Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

akkm

Members+
  • Content Count

    835
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

209 "I mean, funny like I'm a clown? I amuse you?"

About akkm

  • Rank
    Amateur

Recent Profile Visitors

3,901 profile views
  1. hey some fair points there especially people will like engines that can enable a style of play better and obviously one they prefer will bias their opinion favourably and fm17 enabled better passing through the middle with passive defending and the wide players thing but thats a small picture view of pass decision simulating real world football as fm17 in the whole simulated pass decision making much better than fm20. as well fairish to suggest biases are there targeted towards high pressing but the bigger point of how that is enabled in fm20 misses the overall point of how its happening. With the dearth of quality pass decision making/movement overall and in the top third and from quality creative players pressing can't really be played around with fm engine so its relative success is not enabled or unfolding for the right reasons. Then throw in then poor stamina/fitness decline effect within matches/periods/seasons/by player standard and fitness wise then the implementation of pressing is a poor simulation compared to real world to enable improper success within FM added to poor pass decision making then you actually have more quirks enabling an easy to beat and for the more wrong reasons within FM. It shouldn't be a linear pressing = success without factoring other elements which Fm happens to not simulate to get to result of making pressing more effective which is the case. Also playing out of defence is to retain possession at times and move opposition around the pitch to move the ball into positions to play threaded passes up in the top third so again having cosmetically good passing out from the back is ultimately futile unless the passing decision making (and obviously complementary movement) further up the pitch will engender a better outcome for why the passing out from the back is utilised in the first place. so really whilst there's passing out from the back and much improved pressing to be fair the success and use of both is misleading because of lack of fundamental football aspects being simulated to firstly make full use of passing from the back and secondly to ensure people garnering success from pressing have a false sense of achievement from using same. So really your points about fm17 apply to fm20 for the reasons you uphold fm20 as being good lol just from different aspects of football. As for the balanced angle FM20 cannot be at all deemed to be well balanced with the absence of proper pass decision making...at times it resembles the opposite of football in passages of play. The simulation of pass decision making to not value space adequately in the top third and in tight spaces and often to overvalue space out wide and over a higher line deem this engine a failure as a simulation of simple basic entry level passing which even playground football would see. Add in the need for improved movement then FM20 really falls down heavily in the basic fundamentals of football which have been prevalent since football began. The basics of football within FM should be to have passing and movement simulated as well as they can be. After that comes team structure/defensive shape/pressing and all the other things which would ultimately make fm more challenging and realistic but without the proper simulation of those basics of pass/move then you're really just haven't simulated real world football at all well. Without those basics you'll have incessant and circular balancing exercises where you squeeze one air bubble to just move that air further around the tube causing air bubbles elsewhere. FM19 and FM20 have unfortunately been weak that way...the basics of football aren't up to scratch. Everyone also likes match engines where the latest shiny object appears within the simulation and satiates their need to have that 'hit' from having the latest thing lol
  2. technically you could make a crap football game and call it the best game you ever did as well lol
  3. great post. There's a reason teams choose to defend central areas because as said it's the shortest route to goal...you don't see teams prioritise defending flanks (consistently anyway) over the centre and leaving massive gaps centrally because good teams/players first course/default is to look centrally to create...as in with an opening/space players will look to play players in centrally as it's a higher percentage play creating a higher probability of a goalscoring chance. In FM the opposite happens...players often prioritise flanks over central passes so in effect the pass decision making in FM is the OPPPOSITE to real world pass decision making. Whether it's space/run evaluation within FM is academic but FM match engine is regularly making pass decisions which are the opposite of what they should be doing. This is why there's such frustration on the engine. But above point very well made about central corridor...there's a reason teams defend that in numbers as it's the easiest and most effective route to goal given the opportunity. If you vacate central areas in real world teams will exploit that accordingly and as efficiently as they can. Try that exercise in FM and you'll see the way the vacated central space gets exploited will leave you despondent at the state of the current engine. Pass decision making in the real world will go through the middle for the best option when there or even try and create a better opportunity if not immediately there. In FM this isn't happening. Yeah in real world play will move to wider areas either to stretch play and drag players/defensive units out of position and exploit that opening or the occasional cross when its there or to mix it up but in FM the decision making to simulate that is woeful
