akkm

Yeah for sure on real world numbers of through balls but like other measures I'm not sure how comparable SI's definition of through balls is to the real world ones. Re threaded passes this would encompass more than just through balls and that's just terminology but overall creative passing isn't up to scratch...FM is missing other creative passes than just through balls really

Oh I absolutely meant to say he can't fix it...because he can't as overall it's a match engine issue. I said this (italics)... "Its a match engine issue this year sadly. Sure...there are a few still in there but movement, decision making, ability to operate in tight spaces and weighting of passes is off overall. Needs work in the match engine team" To which a user answered he didn’t have those problems Itego asked how did he fix it So that extended his reply beyond through balls as he asked how did he fix it referencing other elements but still, I get you, the crux of what he wanted was re through balls. I replied mostly on that below (italics)... "You can't. It's a match engine thing overall. Sure...certain levers can be tweaked to mitigate it to a small extent and give you some intermittent joy but the patterns will ultimately repeat as you've seen yourself. I saw you mention this year versus last and last year relied on a lot of passes through the air to alleviate that element of things for those balls you want to see but that was an unrealistic element of the simulation in itself. This year they addressed the balls through the air but, unfortunately, without addressing the creativity required elsewhere to balance it out. Worth checking @XaWto see what his tactics can do giving you a little uplift...his inputs are useful sometimes but I'd say manage your expectations on what it will deliver as overall it's a fault in the match engine simulation" On balls through the air last year I didn’t mean just through balls. Anyway, I alluded that the through balls issue can be mitigated with tactical tweaks…even my first response never said there was none. For sure I extended it early beyond through balls and you yourself extended it beyond merely through balls when you said “attacking central areas is certainly a thing in FM24” which is why I gave the lengthy reply beyond just that issue. I also know you’re trying to be helpful which I alluded to and said you had lots of helpful posts but unwittingly in this instance it’s feedback but ultimately not helpful to improve the simulation…for sure it can be helpful to itego. It reminds me in FM2019 lots of the feedback on the forums was the central play/through balls issue was movement related. An SI team member agreed on the forums then. I could see this wasn’t simply the case…movement did need enhancing but the issue was also pass decision related. I actually directly messaged the match engine team with an extensive post including time stamped match examples showing them this but so much feedback on movement on the forums seemed to influence their assessment and ultimately there was an element of misdiagnoses and it actually wasn’t fixed until fm21. To be fair to them I think they did attempt to improve passing but it lead to too many passes through the air from too deep…but that was another issue I had flagged to them years prior lol. Apologies if you feel I singled you out here but again it’s just I can see what feedback can make SI not fully aware of the extent of the issues and not draw the correct conclusions as a result. I know you think you have fixed the through balls element with your examples but you’ve actually just supported what I said…it can be mitigated for sure but your example isn’t the issue fixed at all. The issue is a match engine issue in terms of fundamental decision making and vision not being simulated/coded well enough. Players can be far more creative with through balls (and much more) than they already are and whilst we can see examples of through balls, situations arise which should engender/trigger them more especially with creative players/style to do it. There doesn't have to be glaring space to trigger these passes either but FM needs too much space at times. Essentially it’s too limited. And fyi…yes I have provided information on this to SI...by another means. Ultimately what you have posted is only a mitigant, not a solution/fix. There’s a bigger picture at play and I do think it comes down to view of football at times. I’m sure you’ve played a bunch of matches and tested out all sorts so I guess if you haven’t seen the stuff I allude to then you won’t at this stage. Sure, you may not see the extent of them and feel only small tweaks are required but that’s just not the case. There’s a reason why SI struggles to balance the engine each year and knock ons cause them too much strife and this is one of them. It's why we see patterns repeat too much at times in the match engine and with attempted development. There’s been too much of a default reliance on width over the years with proper creative play encompassing vision, passing and movement not up to scratch. I mean threaded passes, through balls, guiled passes, line breaking passes there…not just through balls but it needs quite a lot of enhancement to actually allow real progress to be made. Also, complementary movement as well. There’s a lot to be done to improve things and it’s about time we see this. So that’s why I jumped in on your feedback about this stuff and for sure an element is borne out of frustration for the lack of progress with the match engine

