Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Rupal

  • Rank


  • Biography
    Female! Long black hair, small, married.

About Me

  • About Me
    Near Wellingborough, Northants


  • Interests
    football, gardening, classical music, walking, cooking

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    M K Dons

Currently Managing

  • Currently Managing
    Bradford Park Avenue

Recent Profile Visitors

2,196 profile views
  1. How very odd! Thanks for the info!
  2. It is difficult. As I said in a post above, I'm doing reasonably well initially with a 4-2-4 attacking tactic which I started largely out of frustration with my attempts to make a 5-1-2-2 DM WB counter attacking tactic work. I followed hints and suggestions by Experienced Defender in order to get somewhere with this latter tactic, spent hours tinkering and tried all sorts of things. The plain fact was that it simply wasn't on. And frequently the failure manifested itself by the very scenario that I've been moaning about. Loads of possession (very odd for a counter attacking tactic trying to draw the opposition forward) and simple chances being missed and woodwork hitting galore! If I tried logical adjustments like lowering the defensive line and LOE or other tweaks, the matches often went to the opposite extreme, camping miserably in my own half, having no shots at all to speak of and eventually losing to a 35 yard screamer late on! Eventually, I have reluctantly been drawn to the conclusion that you can't play this way successfully with this particular version of the game, certainly not in the Lower Leagues. In a way it's logical, I suppose. With less than brilliant strikers, scoring from fewer chances is less likely to be successful. Although the goalies and defenders are worse, so that ought to even things up. But it doesn't seem to work that way. I suppose you have to decide to play in the way which works with the current ME rather than trying to play in a 'realistic' style for the club you're managing! Or you keep battering your head against a brick wall. Edit: Not that I'm complaining about this enforced change in the slightest. Have just completed a very successful pre-season with only one loss (4-2 to Birmingham City, which, considering that Bradford Park Avenue are in the Vanarama North isn't too bad really) which culminated in a memorable 3-1 victory over Bradford City. It just seems that the game LIKES attacking football!!
  3. Yep, that's true enough. I shall continue with my step backwards in time (as I outlined in my last post). It will be interesting to see how it works in a full season!
  4. Oh I'm not suggesting that it's easy at all. But I think the ME should do a better job than it does. It's all very well saying it works for you. It ought to work - period and it doesn't work well enough for a lot of people if the grumbles are anything to judge by! Having said that, I'm enjoying the game thoroughly at the moment. Have gone back to the 1950s/60s/early 70s and am employing an attacking 4-2-4 with emphasis on wingers. Only done pre-season thus far but am seeing my strikers hitting the back of the net with monotonous regularity! Of course, this tactic leaks goals as well, but the approach of 'If they score 2 we'll score 3' seems to be working fine and we've hit 6 on three occasions already. I like old-fashioned goals coming from a winger belting to the by-line, crossing the ball to a big man in the middle and seeing him blast it into the net. Not exactly subtle but who cares? Exciting games with results like 6-2 or 4-3 seem to be the norm! Edit: As I said - high scoring is the norm. Latest match 6-4 to us!! Four to my target man!
  5. The off form point was being made in other posts. I was not suggesting anything other than eliminating it from the discussion. See my edit on my last post. That makes the position clear enough. Edit: What I don't want is to have to GUESS what the problem is because the ME doesn't give me the chance to work it out from what I can SEE. Nor should it have to be a matter of trial and error. It ought to be possible to analyse what's going wrong from what happens on the virtual pitch. As for 'just accept it' that's not a remotely tolerable attitude. SI sell a product. They ought to get it to work properly if they're taking money for it. And one of the few things we can do about it is to point out the shortcomings in the hope that they will improve things. Just saying that it's been like this for ages doesn't help!
  6. No it is very far from simply being your tactics. If you find that a reasonable striker misses a bucket load of easy chances and you sub him and his replacement does exactly the same (and it most definitely happens) then that has pretty well eliminated the 'off form' explanation so we can put that one to bed. If close range in front of an open goal isn't 'as good a chance as you think' then exactly what would count as a 'good chance' at all? The fact is that the misses in these '30 shots to 1' scenarios are often apparently of that sort. Now if they are APPEARING to be dead easy but in fact aren't then that shows that the ME is cockeyed NOT that your tactics are cockeyed. How is a player expected to work out from what he or she sees on the pitch what is wrong with the tactics being employed when the apparent information available is so out of kilter with what the ME does? Of course, you can be wise after the event and tweak as much as you like. You can rerun the game with those tweaks if you like. But that's no substitute for being given information which isn't misleading so that you can identify what's going wrong and try to put it right in the first place. It's not the LOSS. It's how it's presented which is the point. The situation over in-match tweaks is rather like firing a gun in a pitch black room if you say that what you see isn't what's actually happening. You may occasionally hit something but that's by luck, not judgement! Edit: to clarify. I want to be able to look at a match (and I often look at the full matches, not highlights) and (for example) be able to see from the play that my wingbacks are not getting far enough forward so their crosses are ineffective and thus I need to alter that. I DON'T want the ME to show a load of crosses apparently going in dangerously and my striker constantly heading them over or hitting the post, which is how it seems the ME represents it.
