than 1 goal on average, or with top teams, far less than 0.5 on average. The AI must manage it despite its flaws, such as the big guys never registering when they're punished for their aggressively stuff as you'll see it winning leagues with scoring no more than 1.5 goals on average depending on the manager despite having huge squads. It can be very annoying, and in some random matches multiple goals may come off them and if that's broken for you then it is, but over the long term for every cross from deep connecting, there's tons that don't get anywhere at all just not shown in the highlights.
  10. 20% doesn't sound particularly good, in particular if that's before that bad spell. It's easier to get better numbers if you face teams who try to attack you, rather than just avoid the royal spankings, like Barcelona would face every week from the game's start, which is natural. They visibly open up, so leave space behind. It's always been that parking bus conundrum that's been the cause of frustration. Firstly, if a team parks the bus, you will dominate every single stat by default, so having more is not a sign of playing well -- a common argument is that dominating stats every week was beating the ME, and thus the game would need to drum up these matches were you dominate stats but still lose consistently. You can statistically dick Barcelona with Stoke if they would sit back (which can happen due to odd AI manager decisions). All they aim for is spoiling, more players staying behind the ball, dropping deep immediately, playing narrow, etc. I rarely to never achieve such numbers as these with top teams, that's approaching the same conversion of overall shots you have for yours that are on target, for months and months, and nothing to pat myself on the back for. But caused by teams exposing themselves. Every 6th attempt a goal. As Silver Twilight Sparkle hinted at, you can have the best conversion rates with the most mediocre of forwards and the worst ones with absolutely top class. One-off or over short spells man management, keeping players focused, all that all plays a role, plus random chance (worth watching if you always convert but 20%, as argued the current AI average seems to be about 25%). But if things persist for months, that is tactical. The match engine isn't a statistics simulator, it is the visible play encouraged that makes the numbers. How the game defines a CCC is always tweaked, a header finish for instance is never counted as such even if the goal is empty (on some releases it was), and naturally all shots are different. It is possible for instance that it may be comparably easy to unleash forwards one on one from no angled through balls through the centre (recent release had a bug for this actually), but that doesn't make it a better chance. Same as it may well be an ME weakness that you can get so many on average far weaker attempts from set pieces going. To further quote from wwfan's research involved with SI: The stuff he says about roles and duties in particular in his 12 step guide still all over the web is what I always encourage somebody to just reset to when things turn sour. It's not meant as a set of rules, but it still ensures you've got the basics covered even when never watching a thing on commentary, and even if there would be hard rules which there aren't they can be broken if/when you understand them. Well above average conversion doesn't mean success naturally... it just means the chances you have which can be few or many are consistently taken. :-)
  11. Players becoming unhappy/demanding a move can happen right after a first offer may be rejected, depending on which. So any bid thereafter has a bigger chance of going through. There should be more feedback on transfers in general, not sure if SI would need to make a list of factors that are at all considered (those tend to be quite simplistic affairs in management games old and past), but there needs some of it. What they will likely never reveal is the actually negotations AI managers make to wrap it all up, although that would make for a better understanding how it all came about. What you see is the sum, but not the entire deal, and whether there were deadlines applied which put the selling manager under pressure. As for the transfer markets, will be intriguing d how all that cash now in the game is going to be balanced out. One two seasons in and even a mid-tier Bundesliga club will have big to huge budgets and just growths in wealth, which eventually naturally rubs off on transfer markets in multiple ways. For one, no clubs needing much to sell unless player may demand a move. On a release a couple years ago there was a bug that made you see private conversations between AI managers and their players, and at least back then in tendency whenever a player would demand a transfer, the AI managers gave in and put him on the list (many human players simply sat it all out and refused). The sums being in the game after but a couple of years are quite absurd. Not sure whether they will reflect actual reality, even considering the ever rising TV deals. That reload scenario is a non-issue. The aim should be to make AI managers behave like actually managers roughly, that is humans who have all different preferences and squad bias and systems they are looking for, which snooping around in the editor and the traits you can edit for managers, appears to be just that aim. There's nothing AI sees here that you can't, like you being told by scouts these guys aren't worth it, and if you would go check their profile you'd see that they're bad players. Apart of reloading or editing this could be done by hitting on match engine or AI tactics bugs, oft making players semi-regularly appear in spaces that visibly aren't much marked. If they were, they would underperform and taken out of the game easily. If you'd ever get lowly players competing all up, I'd report it, as it must break the save in several ways and may make it quite unenjoyable as those guys would never attract interest from anyone nor demand a move for a start. You wouldn't buy them, so no AI should either. It would make them less competitive actually, wasting all their funds, as at their teams those players would never perform.
