• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About RBKalle

  • Rank
    Third Team
  • Birthday

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Rosenborg BK - Odds BK
  1. I honestly don't understand the "it's cheating" argument... Unless you also download a shortlist and build a carbon-copy of the squad, it's even debatable a downloaded tactic is actually helpful... I mean, if you're managing in the Conference and download one of those "Barça supertactic" that require worldclass players in every position, is it gonna really work for you? If using other people's tactics is "cheating", than even in real life, then 99.99% of football managers have based their careers on cheating
  2. Are you really suggesting that a professional footballer (or a semi-pro) would feel "awkward" (to use the in-game wording) playing in a relatively straightforward and universally employed formation? Again, I can see that being a bit of a factor for very specialized roles, moreso in equally detailed tactics, like a False Nine in Guardiola's system or a playmaker operating in various types of midfield, but honestly, a full-back in a plain 4-4-2, a centerback in a 4-men defensive line, a traditional target man (1980s British football-style) shouldn't really need a long (and tedious) process of learning. At best, it'd be acceptable at a Conference.-level, where players aren't pros and may don't have enough experience, skills or time to digest extremely complicated systems, but players in the top-flights could and should master at least the basics of their position in rather "generic" setups.
  3. Which is reasonable enough, but you'll agree it tends to happen a tad too much when TF is low (again, very very clear to see in pre-season friendlies when TF is low. Or in general in NT matches, where TF is always lower than at a club). I can see how teammates can "fail" to play at their best whenever they're not familiar with eachother or with a specific set of instructions, but how much is too much? E.g. Zlatan didn't really click with Guardiola's tiki-taka because he wasn't suited for the "false 9" position (and for sharing the spotlight with Messi, Iniesta etc), just as much the other stars weren't used to link up with a striker like Ibra. So it made sense for the play to look a tad "disjointed" despite the overall quality of the players being through the roof. On the other hand, last season's Leicester worked great despite individual players being average (and having the season of their career). There, a set of "easy" instructions worked well regardless of the individual qualities. So there IS a reason for TF playing a role, but how big of an impact that'd have on BASIC duties is another matter. I maintain it's a bit too much... As said already, one of the "plug-and-play" tactics that work from EPL to San Marino lower leagues shouldn't require months of practice to get the gist of. Then, the more details and specific instructions you add to it, the harder it'd get to master. But a 4-4-2 can and should be "learnt" in like one week.
  4. And hopefully so... Then again, I see why many think some aspects of the game are too "powerful"... Tactical familiarity can be seen as the main culprit for awful matches where your players don't seem to be able to string two passes together or to perform very basic tactical instructions. That may NOT even be TF's fault, but it's not hard to guess why there is such a perception. Role familiarity is a great idea, something I've wanted too. However, there is a not negligible difference between playing, say, DLP in a 4-1-3-2 setup (think of Pirlo), in a plain old 4-4-2 or in a possession-based 4-2-3-1. Ditto for plenty of other roles and positions. Tactical familiarity wouldn't be done away with, so the added depth to roles has the potential to become calamitous, should the implementation clash with the existing model. Then cue tons of rants about "TF is 100% so why should my striker forget how to play up front if I change his duty..." and so on. Sure, but I've noticed, upon starting a new game or taking over a new club (or NT), the TF bar being low DOES impact the performances in the early friendlies, in a way I'd not ecpect in real life. Again: any professional player should not need 10 pre-season games to play comfortably in his natural position in a very basic formation. Instead some of the friendlies provide shockingly bad football because TF is still low and apparently a fullback+wide midfielder combination requires a month of in-game time to practice stuff the players have been doing for like 10 years of their career. I have no issues with players strugglig to digest an asymmetrical 3-4-3 or any other very specific (or convoluted, or downright insane) tactic. But there's a couple of formations that ANY professional player should be able to perform in at a rather high standard almost from the get-go. Oh and the off-season break shouldn't make them forget how to play a tactic they've been playing for months or even years...
  5. I use it to: * Change kit colours/style for cosmetic and visibility reasons * FIx CA/PA of players and staff I "forgot" to tweak with the pre-game editor. (Mostly nerfing overrated "talended" youngsters or average players who still get rated too generously). * Fix Youth Rating for nations to avoid getting world-class players from outlandish countries. * Fix inconsistent names/ethnicities/ingame faces. * FIx odd positions for newgens. I mean a kid with 17 Acc and Pace, passable dribbling and awful passing would be developed as a winger, not as a CM... * Alter Tactical Familiarity for the pre-season or whenever I'm going for a very basic formation. No professional footballer should need weeks (or months!) of matches and training to digest the most pedestrian 4-4-2 or 4-3-1-2. Also, if I've been at the same club for years, and the core of the team is the same, a couple of months of off-season shouldn't make my squad forget half of their tactical duties... I know some of that stuff can be labeled as "cheating", but I always try to keep the attributes altering to a minimum, and I never do it to get a direct advantage. Editing money or adding players to my team is out of question.
  6. Well, Spurs are "relevant" as much as any other EPL team because they're the oddly dominating side in the OP's screenshot... In my last FM16 save, Man City defeated Arsenal TWICE in four years for the CL, with Chelsea being runner-up once. EPL sides being a tad too successful in FM has been a common issue since, well, forever, and whatever club is overachieving in a random save is incidental, but as part of a bigger issue. BTW, that's not a dig at the researchers, who I'm sure are competent, as unbiased as they can be, and are following SI's guidelines. However, somewhere in the game, there's some combination of factors that turns some EPL sides into european powerhouses, despite it not having been the case lately and it looking unlikely in the near future, ESPECIALLY if it's "second-tier" top sides like Arsenal or Spurs. Maybe a couple of players tend to become waaay too good a few years into the game? And/or AI managers are actually better than their real-life counterparts?
