Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won




  • 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

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    Dishonored II

Recent Profile Visitors

8,448 profile views
  1. There is no tactic (nor a tactical decision) that makes a side outperform consistently their ability like that. There Always is in the ME, and a part of that is imo that FM does not simulate zonal defending as a Team proper, which in tendency Always leaves gaping holes to be plugged manually (open flanks on FM 17, central spaces FM 18/19). Even if there were, Managers would quickly take note and try to adapt. The AI is incapable of doing this. And even as a human Manager, it oft takes awkward measures to defend them -- exploit tactics typically also are the only tactics you Need to prepare specific counter measures for or you may be getting "ripped". (Which is why I don't Play online with People who use them, personally.) On the Occasion, an AI happens to defend those tactics some btw. For instance, if somebody against against most common sense were to just shove legions of players forward and crowd the central area in front of the OP box. If he would come against an AI Happening to crowd just that area just as well (the AI prefering a Formation packing that area and the AI sitting Deep): The end result often isn't particularly Pretty... and makes Players go "broken ME". This release this doesn't come to pass this oftenly, as the most "successful" and therefore popular tactics have Pretty damn powerful set piece exploits in place, which kinda guarantee a set piece Goal every other match. So even if the AI **** easily gets a foot into the move every single time, eventually it'll crack from a set piece, unlike, say, this (BROKEN ME :D). There's Always been two Schools of playing the game "tactically". I'd argue the one of them keeps legions of Players of ever getting to "grips" with the game wholesale. For instance, as few admit to exploiting the ME (which is fine), there is the Notion that the game is intended to be like that; spend Hours on finding / creating the "Right" tactic and you'll be over the moon consistently no matter what else you do (that is, until a patch may fix an exploit, and Maybe by accident -- upon which it is back to the drawing board.) Meanwhile, don't do the same and you'll do significantly worse (what kinda game is that?). That's Frustration guaranteed. That said, most of the stuff in this Forum takes "Advantage" over the AI itself as well; it's simply not on a Level playing field in Terms of decision making.
  2. I think I had a 48-1 somewhere too. Admittedly I had sabotaged the Concord Rangers backline by fielding a single FB as their "last line of defense". Seems like the game doesn't consider all "one on ones" or even better yet cutbacks to unmarked players actually taking the keeper out of the Picture already equal opportunity. Same as for the infamous "clear cuts" in general. Quite weird that innit. :P
  3. The first step to take in any general enquiry About conversions was figuring out how many chances/shots are actually generally converted… The above is akin to Pep going through all the Matches in which he concedes off very few shots (which in tendency tend to be most Matches where he concedes/Drops the Points by his brand of Football vs. what the Opposition typically Plays against his), and then figuring we concede too easily. General conversions can only be worked out at the total numbers. Then you could break that down to specific Scenarios you may be struggling to score, with both not necessarily being the same thing. That said, FM's AI has that Habit of playing Ultra defensive spoil Sports Football (and Den Haag for damn sure did in this match, in particular after going in front). Statistically very one-sided Matches then will be the norm. THey simply try to make it hard/er to score 90 minutes plus extra rage quit time. Btw. Above tactical Analysis I'd be interested as to a breakdown how many of the above shots inside the box, in particular central positions were from a) set pieces (e.g. typically oft a Header in a much crowded box), b) open Play. That said, the flanks in the above look fairly symmetrical, so will provide the same kinda movement/Play. Additionally, with both IFs cutting inside, there doesn't seem to be a really aggressive wide Defender to then push Forward into that wide space to stretch Play/the pitch/provide passing angles from wider positions that could cause additional Trouble for the defensive Shell.
  4. In the BL it also isn't that unusual for there to be but a gap of 12-15 Points between European spots and the Relegation play-off. That's basically 3 wins turned into losses (or vice versa) plus a couple Additional draws. A lot of competitive Football Matches are tight Affairs that could really have gone either way at some Point. Whilst there's also something to say that overperforming sides oft lose some of the key players the coming season, and all that… There's also a saying that goes: Luck doesn't endlessy repeat, skill does. If "luck" played a significant part in the Prior Season's Performance, then Teams would come crashing down simply because of that. Whilst that is hard to gauge -- I think the role of such tends to be big time downplayed, as else we wouldn't have heroes to upgrade celebrate and losers to Downgrade rubbish (and the margins between both, in particular in competitive Sports in which athlethes of comparably equal ability apply by Definition, could be Pretty damn tight…). As of Vardy, his raw xG backed him up back then.