No one is saying it doesn't happen at all or it's non existent...I'm not sure where you formed that impression from...perhaps you've seen a frustrated user indulge in hyperbole but clearly that's not the case so there’s no need try to prove something that doesn't need proving . I do think it’s great you’re trying to help here and it’s all very obvious things you’ve pointed out and I get more casual users mightn’t see those things so fair enough but unintentionally you’re clouding things a little for SI to draw proper conclusions here. I broadened my point to mention creativity earlier rather than simply through balls but you've fallen into the 'its your tactics' fallacy. It may come down to expectation or view of football but the issue I've talked about at length at times is 100% a match engine issue. I have said certain elements can be mitigated with some tactical tweaks/levers but overall it’s beyond contestation it’s a match engine issue with behaviours that aren’t being coded well. Also, you pointing out 3 through balls in a match and concluding everything is ok with through balls and central play is doing a disservice to the issue and isn’t helping to resolve it. This is how conspiracy theorists operate. Essentially someone forms an impression about something and then frames everything through that lens and sees/extracts what they want to see with an example of something, ignoring the majority of information to reinforce their impression of something (bias overrides rationality if you will). I'm not for one second saying you're a conspiracy theorist by the way . This is what you’re doing here by thinking it’s a tactical issue and something which can be resolved with tactical elements and seeing 3 through balls and saying…well there you go…but you’re missing the bigger picture overall and not observing patterns and making proper conclusions. I’ve tested the match engine thoroughly using many variant tactics and tweaks. One example is observing closely and experimenting by managing both teams in a match (watching in full match mode) revealed issues with quality play and creative passing & movement. With one team I moved all players to the wings bar 2 up front…so essentially the centre is free from impediments that would prevent good central play so it takes any perception of ‘its your tactics’ out of it. Some of the actual play that unfolds is just dreadful at times. I’ve done it with Liverpool and the way the team sets about to attack space trying to pass and move is legitimately bad too often. Sometimes the decision making and awareness of teams mates is shockingly bad. That’s not to say there isn’t any good play at all…there is absolutely good play for sure and good pass selection, through balls, good weighted passes at times and all that but overall you’ll see patterns that mean perceptions/opinions formed about the match engine can be somewhat illusory at times. The main patterns from an attacking perspective are: - The creative or even obvious pass isn't selected at times where it should be and supporting runs to provide options aren’t made. The final engine has been best of this year's iterations in terms of selecting pass when it’s on but it's still not good enough. The off the ball runs are not good enough either - The attempt at a creative pass is played to feet more than it should be where it should be played slightly ahead/ahead into the path of the player to run on to. This is quite glaring when space big and small is there - The angle of the pass can be off...it seems to favour more angled passes left or right rather than straighter passes vertically (along the ground) - Lots of moves break down where a protective mechanism seems to kick in to have the move break down…be it sloppy control, bad pass choice, awful awareness of others around them etc but a pattern emerges to see issues are there. This exercise shows that the match engine is not simulating fundamental footballing behaviours well enough to be on point… be it movement/pass selection at a basic level. If this is the case with an abundance of space then it’s even more compromised when normal tactics are employed. So elements of it are good but overall lots of examples of just bad play…far too many to be fair to suggest central play is good, let along adequate. That take would just be misguided. Overall, of course there are lots of good and even great things in the match engine but central creativity & the ability of players to operate in there is 100% an issue and often is an issue with the engine. If you don’t see that then that’s fine but it’s still an issue nonetheless and 100% is not tactical on the whole. I don’t mean to sound harsh and I’ve seen you make some good posts…just not here taking the bigger picture into account as we keep seeing this issue crop up in FMs match engine over the years and some people defend it and feedback that it’s ok but on the whole for the integrity of the simulation…it’s not ok. Can the engine produce some through balls…yes Can the engine produce enough good quality passing & movement, ability to operate in tight spaces and good creativity…nope. As @XaW said each to their own…and I agree 100%...it should be a case of each to their own and each can garner what they want out of the engine being able to play whatever style they want but unfortunately that’s just not the case. It’s misleading to suggest that it is and prevents the engine from being developed/enhanced as there are key pieces missing (not saying anyone is doing that intentionally) . These elements require improvement to make the simulation more versatile, more varied and most importantly…more realistic

You can't. It's a match engine thing overall. Sure...certain levers can be tweaked to mitigate it to a small extent and give you some intermittent joy but the patterns will ultimately repeat as you've seen yourself. I saw you mention this year versus last and last year relied on a lot of passes through the air to alleviate that element of things for those balls you want to see but that was an unrealistic element of the simulation in itself. This year they addressed the balls through the air but, unfortunately, without addressing the creativity required elsewhere to balance it out. Worth checking @XaWto see what his tactics can do giving you a little uplift...his inputs are useful sometimes but I'd say manage your expectations on what it will deliver as overall it's a fault in the match engine simulation

And that's awesome you don't and can enjoy it as it plays out how you expect it 😊. But those issues are still there unfortunately 😔 I should explain I mean to extend it to overall creativity and threaded/guiled passes as well as through balls to be fair

Its a match engine issue this year sadly. Sure...there are a few still in there but movement, decision making, ability to operate in tight spaces and weighting of passes is off overall. Needs work in the match engine team