  7. I don't agree. It would be most unusual to find a coach, approach him or her, offer a job, get rid of your own employee and get the new coach in all within a day or two. But that's exactly what you can do using Staff Search. It would be far more realistic to assess the coach you have, decide that he's unsuitable and look around to see what alternatives might be interested before deciding to commit yourself to the sacking. That's what using the Job Centre used to do. And just 'sacking' the existing coach out of the blue without seeing what the alternatives are would be very unlikely. But that's what you seem to have to do since the patch but only if you use the Job Centre. There seems little point in having a Job Centre at all if you end up not using it but just cherry picking the coaches available by using the Staff List! What's the point of the change?
  8. If you notice, I didn't say that precisely. The point which I am making is that reasonably decent strikers miss from six yards out or keep on hitting the post or the bar, or balloon it over when they are on the goal line in these types of matches. I am not saying that the team with more possession should score more goals at all. Indeed, as I've said in another thread, I have been trying to create a counter attacking style myself which would obviously have lower possession. However, if you are having more possession than the opposition and you are getting a load of goal scoring opportunities but missing SIMPLE chances. that shows a problem with the game presentation, not with your tactics, I would suggest if it happens relatively frequently, which it seems to do. It's too glib just to say 'It's your tactics'. Your tactics should not suddenly repeatedly prevent a decent striker from hitting the back of the net from six yards in front of an open goal! The point is that they AREN'T 'all from outside the box and/or from wide angles'. They are from bang in front and close in! If a lousy long shots player can score the occasional screamer from 30 yards that's no problem. But you'd say that someone with a rating of 15 ought to score more of them. Otherwise the rating makes no sense. In a similar way, if a striker has a finishing rating and a composure rating of 16 he ought to be able to score from six yards in front of an open goal far more often than he misses. You certainly wouldn't expect him to miss a load of open goals one after the other if the rating is accurate, would you? Of course the best strikers have off days. And the best strikers will miss sitters. But they won't do so on a regular basis. Otherwise, they aren't top strikers. As I said in my post, it's not the fact that one's strikers have an off day and one loses which is the issue. It's the NUMBER of EASY chances which are repeatedly missed in these games, the NUMBER of times the woodwork is hit and so on!
  9. I can understand why people get frustrated. The thing that annoys me most is the 35 shots to 1 with 75% possession and you lose 1-0 scenario. That happens too often. The glib response which one so often sees, namely that 'Your tactics are wrong' is unhelpful. If your tactics were so wrong you wouldn't have such an overwhelming superiority in shots, possession, pass completion etc. If you are having all the play and 'battering' your opponent, how are you supposed to work out that you should be playing in a completely different way? You must be doing SOMETHING right. Furthermore, tactics shouldn't cause a striker with decent finishing and composure to keep on missing shots at an open goal from six metres out or hitting the post four times in a match or ballooning the ball over the bar when he's practically on the goal line, etc, etc. Nor should they suddenly endow an opposition midfielder with a long shots rating of 2 the ability to win the game with a rocket from 30 metres with the opposition's only shot on target. Yes, I know these things can and do happen in the real football world but they are rare. Very rare. It's not the fact that you lose. It's how the computer PRESENTS your loss that is the issue.
  10. Apologies if this has been covered elsewhere but there is a huge lot of stuff to wade through regarding the update. I reported an apparent bug yesterday. I was unable to advertise for a new coach in the Job Centre as the option was not available. After uploading a save and a little toing and froing I was told that this was not a bug but that as I had a full complement of coaching staff I could no longer advertise. although prior to the update it had been possible to do so. Curiously enough, I was able to use Staff Search, approach a coach that way and replace my existing one. Now those of us who try to play the game using LLM 'rules' know that we aren't supposed to use the player or staff searches but to use scouts or trials or the Job Centre instead. It looks as though the only way to do this now would be to sack the existing member of staff and then advertise because there would be a vacancy. That means that you would be operating without a member of staff for an unspecified period and risking this being extended if no suitable candidates answered your ad. What I don't understand is why this restriction has been put into using the Job Centre but that you can easily replace members of staff by using Staff Search. It can be a hard road playing by LLM rules and this is something that makes it a little more difficult still. Could someone please explain the reasoning behind the change?
  11. I actually uploaded my save yesterday in connection with another query. It is called 'Gina'. Incidentally, I also deleted the cache yesterday because of that other query and the problem with the Development Centre still persists. There is simply no under 18 squad at all. And it's not possible to move any players in order to create such a squad. Although the Head of Youth Development remains in place, costing me £200 a week, there aren't any Youth for him to help developing!!
  12. Ah, that explains it then. Thanks for clearing that up! Edit: I'm going to post in another forum about this, though. Why make that change?
  13. Well that's true. But before the patch it was possible to advertise in order to replace a member of staff even when you were at capacity. You then could decide to employ a new member in his stead or not, depending on the quality of the replies. The Board would say that they were blocking the appointment but you could get rid of an existing coach and that would be all right. Has this now been altered?
  14. You made perfect sense. Unfortunately, deleting the cache has made no difference. Have uploaded the save file (I hope!!). File is 'Gina'. Mind you, as I warned you, my ignorance of all things computer is vast!
  • Create New...