  5. Oh yeah, Looking at the raw numbers in isolation never tell the full Story -- though it's 9.9/10 still more "accurate" than what is written in the papers or discussed amongst fans / pundits (I've seen guys arguing United may be in for a relegation battle, whicih granted, given this is Football, is possible -- ask Klopp about it). At the same time, purely Looking at raw results, the table, the assists and goals also doesn't suffice to gauge performances. As anybody making a Living off this argues, be it club analysts, bookies, bettors: as a reliable ranking of Performances, "the table and results lie" (which is why bookies love to publish just such results and recent WDL streaks on their Websites). Naturally the table lies much more in the early season than later on: A side Winning tight Matches in sequence won't be able to do so for an entire Season typically… e.g. their results would eventually regress towards their actual Performances. Same as what Alcacer did first half last Season at Dortmund just wasn't sustainable in any Kind of way -- basically every shot on target being a Goal when he was brought on -- whilst Neuer seemed to have faded completely on the other end for Bayern, and appeared to have lost all his shot stopping ability (which had cost Bayern dearly). And then there's also the influence of the fixture lists, etc. This may be also worthwhile when generally considering upgrading/downgrading entire Squads after a single successful or unsuccesful Campaign. Naturally, it's tricky to do. In Germany there's oft a talk about a supposedly "Euro League Curse". It refers to Teams that, oft by "surprise", make it into the top six -- but then don't ever seem to repeat it the Season/s after. Sometimes they are even relegated the Season after. Given the previous overperformance before, decline is only natural to be expected… over a single Season, much goes. Over multiple ones… not so much. Accumulated point tables over 5 - 10 Seasons are a depressingly predictable affair most of the time in General.
  6. In a way, yes. However, in another, not quite. At least in a couple posts there seems an expectation that if Teams/Players start well/badly into a Season, they should receive Upgrades/Downgrades. Not sure how that works at the actual Research -- but that is much too short a time Frame. In particular in a Sport such as Football, where the perception of Performances is oft this overshadowed by raw results (in Matches that oft could have gone either way…) I haven't actually looked, but it would be interesting to check whether CR7, Ibra et all back then received a Downgrade when they went slumping for a couple months (to be inevitably upgraded again a couple months later…). In truth they still had About as much Quality scoring chances as ever, and simply went through slumps as of providing an end product (which are Pretty common in Football). Not sure whether actual Research takes such into account where available, mind. However, I'd personally hope they are eyeing longer term time Frames than but a couple weeks or months -- as kinda requested here.
  7. Did both respective side do so despite some of their actual Performance metrics telling a more nuanced Story tho. :P (See Team Analysis on StatsBomb, for instance -- the Team Rankings on FiveThirtyEight has City still slightly on place 1, and United actually still in the top 5). (I'm personally questioning whether Liverpool are currently actually "battering everyone" myself, at least if moreso than in the last season). They've had a run of 9 straight wins in the last Season, during which City lost 3. Likewise, United had their bad spells of results during the last season too. Both didn't happen to be at the start of the Season though -- e.g. at the start of any Season, the table as an actual somewhat reliable ranking of Performance may or may not lie the most. Then again, who knows. Football is a funny Sports due to the ridiculously few Points made per Minute played -- as Klopp had found in his 2014/2015 Dortmund Campaign too, in particular the first half. Better or at least equal Team almost every other week as you'd at least expect from a CL Finalist a couple months Prior, even one in "Crisis" -- place 18 by February in the tables. Now if that were possible to happen on FM.
  8. Probably one of the reasons why SI never listen to the one on one complaints. Ever. (Actually, one time ca. FM 2011ish they did, and found that there was an actual issue with a specific type of one on one. However, the criticism went a bit further than the obviously far off the mark "striker never score on on ones" complaints).