Well said. You're fundamentally correct about some of the fundamentals missing from the match engine simulation . It is a concern that SI isn't seeing it as well as it should on this and most years leans towards the more rudimentary way of playing (width/crossing/balls through the air) to produce goals/chances and seems content with that or at least happy enough to keep putting out (broadly speaking) the same fare year in year out. Of course certain elements have been attempted development wise (chaos factor/increased effects of pressing most notably in the last couple of years) so it's not to say nothing has happened but they seem to have displaced certain elements of creativity which were more prevalent in fm21 & fm22. This just shouldn't be the case however many years into the development of the match engine. I'm well aware of the how complex the code must be and to produce what it produces is already wildly impressive but the issue is the output is only as good as the inputs. Of course things have knock ons and can take time but there are too many knock ons which result in things going around in circles and something 'breaking' something else...then fixing that...resulting in breaking another thing ad infinitum. At this stage I've seen some really good stuff in some years but generally things are off so it seems SI CAN code certain fundamentally good behaviours at times but overall it seems there aren't enough good behaviours being input (ie width/crossing dependency has generally been too overpowered) which is indicative of views of football not seeing what's missing. Even the positional play this year...sure it's decent and different from before but so much more is needed. As @whatsupdocpointed out above elements that are still missing. To me these are basics that should have been 'inputs' from the conception of the match engine. Call it whatever you want (positional play) but it's really elementary elements of how to pass and move the ball around situationally. Players need to be dynamically aware of their team mates and opposition to offer themselves to move the ball around offering angles/positions to receive passes to break lines and build a move up and around the pitch. I've posted on this to SI years back that this stuff was needed to improve fundamentals to better simulate football passing and movement from a decision making point of view. This would wean the engine off it's dependency on width crossing and mean balancing would be far easier to achieve. Teach the AI better fundamentals and the output will be better. From there once passing and moving is on point the AI can be taught and learn better tactical and defensive elements to react to and cope better with well simulated offensive fundamentals. Unfortunately the stuck in the mud development seems to have become the norm with efforts to address core elements just not happening well and we are left with what we are left with currently

Yeah that's the concern...those elements of creativity were there in FM21 and FM22 but are gone since. Yes FM22 had a massive thing with crosses being blocked...could have been a reaction to crossing issue you describe for FM21 but centrally and in the top third there was still some good creative passing and decision making. Since trying to introduce the chaos element/better pressing the creative elements have taken a big hit...can the engine not cope with that or is the view of football in SI just not able to see it. Are SI consciously taking out those creative elements or do they not see they're missing...not entirely sure which one it is. All I can say for sure is creative elements are sorely missing completely undermining the quality and legitimacy of the simulation as it limits the ways to play, build up, create and score. Play then gets funneled into a smaller number of more rudimentary ways to do that. It just means more repeated patterns then and a less enjoyable and less realistic experience

Yeah I read before jose allude to changes in players' character over the years means they don't have the appetite to do certain things they used to. For sure modern players seeing others play more front foot football has affected jose's more recent teams as they get sick of playing the way jose wants them to and won't sustain the effort or concentration levels over time. Agree on thinking outside stats which is why I mentioned the eye test re modric...and the others as you mention and many many more as well. Re messi vs ronaldo...hard no there . Messi effectively switched off at club level after he left barca...plus his legs were really already gone and I feel he saved as much as he could of himself for one last hurrah at the world cup...which kinda worked out . One could argue ronaldo could shine in any side as a goalscorer...similar to how haaland could...but haaland is a donkey really lol. So I think a great goalscorer and a great player are 2 different things. Messi still did shine at psg just not as brightly as his peak....messi also shone at the world cup and the one they lost...where ronaldo didn't really shine at any world cup. Messi exhibited a much higher degree of quality than ronaldo ever did outside goalscoring measures...except perhaps heading/right foot . Also, messi could play up top, right wing, left wing, #10 and he could very easily have played in deeper positions than that...at his peak with fully functional legs he could have played in midfield and ran the show with consummate ease and been very creative. Ron was limited in terms of what he could do vs messi. In terms of different tactical systems though ron often needed more space to operate in than messi to shine. In premiership days under fergie English teams defending wasn't stellar (and at times stupidly high up the pitch lol) and plenty of ronaldo highlights were him running into big spaces. Similarly jose at madrid was happy to use him on the counter to score lots...as he needed the space to run into. Messi at barca invariably came up against deep lying defences which is harder yet messi did alright lol. Also, ronaldo effectively did little to contribute besides scoring and making runs into certain paths and had others (like benzema) do a lot of his work and was carried more so this was more restrictive to how a team could play where messi (until his legs went) was more involved in build up play meaning more variation in attacking play was achievable. At man utd 2nd effort ron scored but the team became too one dimensional and easily stopped because of ronaldo. Overall I do get your point though that a player wouldn't necessarily shine as bright in lesser teams surrounded by lesser players. Perhaps maradona and the real (brazilian) ronaldo shone bright no matter who they played with. The rest re FM I wholeheartedly agree with you on what changes are required and at this stage just should happen. My feeling is they've moved on to next year though on the match engine but fingers crossed they will employ the strategy as you've described above as is it's time to get things in a better state