  4. fair play for saying this. you've been a strong contributor to the community for a long time and I think given the last two years people need to start speaking up like this as you have done there above. well done
  5. this may be the actual case but the pass into space shouldn't be redundant at all...it should just be able to wait and assess space more judiciously and when even small spaces are identified then when the opening is more propitious to play a threaded pass into even a small pocket of space either into a players feet or even a slight opening for a run just ahead (even small amount ahead) of a runner. The major issue with the engine is it isn't assessing or evaluating space/runs at all well...and when I say that it's dreadful at times...especially when there's lots of bodies in and around it. It mostly needs a huge amount of space to play passes into and this is what is needed to bump the creativity up. I've seen people talk about movement not being good enough and that's entirely accurate but it's not the main cause of the central play issues...it's pass decision making simple as that. The engine is severely undersimulated in that element and it's especially evident in the attacking third and exacerbated even further when you have a deep defence or many bodies in and around there. The richness of movement is sorely lacking the dynamism required to emulate real world football in terms of moving through the phases and recycling when options and passing lanes are shut down. @MBarbarichas provided multiple examples on the forums of how that should be done and it's a significant area of improvement that's required. But all anyone has to do is manage two teams and mess around with one teams defence and midfield screen and you'll see that the way other other team will attempt to break down the messed up formation passing decision wise is weak. So on that basis it's essentially pass decision making that's severely undersimulated. There are numerous examples of players in decent and even good space to be put through either with a through ball or threaded pass but the option is very very rarely taken. Doing that exercise will also show that movement needs a complementary bump up as well but that main driver of poor central play and creativity in the top third is currently pass decision making. This is not opinion, hyperbole or perception but simply the case. The match engine simply hasn't the tools pass decision simulation wise to make decisions and passes which will put players either in on goal or put them into good positions for other moves/options to play out in second or third phases or 'thinking ahead' in a move. This is what SI needs to work on to improve the poor fare we've had to endure recently. Once pass decision making is correct to move from defence to midfield to attack and recycle the ball when options aren't there and make the actual passes when the options are there then the complementary movement can take the bump up it also requires to make the play 'smart' and more in line with real world football. Until that happens we will be left with the increasingly limited offering we have seen recently with incessant circular balancing exercises which just produces knock ons ad infinitum but is actually just making the engine worse and less and less a simulation of how football is in the real world I'll make a longer post on all this at some stage to expand further and it needs to be laid out in one piece somewhere for SI to see it
  6. Great post as always but just wanted to highlight this as well...it absolutely has existed since then and as you point out it just become more evident
  7. yeah I think reasonable stuff there tactically and especially as you say playing cautious lower line of engagement means you'd see as you say you drawing opponent and hitting them on the break with pace and power..that will leave space behind which is essentially what the engine needs to be able to produce more open play goals in a manner which is kind of what you'd expect and like to see with those tactics so it would look normal. That would definitely explain why you're not seeing the issues others are. I think what @Weller1980 and others are trying style wise is different with attempts to play more controlled slower tempo possession based game where space is more condensed and creating chances and goals is then more reliant on their teams players skills such as vision, technique, passing, movement, off the ball, decisions, agility and all that but that's the real issue. These are underutilised with the engine and the value of them is way too low to determine outcomes in terms of style of play...essentially the match engine isn't currently simulating creativity and the tools to unlock defences is fairly severely lacking and that's why you see so many complaints...all of which are justified...pass decision making isn't executing choices to mirror how things work in real world football...there's too much of a bias towards passes out into large spaces usually out wide or from deep and often when there are better options inside and shorter. Yeah it's harder of course but not as hard as FM depicts it and as said when pass decision making isn't right then it just exacerbates the issue. Complementary movement is then required as pass decision making gets the crucial bump that's needed but pass decision making is the starting point and the fundamental issue which needs a lot of work to enable multiple styles of play to be attempted and subsequently rewarded in the right way...the frustrating thing with attempting to play centrally is the patterns