  9. You may or may not be Right with the "too many chances", but if anything, it's usually many of the poorer ones that shouldn't be converted that oftenly. Count the amount of stuff from set pieces, no space and range alone, in particular against the inevitable "parking bus AI". To expect or Code any of this stuff to be converted regularly, would Display a complete lack of understanding of how the game of Football works (Copyright TEd Knutson). https://statsbomb.com/2016/10/xcommentary/ PS: SI's Definition of a "clear cut Chance" sucks. It will do so for as Long as SI hold an entirelly semantic debate of what should consistitue a clear cut. And even then there's far too many different chances that apply -- from actual tap-ins in an empty net, to reasonably difficult one on ones at no angle and with the Defenders breathing down a forward's neck. Whilst he makes a case for the CCCS I don't agree with, you are likely much better off with Rashidi's Analysis instead. As it's plain obvious a huge Edge over what the AI can do in-game in Terms of Analysis, probably one of the reasons why SI don't "ape" it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PToI29JH2SE&t=279s
  10. Just saying, this is not how the ME works. May be useful to know as a Player, but is even more important if you'd report Bugs. The ME is a sequence by sequence, kick by kick calcuation. It doesn't artificially make a crosser overhit anything. The Thing to fix therefore here would be defenders too easily getting in the way of a cross -- or the winger too easily hitting the Defender. Which can have a Variety of reasons, some of which sometimes not at all obvious, as it may be related to faulty off the ball movement many seconds to the actual incident i.e. cross/block earlier, etc.. The end result would be a second actual Chance in the same "highlight".
  11. Perhaps AI, same as Players likewise should be finally limited to making actual Football decisions. (Which would also making the balance of the ME tons easier -- Things actually being coded around Football concepts proper implemented wholesale). Granted, then the tactics forumees couldN't have this big of an Edge (and the download sections may throw a tantrum). You have perfectly highlighted in your above post where a big part of the "issue" is -- AI included as well. Too many possible Micro combinations leading to not much Football -- and too many factors to consider likewise. Good luck coding dynamic AI changing things also during a match (let alone making Adjustments prior to each match) around such complex decision making processes. Speaking about AI, how the General Play "Looks" like may also depend on how the AI may set up (rigidly parking the bus every other week so that Play may be forced out wide more often than not….).
  12. If you get a player feeding / popping up in space, he'll score some. The prime reason why some Players get fairly average guys to score Pretty consistently every release, and vice versa the AI struggles with Messi et all. The Chance / regular amount of such matters far more than the Player who has them. (Which is actually some true in Football as well). There are Player Attributes that help here -- off the ball movement, pace, dribbling, anticipation. But in General, if a guy is set up in a way that he has attempts regularly, he'll score. Needless to say I don't like how highly rated Goals are in themselves. A Player may be just doing his Job, and this fairly averagely or even below par, even he if he was pretty regularly scoring. His side may be just set up in such a way that he would be regularly fed with Quality balls. Goals are the only Things that eventually Count on the score sheet; however Goal scoring as such is just as much of a "Job" as Winning the ball back is.
  13. Not sure, Needs to be more specific. On early FM 2015 you could have cricket scorelines on average though precisely because there could be so many one on one Scenarios and similar. If the AML/AMR/AMC/FWD positions were given an attack duty by either player or AI, those players didn't track back to defend. As a result, defenders were pulled all over the pitch. Of Course, for the majority of Players who noted the phenomenon it was "keepers being garbage" -- a nice Change in narrative. Don't understand the Obsession with one on ones generally. They aren't converted roughly 7/10 in Football. It all depends on the angle, distance and pressure, but generally they're very good, but not great chances. The term "one on ONE" may give it a bit away -- the keeper isn't taken out of the Picture, and most of the time, he's fully game (and has the edge). Therefore, I don't do data one on ones, but I would bet that it's not as low as is perceived (though there could be more of them in-game than in football). Don't get FM 2010 or 2011ish, as for once there was an acknowledged isssue with a specific type of one on one. This was resolved as Players for once gathered and took a look what was Happening, rather than arguing genereally going one on ones are broken.
  14. The Thing is that 99% of them don't work by Football logic, so crazyness in individual matches is to be expected (scroll down to last Paragraph). (Even though there still is no FAQ in place for this). In particular if the AI happens to defend its illogical one-dimensionaless some. The stats on FM may say one Thing (and they are not that good), but typically there's also a load of crap shots in there. Plus, and this is no exception, this tactic has no defensive protection whatsoever (just a single line), so depending what the AI does, it's presented stuff on a silver platter. It's Always been the same Story every year. Nobody "gets it" though. For as Long as the game is set up the way it is: Garbage in, occasionally garbage out. If we are arguing "realism", then the game would Need to be limited to "realistic" tactics.
  • Create New...