Some great posts @g1nh0 I actually think mourinho is a fraud but won't even get into that as ultimately you're correct in what you said earlier that any manager is only as good as the players they have. One thing that doesn't help mourinho or anyone trying to implement cagey park the bus tactics is the level of defenders has declined over the years so he wouldn't have the personnel to implement what he wants as well as they would have done in the past. Yeah modern football has changed with more running/pressing and all that but that's displaced quality to an extent. Anyway, there's always been hard work, intensity and pressing but fitness/nutrition of modern players enables it to be tapped into more. Also drop off in player quality can make elements of it more effective. On gegen, taking it back to its most prominent proponent...I'm a Liverpool fan and they've been garbage in many games this year yet still churn out results so it's not the system of klopps that's ultimately producing results more the quality of the players at his disposal and more particularly the forwards. His system actually produces crappy performances regularly...yeah sure they work tremendously hard, press ferociously and all that but the amount of average to bad performances that result in wins shows the players he has keep bailing him/the system out. Even in klopps peak liverpool years they didn't play well plenty of times. Then the down years are farcical...without the ferocious press liverpool churn out abysmal performances and you can see some elements of what they're being coached outside of gegen is poor...some of the basics of liverpools play is dreadful in those down years. Take Newcastle...under howe last year did very well but intensity this season hasn't been same level and performances and results haven't been as good. So gegen isn't what many perceive it to be in real world football. FM's implementation of the inefficiencies of gegen is not done well. They don't simulate effect of fatigue in games, over a season or knock ons for other seasons. The intensity required and the resultant knock ons just aren't done well yet in FM. The other key piece is proper creative and technical elements of football aren't well simulated in FM so gegen isn't exposed as well as it should be and in general more possession based tactics lack the tools to open up and create in more varied ways. It's the biggest part missing this year. One of big things is teams/players cannot operate well in the top third or in tighter spaces compared to the real world and then the weighting of passes is generally off both of which make things too restrictive and can make for repeated patterns and a banal experience. Also re gegen in the real world isn't as prevalent as people think. Sure, teams run and press more, high & low but that doesn't necessarily constitute gegen. Lots of teams combine it with other elements of possession football. City are ultimately a possession team but combine it with situational variations of pressing/counter pressing and tempo and that's how football is. Unfortunately that isn't possible in FM's match engine the way City do it with on the ball. Some may think it is or recommend tactical forums etc but that’s just not the case. This weak simulation of the on the ball passing and movement and it’s one of reasons FM engine is lacking. Again back to the real world Klopps Liverpool have played Real Madrid on 4 occasions and been beaten or knocked out each time. So the ultimate gegenpressing machine isn’t as efficient as people perceive it to be. There’s a better way of playing as city’s template has proven as well. For sure modern football has more speed, pressing, more elements of transitions but the basics of passing and movement and creativity are never going away. Take Modric…a small statured man listed as 5.8 and less than 11 stone and not what would be drawn up as the archetypal athlete but in an era where physical elements, pressing, power etc have increased Modric has had little difficulty in navigating that and has arguably been even more effective through the years. For one thing I checked on his whoscored stats and his dispossessed per game stats have decreased after he turned 30…so in current era where pressing etc has supposedly made it harder to keep the ball he’s actually found it easier to retain possession. So that means it’s not as hard as people perceive it…if the player is good enough they can do it. Sure, Modric is a top player but he shouldn’t be finding it easier in his 30s especially if things have supposedly got harder…that’s not how things work lol. All of this with Modric simply passes the eye test…his movement around the pitch identifying small pockets of space and angles to give team mates options to pass to and positioning of his body to receive it, retain it and move it around is something lacking in many modern day players…it’s simple but incredibly effective game intelligence. More players exhibiting these skills would mean press breaking would be more effective than it currently is. Another one is I’m watching City vs Chelsea match and FM isn’t simulating someone like Cole Palmer in terms of poise, movement and pass selection at all well meaning it’s almost pointless trying to set up certain ways to try and get quality creative and technical players to utilise their skillset which essentially means this year match engine is unbalanced and lacking in some basic fundamentals of football. It needs lots of work yet

weak effort to deflect. you work for trump, huh

so what's your ultimate point in all your recent posts...that no one can conclude anything about any aspect of FM without producing watertight and rigorous test hypothesis and results for everyone to interrogate I saw this from you on another thread "You post your findings with a solid objective testable hypothesis and a conclusion from testing. You get questioned about the method and results and probably asked to provide the data and parameters so that the test can be repeated outside your set up - and it might not just be from me. You might even have to repeat or modify certain test items to verify its not just a fluke or artefact of something unaccounted for. If you can answer those questions sufficiently then we can talk about right and wrong" So can content providers and posts on tactics forums be dismissed for not doing above. Is it just things you don't agree with you need above for

what teams in the real world are playing gegenpress for 90 minutes There are definitely more teams at lower levels playing good possession football...gateshead in non league under mike williamson was a great example. That is absolutely all relative and needs to be doable in fm as well as you can get enough good technical players with the right view of football who are well coached to do that at any level...relative to the opposition. It's when they start to play teams levels above that the possession football will become more difficult for the lower level team then