  7. Oh come on... What is a "failed" CL campaign to Real or Barça would still be considered a very good display by the likes of Arsenal... Bad luck is only a marginal factor, as English clubs are still inferior to the Spanish Duo and Bayern, while pretty much any other latter-stage encounter can be dangerous to them. Actually England are "comfortably" in 3rd place, with Italy in 4th being closer to them than they are to Germany in 2nd. So no, sorry but EPL sides being a staple in CL finals in FM, iteration after iteration, is something that should NOT happen anymore. P.S. Don't take it personally, but Tottenham making 3 finals (2 wins) in 4 seasons is completely outlandish.
  8. It may as well be anectodal evidence, but it's quite widespread to dismiss it as "once you hit Continue the first time, gameworld and reality diverge". English clubs haven't performed as expected in European competitions in recent years, despite the amount of money and of (perceived) starpower in their squads. Then again in FM they still are a force to be reckoned with, even second-tier clubs that haven't achieved much in real life. Is it the players are rated a tad too generously? Or the managers maybe? Is it about high reputation being a factor as well when calculating AI results? Actually I think it's a mixture of those, and we'd may use a "bottle" hidden attribute... Didn't we have a "blend" one back in the old days of CM? Or was it a crude representation of Reputation?
  9. I think the OP has some very valid points, but it all boils down to the technical limitations of a computer game... After all, it has come a long way since the days of results being determined by comparing the total points of a team or something equally "trivial". Anyway, on the "football vs ME" debate, my biggest gripe is that even trying to play the most basic and immediate style of football takes hours of trial-and-error, and some styles can't really be perfected due to the ME clearly favouring a specific kind of tactical approach. Depending on which edition you're playing, you KNOW by experience some styles aren't gonna work. A few years ago it was all about pacey forwards, then we got super-crosses, all while tiki-taka and "fancy football" show up even when the level of the players shouldn't even allow that. I'd LOVE to play a good ol' "hoof and run" style, especially when I'm still in the Lower Leagues or I'm managing in some God-forsaken country where my best player has attributes in the 10-12 range and most of the team consists of amateurs. Instead I'll have to settle for a poor man's tiki-taka, or I'll get bits of it regardless...
  10. I've dug up my old FM14 save, and I decided it was time to get an actual feeder club for my 5-time CL winner Faroese side. My request to get a club with a good youth setup was accepted, but I've been offered obscure clubs from Brazil/Argentina (2nd/3rd tier, all-grey players, average-to-poor facilities and academy). The "best" I got were Eibar (yo-yoing from Liga Adelante to Segunda B) or Aalen (same fate between 2. and 3. Bundesliga). Now, I wasn't expecting an EPL club or anything, but at least a decent-ish club from an active league (I have the Top 4, Championship, Serie B and all the Nordic countries). We've been consistently among the best 4 clubs in Europe (5* rep, #1 coefficient, plenty of trophies won), the league is ranked 10th overall, how come the only affiliations I'm offered are with irrelevant (and inactive) clubs and therefore completely useless? Shouldn't at least all the smaller clubs from the Nordic area salivate at the chance of striking a partnership with a CL-winning side, possibly getting plenty of loans out of the deal?
  11. Custom db is FM's raison d'etre, so as tempting as the idea of a less time-consuming, more streamlined version of FM can be, nothing can, at the moment, make me quit the "actual" FM. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, FMT is the same as FM full, under the hood... So by taking away some features from the user's control, the game is actually harder to play, or at least is less manageable. I mean, if team morale is still a key factor for the team's performance, and I have no way to influence it outside the pitch (less press conferences, less, if none, player interaction), it's gonna be more difficult to turn a run of poor form around by sheer motivation... Basically we have to do the same job with a smaller toolbox. FM can be frustrating, annoying, a chore at times, but in an odd way, that's part of its charm and of its unmatched success. Plenty of more "user-friendly" and straightforward competitors have tried to capture the same magic and the less hardcore portion of the fanbase... We know how it went for them. I can see why FMT has its own purpose and target, but it's just not for me. For now.
  12. Why bothering with reviews? FM is FM... You know you'll be getting an impossibly immersive game with a gargantuan database, a solid playing experience based on a tested and successful formula, albeit with a couple of frustrating and annoying quirks you'll have to learn to play around, because they won't be fixed by any of the patches (or will be overmedicated, leading to new, opposite, quirks). Unless SI either drop the ball or (finally) go for a completely new code for the core of the game, every iteration will likely fall between a 7.5/10 and a 8.5/10 depending on how much you're affected by the annual ME oddities and by the long-lasting issues in other areas of the game.
  13. 12/20 Got Gazza wrong as I didn't check the attributes Missed a few of the obscure (to me) English players I wasn't familiar with. Pre-CM97-98, anything not featured on Sensible (World of) Soccer is off-limits...
  14. The lesson is: reduce private chats to a minimum In the early days of FM14 (IIRC), I had the silly idea of criticizing a newly signed CB following an abysmal performance. He didn't take it well and things escalated to the point I had to release him as the relationship had been compromised beyond repair. All of that with a mere FIVE clicks And team meetings are a very dangerous coin-flip. Unless there is a very serious situation (like a drastic form dip right at the end of the season, with the title/objective in jeopardy) it's better to avoid the altogether and stick to press conferences and pre-game team-talks to keep morale to a reasonable level. Same for players. Post-game praises are enough, ditto for criticism, except, again, for truly awful performances in key matches.
  15. I assume it's applicable on newgens only for legal reasons... Real life players only have positive or generic labels, like "Fairly professional" or "Balanced", even though IRL they're complete nut cases or would sell their mother for a bigger paycheck..