  12. Until you expose yourself all season and then whine about why they eventually slot one home and you have a record of conceding from the first few shots on target (AI is cheating!). Some goals you concede may come off individual errors or bugs, so that it's always some likely that you would concede despite dominating in the odd match, but you don't have to provoke it. E.g. having no deeper midfielder protecting as many have can also rub off on your conversion in negative ways, and it makes it harder to retain the ball. What you would set up would repeat until you change on each of your attacks. The ball is dropped many times a match and season. The ME is a second by second sim for each match, so for every counter that may be bottled, there may be one that isn't. In particular, as you may have found, that finishing attributes in themselves aren't everything (so did I). Searching the forums, I recently saw this post. Whilst this was from years ago, wwfan used to do some research and got quite involved with SI, so he knows what's roughly aimed at (it's surprising how players can on occasion have the same issues he argues they'd have in current editions also), in other words, you should look firstly at the nature of the supply and play you create more than at the player here, as the world class is on occasion meant to save your arse on the odd occasion, but he won't turn a mediocre/bad chance into a good one, and even the worst of players will have it reasonably easy to score if they are gifted space (like on the counter, i.e. my world class defenders conceded two against the bottom pile, cheating!!!). That's not talking the set-up, such in your video how the dribbler goes past defenders himself to set himself up, that is about the eventually situation and taking the chance or not. This wasn't based on gut feeling, but research: A lot of the way I play and my understanding still goes all the way back to wwfan's guide published. That stuff is still useful today. Recently saw a package of pkms where the exact same thing he described where happening caused by completely narrowness against a packed defense, whilst there's reasons in real football teams try to stretch them. In particular from overview cams the difference is drastic. Go super narrow and no defender ever has to engage much out of his area. Go wide and they are pulled all over. The bad thing is that the stats that are focused on can make it look as if you were battering, because it isn't revealed where those shots are coming from (actually open play, that is are you at all carving them open, or set pieces, of which FM can have many and which have boxes packed and players under pressure). Via the body language it is revelead that players can get frustrated and nervous after missing, which can rub off negatively in their conversion from there on, so if you average doesn't have much bite, even with world class forwards this makes bottling the statistically dominating match become much more likely. Other things that guide had addressed, movement, getting the wide guys involved, never playing as one dimensional that all the finishes fall to one guy (who can have a bad day), always a multitude of types of chances created, not isolating your attackers as that can force them into additionally shots... no wonder why despite playing fairly simply I rarely have this and my average conversion rarely dips. Of course you will drop points against runs of play, but the basics are still as simple as they'd been years ago. From there on you can naturally try progress to the next level if you like, and become Rashidi, but if you ever get there, it all probably gets a bit boring depending on how appealing even beating random chance / rotten luck is to you. https://www.addictedtofm.com/fm15-unbelievable-unprecedented-unreal-wba/
  13. Can you upload such a match or two? Click on the result, hit "save match" in the bottom left corner and upload that pkm file to someplace? Just a few kb. You can also check if at least generally, overall, this is perception bias by checking your team report and check the number for shot conversion and calculate the SOT conversion by yourself: (Overall Number Of Goals / Overall Shots On Target ) * 100. Anything much below 10% or 20% respectively would be alarming and as that means averages over big amounts of time it is tactical every time. Bad fortunes aren't sustainable, bad system is. You can also compare it to AI, who from experience average about 10% of shots converted plus, 25% of SOT, that is 1 goal scored every 4 shots on target, give or take. On some saves I personally am about onpar, when experimenting this can be a bit worse, but on a last I went through each match individually and saw that we scored a goal every 8 shots in our own matches, whilst the opponents needed 11 to score against us, a goal from roughly every 3 SOTs whilst the opponents needed 4. This needs a bit of manually work though and I was curious to check. That was from a narrow formation where most of the assists came from centrally midfielders, so not an "exploit" of wide areas thing much. It also wasn't as an underdog gifted some space on the counter, and it was all possession based. I even went on holiday and let the assistant handle everything including tactics, and he outconverted opponents by slight margins with that team too. Common causes from my experience, playing very narrow (either by having no player out wide moving into the attacking third) or going "very narrow" in the instructions as a default, the latter of which naturally helps to retain possession as players stick closer to each other rather than stretching out wide, but it also makes the area an opponent needs to defend very very small, which can be an issue in particular against packed defenses / opponents dropping deep as they always will find a way to put a challenge in. Another oft common theme is simply pushing every player into the box or isolating attacking players. Don't be fooled by shot counts and CCCs here. CCCs can be virtually anything anyway, shots from totally packed boxes after a set piece in pressure vs actually counter stuff into at least some space, and in FM it's possible to have most of your attempts atop of the few quality attempts in actually space from set pieces, which would be a bad sign, but for which there isn't a stat as such, which is also very bad and can be very misleading when looking at the stats breakdown we currently have. From the widget we know that players can grow frustrated, so if you spam mostly weak attempts on average without noticing, never much a good thing. Very common clinical finishing can also be caused by having lack of defensive cover. But as said, best to upload a match. :-) It's not given that you are struggling, if you are struggling, unless you have a horrible team, so much can be guaranteed. And the basics are fairly simple once you're sorted and the typically causes always much the same imo. That said yeah, wide areas are a bit of an issue in this one so if that puts you off, though some guys can defend it pretty well by now (I never set up to specifically cover for that personally and just set up a style I want to play). This would apply for both sides in every match, though. No AI aims to exploit anything of this, or defend against weak areas in the engine (would be a sign of a quite incredibly AI), and you don't need either to be successful.