Isn't he saying he didn't buy it for 3 years then bought into SI's 'false' promises and marketing drive re fm24. So that's an example where a person did exercise willpower and not buy it for several years then bought it last year (not sure how he felt about it) and then was won over by what appears to be a rather cynical effort by SI to convince people they had changed their recent ways but in essence, didn't really all. I'm 100% in agreement with you on the not buying it is ultimate message of course. I do get your point and I'm all for personal responsibility, but fortunately or unfortunatetly that's not how the world works. Re the demo...for sure good it's there but how many are aware of it...how many actually download it and whilst it is admirable SI offer it in the first place I'm sure they have the stats of how many download the demo. Then can they track of those who downloaded it...how many bought the game/didn't buy the game. So if the numbers that didn't buy the game were low...do they see it as worthwhile as it translates to sales. Would they take the demo down if they found it many didn't buy after trying the demo. It may well work in their favour to offer the demo sales wise. Also isn't player/club development one of the complaints that crops up...a 6 month demo would be inconclusive on that. Its certainly worth a look though and I've done that myself in the past. The other thing of course the demo would have a specific match engine in it. One year I downloaded it...it wasn't the release engine when I downloaded it as the demo wasn't updated in time/synched with release engine. On top of this the match engine is subject to quite large changes in playing styles over the yearly cycle so if one bought it based on match engine in demo and it changes in the yearly cycle this undermines the demo in terms of match engine consistency on exposure to the demo...ie you're not getting what you were able to test initially on the demo. Either way 2 things (or more) can be true at one time...there can be a demo available to test for a user and SI could change their ways in their yearly cycle anyway. On top of that what was the need to go down the road of what could be deemed a cycnical marketing ploy this year...particularly reading miles blog with the holding hands up on fm23 stuff. I mean SI didn't roll out the marketing spiel this year to improve human rights, solve world hunger or end all wars did they. Thats not exactly the purpose of a marketing for a video game. It was a clear effort to assure people who had become cynical with SIs recent efforts that they acknowledged things weren't as good as they could have been before and intimating that things would improve from there but as many have pointed out that hasn't happened. So its absolutely understandable people will react as they have done this year. SI spiel/marketing is an effort to influence people's decisions and elements of this year's was to affect their willpower in terms of disarming them to buy a product they had grown cycnical of. Providing a demo shouldn't be a green light or excuse to embark on a cycle that has continued in recent years and say ah its ok SI...there's a demo...its not on you it's the customers that are to blame. Thats a tad cynical to say the least. Having a go at someone who bought the game but excusing SI for elements Miles himself acknowledged weren't as good as they could have been isn't particularly helpful as I'm sure you well know. Its akin (however loosely 🙂) to cynical efforts by the fossil fuel industries to put responsibility and helping with climate change back on individuals to take responsibility off them and knowing well its not realistic at individual level. Same as leveling it at individuals re buying FM and taking onus off SI to get their own ducks in a row and themselves in order. Like what happens then...same as with climate change...sure some individuals will act but won't be enough to effect change to climate with everything fossil fuel industry is doing anyway...so fossil fuel will continue to do as they do without changing their behaviour improve things. Similarly not enough customers will choose not to buy FM to effect change on SI policies and therefore SI will continue to do as they do without changing things to improve. The demo certainly isn't going to cause enough people to test it out and not buy to cause SI to change. I acknowledge buying a product to enjoy is a choice versus a need for energy but its more the context of cynically putting onus back on customer when it's not a realistic proposition for enough to act to change and make SI change as a result. Again 2 things can be true at one time...if everyone stopped buying the game that's a message SI will absolutely stand up and listen to and act on it. ..but also SI recent practices and this years cycnical efforts can be called out. Plus what is that saying about SI anyway...once they get the cash they're happy to continue down the path of a lesser offering and only if enough stop buying it they'll act...not a great reflection of them is it

that's well said. Essentially too much of the core engine is based on english football wide/cross concepts of the past. It's not even modern football concepts more basic concepts of passing and moving and a different vision of the game than the wide/cross nonsense (but I get what you mean with that). I mean in terms of technical and vision attributes you see even at kids level and 5/7/11 aside at any level...FM match engine doesn't simulate these well meaning a fundamental way to create is very often absent or very very limited almost every year. When changes get made the core elements (wide/cross) become too prominent again. It's time for once and for all to teach the AI/simulate better fundamental decision making so the match engine can produce better football and break away from the stuck in mud progress with wide/cross being too much of a crutch to create chances and goals when other aspects are lacking. At this stage it's difficult to understand why it's not being done. It may well be the view of football isn't seeing it but it's about time things are done better. It's frustrating to keep having to endure repeated patterns over and over again