become too repetitive and the chance creation and goals become too disconnected to the inputs tactically and that's because the engine just cannot play that way properly in a consistent or sustainted way. Of course there'll be intermittent moves/goals/chances which are great but they're more anomalous to the overall attempted style which basically deems it pointless to attempt that way of playing. So really a fundamentally significant way of playing is missing from the engine for the last two years so people's frustrations despite SIs best efforts are warranted. It really needs to be addressed asap. It's great that your way works and you're getting the most out of it and enjoying it but obviously it needs to cater for most and ideally all ways of playing at least to be attempted and then let the relative success be determined by quality of players and use of tactics to get the most out of said players. That way the engines simulation of real world football would be on point
  8. you realise just because you're not seeing certain issues which your use of tactics might just mask underlying issues isn't an implication that the issues aren't there. So just because you're not seeing them is academic to them being a fundamental issue for the integrity of simulation in terms of what the match engine can produce. Whether you don't want to acknowledge them is fine but they're still there. What way do you try to get your teams playing just out of interest. The match engine can produce certain styles but not others so you might be just using a style that the match engine has a bias towards...it could be that simple
  9. actually it's not my opinion at all...my point which you've misunderstood spectacularly is beyond contestation...i haven't expressed an opinion anywhere above...merely how recency bias drives the polls here...everything i said is factual Nowhere did I suggest fm17 was the best rather that fm17 when the dust settles will likely be the non recency bias winner of the poll...it may be fm12 either...we will see Google how recency bias works. Last year fm19 won the polls. the poll here so far has just 4% of the poll...so last year it won then down to 4pc. Each year the winner of these polls is generally it's current or the most recent at that point in time version...then as the years pass by the version settle down and lose appeal. Were Fm19 as good as last year's poll suggested then it couldn't possibly crash so low...it should really be polling second then...especially given your own logic of how you rate them that the game gets better every year. The thing is yeah its a poll and it's subjective and exposed to how people view it and feel about it years after but the trend of the polls is that the most recent one wins it...were the polls to follow your logic of each version is better than the previous one and the voters vote accordingly then that would be reflected in most recent one highest rating, second place previous one, third place one two years prior and so on...thats not happening but that can be influenced by subjectivity of course. However the way the winner of the previous year can tank in the polls the following year suggests recency bias is the primary driver of the poll at the current point in time...any other conclusion given the historic trend of these polls is actually expressing an opinion where bias overrides logic. It can actually happen that on occasion the actual current version IS the best but as said the trend of the polls is that a winner one year can crash the following year so recency bias is the driver. anyway this poll is favourite as i alluded to above...not even the best. just correcting you on not being my opinion and explaining how recency bias drives these polls...the evidence back that up Just on fm20 as it happens everything bar the match engine is in my opinion the best i've seen it...so agree on that. However the match engine as a simulation is so weak it detracts significantly from this year to the point i just won't play it...so it simply isn't the best overall...if you want me to back that up can of course do so lol
  10. yeah that's your opinion...the poll is fav game...the polls each year generally though not exclusively churn out the current game as the winner of those polls and then the years after the those same versions poll very differently...fm19 being a prime example of that. That's recency bias...whether you acknowledge or accept that or not is completely irrelevant...it's still recency bias
  11. that's recency bias....last year was it fm19 that won the poll yet see where it's featuring in this one. when the dust settles it seems fm17 will be the non recency biased winner...there's plenty to take away from that
  12. thanks for that...thats really what you see trend wise within FM match engine...play is unfortunately directed towards the wings from the centre or from the outside along the wings and rarely good play otherwise. Of course it's difficult to go through the middle in the real world but that key passes tab essentially highlights the deficiencies of the engine as the simulation of good pass decision making and complementary movement isn't done to allow consistent attempts to play a certain way and that way is with proper creativity guile and vision and good pass selection to enable quality and even sometimes basic pass choice. there's currently too much rudimentary pass choices being executed to rely too much on passes directed out wide for something to happen from that
  13. yeah but your impression is factually incorrect...it's literally that simple. If you want to see for yourself...do that exercise I talked about, If you don't then no need...just keep drawing the wrong conclusion about fm17 and the last two iterations then
×
×
  • Create New...