Ein

There's room for rules in FM tactics e.g. through the implementation of patterns of play, which, apart from being realistic, might help the AI. I already made a suggestion here.

Thanks. That solved the number of teams error I was getting. If I test rules now I get "*random team* has no squad selected for FCWC playoff match on *date*".

Has this been fixed in FM23/FM24? Does the same issue affect other summer competitions like the World Cup?

Is it possible to set the host nation's national league champions as one of the teams to qualify? If you select 'Get Last Winner of Competition', the competition has to be specified.

Single player is always much more popular than multiplayer. Forum posts are not a reliable metric. I doubt SI base their strategies on such posts. It's a bit amusing how SI tend to be accused of ignoring bug reports but are then presumed to take heed of such posts. Besides, sales has nothing to do with playing time. Selling more copies doesn't necessarily imply that the game is played more or that a game is objectively better. In general, more copies of PC games are sold and revenue keeps increasing (revenue from mobile gaming is over and above). FM is simply following the general trend.

I play FM for the press conferences.. Joking apart, going forward, they should either scrap/automate the whole thing or integrate some sort of AI chatbot. With the chatbot route, you can have freeform responses instead of the same multiple choice answers. This would also apply to all forms of interactions.

I know. My question is whether in this example the probability of getting 160 is higher (~2/3) than getting any number in the 161-170 range on account of the 140-159 values that are are automatically set to 160.

That people won't play a harder game is just an assumption, almost a conspiracy theory conveniently used to justify the status-quo. One of the most enjoyable saves for me was with Newcastle in an older FM where I finished 8th, then 6th, then started challenging for a CL spot. In the Roma save I mentioned earlier I intended to do a long-term homegrown challenge but the fact that I won everything immediately (including the Champions League in the second season) put me off. I don't believe that the game is intentionally easy. I think the new tactical creator has made the game easier because some things are not optimally calibrated and that addressing these miscalibrations is nigh impossible, which might explain why a switch to a new game engine is necessary.

I don't know. If they truly wanted to cater to that kind of fanbase, why did they drop FM Touch? I don't have as much time to play as I used to as well. The point isn't for more time-consuming gameplay (a lot of time-consuming noise/clickfest such as media interactions could be scrapped for all I care), but for harder gameplay. There's a difference. Winning after 5 years of squad-building and steady progression is more fun than winning immediately.

What tools? In FM22, I won every single competition for 2 years with this formation and squad, before losing interest. The formation/instructions seem quite normal to me and were chosen based on the players available at the club. I never had any occasion to use the data hub, OIs, change formation/tactics to counter different oppositions, utilise the transfer market, or come up with something tactically extraordinary to achieve this feat. Correction: I also had 'slightly narrower' ticked.

I fail to see why there would be a correlation between increased sales and game difficulty. After all, players often can't gauge a game's difficulty until they've purchased and played it. There are likely other factors driving higher sales, such as population growth, increased remote work, and greater internet access.

Are you suggesting that SI intentionally dumb down the game to appeal to casual players and boost sales? Has this been a longstanding practice, predating the introduction of gegenpress? Is there concrete evidence that easier games sell better? Personally, I lose interest in a save once I achieve consistent success. I found FM22 too easy, which deterred me from purchasing subsequent editions.

But is the adjustment performed "before" or "after" the random generation? Using the same example, will the probability of the PA being 160 be 2/3 (to account for the all the values in the 140-160 range that are automatically converted to 160)? (This is for a dynamic PA project that allows for more unpredictable player development and varied saves)

If a player has a CA of 160 and a PA of -85 (140-170), can the generated PA be less than his starting CA or would it necessarily have to be between 160 and 170?

This is not the issue. The issue is that Team X plays A, B, C, D, E, etc in that order whilst Team Y (typically the closest rival) plays Z, A, B, C, D, etc. In other words, Y always plays whoever X played one fixture earlier. This issue is easily reproducible and has been present at least since FM20.

The manager doesn't even attempt to play Orsolini unlike the mentioned real life cases who amassed 25 appearances or more in their first season. Something like that would only make sense if the player suffered a long-term injury or if the manager was replaced right after the transfer.

The displayed player value should be the market value not the club's asking price. The club's asking price or a 'not for sale' declaration should only be given with a scout report. It should be possible to sort players by market value for one's own information and immersion like in older versions of FM and transfermarkt: https://www.transfermarkt.com/marktwertetop/wertvollstespieler

Strange. I distinctly remember criticisms of the HB role in that it pushed the CBs too wide.

I thought they already did that in previous editions.

I still don't understand the deal with positional play (I don't have FM24). Is it automatic? Doesn't it depend on player attributes like off the ball, decisions, teamwork, etc? Could it not be done in previous versions of FM given the right setup of roles and attributes?

I reinstalled FM17. I like that IF-A doesn't have 'take more risks' hardcoded. IF-A is more of a wide AF whereas IF-S with 'more risky passes' hardcoded is more of a creator. There is no inverted winger but I guess playing a winger with 'cuts inside' trait will do. There is no SV. Is there a role that can replicate the BBM role from the DM stratum? The DM role is a bit strange. DM-D has 'close down more' hardcoded but the DM-S hasn't (even though it has a higher mentality).

Yes, that's right.

It grants him a fixed potential between 150 and 180 (fixed for each save).

Against the AI, you can even overachieve with a clean slate (literally zero team/player instructions) if you pick the right roles.

This might be the only forum where you'll find gamers arguing against game moddability. I mean, some developers oppose it and in some cases (Creative Assembly) have scaled it back to push the DLC model. In some cases (Paradox), moddability and the DLC model exist side-by-side. Whilst SI's reaction to the Korean mod was insanely weird (why all the censorship if the change really did nothing?), they also release a modding tool (the pre-game editor) for free with every iteration, which makes mods like Daveincid's 'megarealism pack' possible. From our (FM gamers) point of view, it would obviously be great if more stuff could be subject to modification, especially when considering that FM has a lot of unfinished or half-baked features which do not get the attention of the developers but might very well be improved upon by dedicated fans.