Is that just based on less than half a current season when the last engine dropped after lengthening games in the real world or based over a longer period. Surely it's not just based on less than half a season as that would seem a very reactive way to build a match engine. Would that mean should the 2nd half of the season's goals per game settle back down to more normal levels we will get a match engine to reflect that early in the summer then

Obviously completely agree on the best feedback action is to not buy the game as things currently stand as there's no real need or incentive for SI to change otherwise...broadly speaking at least. I also don't necessarily disagree on the likelihood of a competitor emerging or at least a successful one with the head start and all that SI has. Of course the actual market could become so lucrative that it could entice someone to enter the market with the intention of getting a chunk of it. Clearly they'd have their work cut out to gain traction. Re EA's offering...was that part of the fifa game itself or a separate entity. Fifa players weren't likely to crossover exclusively to a management sim within that offering in the numbers EA would want and even more likely FM players were even less likely to crossover to play FIFA management as well given it's likely limitations comparatively. I wonder what numbers play the mobile games on offer and could that, with people's demands on their own time, eat into people wanting to play the longer format. It certainly doesn't seem close to that yet at least. Anyway, the points about what competition would do to push SI and the likelihood of a successful competitor for SI makes for a nuanced discussion and both points are entirely valid. A strong competitor would highly likely mean SI wouldn't be able to get away with or even attempt to get away with things that have gone on in recent years so it's obvious a competitor would improve standards. It's just how the real world works and especially in business where having to strive for better and innovate and drive standards can help grow a business and not doing doing can have detrimental implications. SI seem to have landed in a consequence free realm for themselves which is great from their perspective and a relatively comfortable place to be and for sure the lack of a competitor can lend itself to this. It's ok for people to cite this here and it can be a good vent or message to SI in what is a feedback thread after all. People just want it to be better and the point of what competition could do is only a natural one. The likelihood of success as things stand is another discussion but things can always change. Overall I 100% agree the best current course of action is to not buy the game but no more than the likelihood of a competitor emerging...the odds of this happening in the numbers required to jar SI into changing things isn't that high against the backdrop of the trend of increasing sales numbers. So again SI can and will continue to operate in a comfort zone where people feeding back/complaining on a forum only has a small (and arguably decreasing) impact on things...sadly given the state of things this seems to be the case

This nails it...overall we still have issues with the likes of central creativity which is just astonishing all these years into it. Then when that's missing we have crossing too effective sometimes or long shots/set pieces instead. The juggling act of trying to implement the likes of pressing and other things seems too hard....though I would concede the pressing thing must be very hard to get right. I'd say overall there's been gradual/very small step changes but the pace at this stage is too slow and actual real improvement is somewhat an illusion at times. Take this year...the positional changes...sure, it's great but the overall impact is players just move into places on the pitch somewhat differently than before...but only to not play good passes from a different area of the pitch than previous years so the overall issue of weak pass decision making and weighting remains...it's just happening in a different way/area. And anyway movement has been an issue for years so this kind of movement should have been in the engine 10 years back. The graphical improvements have helped give an impression of improvement and it's obviously very welcome and last 2 years have more of the chaos of modern football implemented but there are still core issues which are just moved around from one to another every year and even from build to build each year. This means real improvement of the simulation of footballing behaviour, movement and decision making remains stunted and a brilliant match engine and genuine progress remains as elusive as it did many years back. Yes I'm aware of the complexity of what's trying to be simulated and size/trickiness of coding that within the framework of what's been built and grown over many years but one of the issues is the core of the engine isn't properly simulating fundamental decisions as well as it should be. The output is usually only as good as the inputs. I'll always say what SI have done is impressive against that backdrop but they're not doing enough at this stage to make the match engine as good as it can be and as easily balanced every year as it could be. I mean even the whole thing of waiting until feb/march patch to wait for a match engine to settle is ludicrous given the stage of development of this game and the match engine can have several large changes to ways of playing each time within a release. Of course it's great SI is willing to do that throughout a game version but should there really be the need for that how many years into the product. Then they say...well we have to shut off to go to work for the next year's engine...but invariably that's just to shut down work to move onto another match engine which needs balancing which throws things off several times the next year. So it's almost like it's moving on to produce another match engine where knock ons just cause more knocks ons going around in circles. This is not meant to trigger whataboutisms re state of gaming industry/software development and all that where attempts to make lower standards acceptable and ok is unnecessary here. Given all that was promised pre release versus what transpired we should all be wary of next year's big change. I'm not convinced it's because so much focus has already moved onto next year and if that is actually the case then one could cynically view the pre release hype as disingenuous at best. Given the pattern that has emerged over the years of repeating/unfixed bugs with additions sometimes adding to that or just not implemented well I think the best way to feedback is by not buying the game. Unfortunately many are quasi addicted (or actually addicted ) to the game so keep buying it every year despite vowing to themselves to not buy it the previous year lol. Again, SI declaration before release of how it would be being last in the cycle could be viewed very cynically as a means to appease those previously critical of the game and prompting them to think/convincing them this year will be different...but sadly, in essence, it hasn't really to be fair. And I do mean sadly as I've played it since 1st game and it's the only game I play or want to play and I really want it to be great. The soundings out of SI are a little trite at this stage with the same things being offered up in terms of excuses and that. Given the volume of sales increasing I'm not sure what appetite SI has to even change its approach as really...does it even have to against this measure...so I really feel don't buy the game is the best feedback people can give. roll on the next update and let's see how things are then