  14. If you would have more costumization, you would have even more of that. There is even historical evidence of the FM kind for that (though the arrows were also unrealistic mind as they basically made players exhibit two positions at once). Plus other management games, I think the drills and set piece creators in the last CMs was a wholly terrific thing. However as stuff like that can easily draw the entire game moot in a sense, it's likely not to be picked up again in such forms. Fifa Manager's 3d match days based on Fifa engines don't at all respond to much, you'd always have the same roughly gung-ho direct style attacking game from both sides even if you went time wasting or when Burnley were taking Arsenal away, but custom formations and arrows and coming up with the undefendable no matter the players... doable. As matches last but a couple minutes on Fifa, that's indeed almost a goal per minute. With a side just freshly promoted. Even with the current level of input, the above is a numbers game that unlike in real football no AI would ever respond to. It isn't recognized as such and would only face opposition likely if it happens to come against a defensive AI that picks a formation packing say the defensive, in particular the centre, with players. A couple of possible AI formations do that. In a sense the entire thing only works when you and the AI can roughly be on even terms, and I think if at all were quite a few years away from AI managers recognizing areas they are currently being overloaded in. If it ever would, it would be a terrific idea to also link it all to the in-match analysis available, which then can be linked to assistant managers likewise. The counter argument naturally is that FM isn't strictly but a tactics simulator as such, it's the wholly management package, though ironically "exploit" tactics turned the game into a game of tactics 100%, as they override everything else. That's basically "I win" buttons, and with crazy arrows on FM Live playing against that, you likely had to be very creative to counter that if such was possible. Including every workaround you can find, such as manually man marking the guys who would always appear in space unmarked else. No fun. shirajzl, totally agree, I mainly brought this up as it was linked to the "crossing issue" which isn't so much a crossing issue but a "defending of wide areas" issue, and this one utilizes wide areas in simple but very creative ways. It's also more effective than just spamming crosses or fielding certain combos of roles that would hit on ME weak areas, as was suggested in previous. The guy gets plenty involved himself, but he also draws guys for the central guys to overload, which then causes the centre backs to be pulled all over, and when that happens, game over.
  15. I started and stopped obsessing over flaws and idiosyncrasies with early FM 2015 as that has managers playing number games they weren't aware of (like when SI made it so that duty determined whether at all attacking players tracked back). That was crazy watching in some AI matches as well. It's fun registering flaws in its own way, and watching matches back to back. However at the same time it kept me months off actually playing the game and made it less appealing to play "proper". However this has got to be one of the more creative things I've seen in a while. It's known that wide areas are an issue, but this created by somebody is so simple and effective you've got to admire it. The core appears that possible left hand players like bonafide left midfielders are tricked and trapped into marking the centrally guys as the mcr is seen and treated as the MR would be, which makes the wbr the completely show runner opening up the flank completely... should the ball get to his he has guys dragged his way which opens up the central of the pitch again which then can be overloaded by what is effectively loads of guys (both the support guys have the get further forward PIs enabled manually)... seems particularly effective against formations defending off flat lines then. Why buy or develop Thomas Müller and keep him motivated when you can turn the average guy appearing into space? You don't have to exploit a thing but it's a bit sad that you can turn so many modules put effort in and meant to proper interact with one another drawn redundant to a degree, which includes the match play naturally, and hopefully the solution one day won't be to completely lock the formations you can pick to what is available from the db/drop-downs which are the ones used by AI. A couple of positions available on the pitch were already axed throughout the years. Should FM ever go competitive/MMO multiplayer again though, who knows, and balancing it all must be hell. Would be interesting to know how that Korean MMO is going so far.