Well said rashidi. I've refrained from going in on the marketing promises pre launch but its quite astonishing the state of the game versus the whole impression created prior in terms of what state it would be in before moving to 25. I'll comment further after all the fixes are in but regardless of that it shouldn't have required all these fixes given the statements about what fm24 was supposed to be before release. It just seems disingenuous and a rather large case of an overpromise undeliver scenario...and thats just me treating it far too kindly quite frankly

Absolutely there’s nuance to this whole thing. Creativity manifests itself in many ways besides the final pass/assist for goal. And it's this that's missing in FM and hence why they've needed that width/crossing for many years to provide that creativity. This has manifested itself in FM in other forms besides excessive crossing…with long shots/balls over the top and through the air being overpowered at times. Bar FM21 & FM22 that over reliance on these has been far too pronounced. As you allude to...anyone who watches football should have noticed this. One of the main differences between real world football and FM is how the middle of the pitch gets attacked. In real world football the middle of the pitch is the most valuable real estate. This is how teams want to attack by default. There's a reason you see defensive teams stack the central areas and try to force opposition teams out wider. You don't see too many (if any) teams stack the wide areas by default and leave glaring holes down the middle of the pitch...for obvious reasons. So as said...by default a team should want to attack and create through the central areas. When that space is closed off and severely closed off then of course teams will move the ball wider. Of course though in the real world teams often move it wide to stretch teams whilst continuously recycling the ball to move opposition player/players out of position to slot one of their own players in on goal. Really that is to move it wide to move it back inside to thread a player in on goal...but that won’t always be doable. That of course then means play can be circulated for cut backs but the way the ball gets worked by a Man City, for example, is to get the ball into inside channels between full back and central defenders…so it’s as near to the goal as they can as it increases the quality of the chance they can create with these cut backs. One thing to note is how the ball gets worked into that inside channel for the cut back. It’s often coming from moving the ball back inside and threading the ball into there for a cutback. It’s not really that the ball goes wide and stays there and gets worked down the line for a cross out wide. Obviously distance from the goal and requirement for a more accurate cross means this won’t consistently create high quality chances so this isn’t an optimal way of playing. This is one of the main differences between real world football and FM. FM doesn’t value the central areas as highly as it should and tends to move the ball too quickly out wide and it stays there before coming back in from wider areas to create that way either via a cross or inside for a long shot just too much at times. FM doesn’t work the ball into inside channels as well as it should either. In FM the play in central areas, especially in the top third really, isn’t simulated at all well as to how the ball gets moved and should get moved through there to create openings and even link up play well. It’s like a repellent at times and players view it as a forbidden zone. It’s almost like the evaluation of space in there in 3 dimensions isn’t capturing real world human players ability to identify space, move into space and move the ball through space…ie that said space in FM is viewed as way tighter than human players in the real world view it. In the real world players will attempt to move the ball inside and up the middle more where in FM it’s more like “nope…middle isn’t on lets go wide” and view that space as being too tight to move themselves or the ball through/in…where the space isn’t as tight as they view it comparably to the real world. It seems to value passes to wide areas too highly in the hierarchy meaning the default attack can be out wide which is at odds/the opposite of real world fundamentals. This means the engine has great difficulty in producing creative passes in the form of threaded passes/through balls/progressive passes/'guiled' passes and all that good stuff. That impacts how players in FM are then able to operate in central areas and tighter areas in general…they don't/can’t dribble, receive the ball or retain possession as well as they do in real world football. This has knock ons in the engine in terms of creativity and quality play overall..essentially in FM it’s too limited…and thus means the engine has to create goals/chances in less realistic ways. Last year, for example this caused central areas top third to be bypassed at times and a necessity to loft the ball to create chances and goals from too deep on the pitch or too many diagonals out wide…rather than work the ball better up top along the ground and into the box with the threaded passes in tighter spaces you see in the real world. This ability to operate in tighter areas and the pass decision making hierarchy to value passes into central areas higher is required to bring the engine more in line with real world fundamentals of how players and teams operate. Even then within FM when the correct pass choice is made the weighting of the creative pass can be off all adding to the frustration (I mean disproportionately so…as obviously that can be off in the real world at times…this is the case currently in FM…it happens too much as sort of a protective mechanism). For too many years in FM all this has been off. This of course always keeps the requirements for whackamole balancing year in year out where changes to one thing causes too disproportionate a knock on to something else and overall then. Things just keep moving from one thing to another too easily and too often. This is reflective of core decision making being not simulated as well as it should be. The other thing is if attacking play is simulated to a high level then defending/pressing can be simulated to a higher standard to attempt to stop that and it will be much more accurate simulation requiring less effort to balance it. Currently as attacking creative play isn’t good enough…then improvements to defending/pressing impacts attacking too detrimentally meaning that gets too stifled meaning defensive/pressing changes have to be tempered meaning attacking can’t be enhanced too much and so on and on and on. One thing 'breaks' the other a little and vice versa. The consequence of this is the match engine gets developed in small incremental steps far far too slowly which is frustrating. This hierarchy of passing to value central areas more (with more astute weighting of passes) and the ability of players to evaluate space and move themselves and the ball into and through said space is the crux of how to develop and enhance the engine to make it more realistic, easier to balance and to a higher level than we currently have. Until that we really just see pieces getting moved around the board…only to be moved back again when something else gets moved then

where was that claim made re full backs racking up assists at will Historically the match engine has favoured wing play/assists from wider areas disproportionately...the engine had an over reliance on width and crossing to create and score. In fm21/fm22 that had improved. Last year creativity outside the wider areas/crosses came a lot through the air so really that gave a faux impression of things were ok there but it wasn't simulated that well or realistically. This year creativity just isn't up to scratch again from central areas and from players who have requisite skillsets to do better...current engine especially. Decision making and weighting of passes is off. And yeah before anyone comes back re 'oh well things are hard to create irw' and all that. Of course it is...but when scenarios arise in the FM engine and space is there big and small to thread balls through into and into players the decision making and weighting isn't well simulated. It's stifling certain ways of playing and is imbalanced currently. Overall it's not a tactical issue either as it's a core issue within the match engine itself. If things improve in that area then we will have a wonderful match engine...if not then we won't in terms of realism. Fingers crossed SI can address it this year and we won't have to wait yet another year where this is off

This really sums it up

depends on the circumstances...and how one defines 'through balls'...as in not just that element of passing. I'd class it overall as creative passes which would encompass through balls & threaded passes into big and small pockets of space...not necessarily just ones behind defences to create 1v1 chances but all sorts. The reality is FM's engine isn't producing enough creative passes. I watch lots of football at all levels and there are lots of creative passes being played where the tendency to play them in FM isn't simulated as well. I do see what the likes of @DarJis talking about when the space is there the decision making and sometimes the weight of the pass is off meaning that creativity isn't the same as it is in the real world. Especially if the space is there with instructions to play that way it becomes even more obvious that they're not being played enough...as in even attempted...not necessarily that they come off or lead to goals. It's just off in the current engine. There's some work to be done yet

Yip...agree re movement of maddison and de bruyne which is what I was alluding to as well. I think that should be reflected in FM. Have that nominal AMC or even call it the #10 role but have the movement so much richer where its always moving into spaces to receive the ball and use its skillset to create or dribble or whatever then from there

Reality though is they also still create. Maddison and Bruno from your own examples are top and joint 2nd in the premiership this season for key passes per game at 2.8pg and 2.7pg...alvarez is ranked 9th at 2.3pg. Then nkunku at rbl had 40 assists. Bellingham key passes is 1.6pg and 49passes per game, Maddison is averaging 44.5ppg, bruno 54.2ppg, Pacqueta at west ham has 1.3 key pass pg and 50 ppg this year. So they're still involved in build up play and creatively where this isn't done so well in FM. The thing is simeone can say this all he wants but it's folly. The likes of ronaldo, benzema, lewandowski, ibrahimovic, quagliarella all experienced increases in their scoring rates after the age of 30 which indicates it became easier to score as their career's went on implying defending has got worse. Good defenders from the past would find it very easy playing these days. Just take thiago silva at chelsea...he's 39...I saw him struggle a lot more in his mid 20s prior to 2014 than I have seen him in recent years. Couple of instances this year where he's made mistakes but prior years at chelsea he's glided through many games and he looks a better defender in his late 30s than he did in his late 20s...so any suggestion of simeone re 2014 defenders not being able to cope with the speed and complexity of the game these days is complete and utter nonsense and removed from reality. Thiago silva provides us with evidence of that...he's finding it easier these days. Maddison has been a great example of a creative attacking midfielder this season...sure teams can attempt to block space centrally but that just implies they be more mobile as maddison has done this year. These players just need to move more into pockets of space to move and create from there. Again these type of players from the past would be fine these days. Take messi...he hasn't found it that difficult to create and score in his advancing years...that despite an assumption the game is faster and these positions are easily taken out of the game these days. Messi provides real world evidence to the contrary. FM simply isn't simulating creative positions and creativity overall as well as they should in the attacking third of the pitch