JRHaggs
-
Posts
223 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Articles
FAQs
Online Manual
Support: Blocks
Support: Games
Bug Tracker
SIGames Manual (beta)
Profiles
Posts posted by JRHaggs
-
-
14 hours ago, Rashidi said:
I am afraid the game was not designed in a way that players would follow your instructions like robots.
OP shows in a clip that there is backup. Two players in position to neutralize the winger.
Perhaps, even if asked to man mark the fullback, the wingback should retreat if the winger is unmarked. But if the winger is neutralized, the wingback should follow the instruction.
I know you're a legend, and I love your videos, but your response seems intentionally glib. Robots have nothing to do with it. Why can we assign a fullback to mark the opposite side wingback at all if they won't do the admittedly stupid thing? I'm not defending the tactical implications of what OP is trying to do. I'm sympathizing with their annoyance at unpredictable player behavior from fairly straightforward (again, if foolish) tactical input.
0 -
2 hours ago, Rashidi said:
Or perhaps unrealistic choices? To do this successfully your wingback needs to disregard his defensive line settings to go up the pitch when you side is defending. What happens if there is an attacking winger driving down his position? Your instruction would force him into tracking the opposing fullback.
What if their fullback is a fullback on defend duty? Now does your wingback simply go mark the player even if the opposition is playing very defensively?
A long time ago when man marking was an instruction that involved a simple check box, this could be done, but tactical systems were incredibly unbalanced.
Wingbacks can mark very tight at the moment and are really proactive at shutting flank threats at the moment with the right setups, but I doubt setting up marking the way you suggest has ever been a conscious design choice.
If you do feel that it can work and you can explain how other roles should pick up the slack protecting the flanks during defensive transitions, then make a feature request. It could be a feature in the future.
I mean, if a player wants to do something tactically foolish, so what? There are certainly times when op's choice of man marking wold be perfectly reasonable. Just because it might not be in most situations doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to do it at all.
2 -
@Weston
I'd guess that, if you were able to get the job, it would ascribe the relegation to you. As you say though, the reputation issue would be the first hurdle to clear.
But I don't know. In my FM saves, I mate for life...
0 -
@Weston
The season "ends", and the new one "begins", when the Hall of Fame rankings pop up. This happens well after the last game of the season.
If you stay with a team through promotion, it is very difficult to sign players suitable for the higher-ranked league until the day the HoF rankings pop up. Just like that, fingers snapped, players understand that they would be playing in the league to which you've been promoted rather than the league from which you've been promoted.
It's deeply frustrating and is completely immersion-breaking. My guess is that the game will never recognize your promotion, even if it *might* recognize your league win. This is, of course, utter nonsense, but here we are.
0 -
Just now, XaW said:
Exactly! But the fictional you who take over Barcelona WILL be hired...
Fair enough, I guess. They didn't hire the human manager; he just... appeared.
1 -
On 11/03/2022 at 10:40, XaW said:
Would the Barcelona board (or fans for that matter) approve of a Sean Dyche tactic?
Come on. They wouldn't hire him to begin with. If they did, they wouldn't be surprised when he implemented the same style he's always used.
0 -
Ever worked for a lousy boss before?
1 -
22 hours ago, XaW said:
Well, in my current squad I have 1 star player, 2 important ones, 5 regular starters and the rest lower. I make it my agenda to keep the squad role as limited as possible, and often players you have a good relationship with will accept you reducing it. So about every 6 months I try to review the roles and reduce the ones I think will accept it. I will always reduce the role _before_ the player start to complain about game time, so at the very least the player can't accuse me of not keeping my word!
I try to keep playing time expectations tied to [perceived] current ability. On the first of each month, I sort my squad by CA and adjust statuses accordingly.
Ideally -
5.0 stars CA - Star Player
4.5 - Important Player
4.0 - Regular Starter
3.5 - Squad Player
3.0 - Impact Sub
2.5 - Fringe Player
2.0 - Emergency Backup
This, of course, has exceptions for breakthrough prospects and, very commonly, players who just can't stand the idea of a reduced squad status. They'll bend to my will eventually...
When signing a player, they'll usually want squad status of *at least* one tier above where this list places them. That's fine. I just reduce it when the opportunity presents itself. I do *try* to sign them with a status only one tier above the intended, but that's not always going to work.
And, obviously, I have players that start every game but are on Squad Player status all the time. I don't care how much they actually play; I just want harmony in the dressing room, and minimizing squad status to create easy-to-meet expectations seems to help a lot.
Underpromise; overdeliver. Management at its finest!
1 -
16 minutes ago, KingCanary said:
Something that definitley needs looking at is the criminal amount of times players get caught offside from indirect freekicks.
Take this one. Three of my players just stand offside, 3 more are just about played on by one Wolves defender who then steps up, meaning when the cross actually comes in my entire team is standing a solid yard offside like idiots.
I know some teams employ the tactic of pushing everyone out as the run up starts to try and catch players off but even that usually doesn't have a bunch of players choosing to stand a mile offside before the taker has even started his run up.
Oh, I hate it. I hate it so much.
2 -
Absolutely agree!
A simple check box, "Hide shortlisted players", would be fantastic.
0 -
Automatic General Rehab training would be an obvious improvement. I've never had the problem with the intensity level though. Everyone who joins the club is on "Automatic" or whatever by default.
1 -
Yes, pleeeeasssse. This and the requested "Mirror tactic" would streamline things so much.
0 -
27 minutes ago, kentonizking said:
I see it as the players 'agent' doing his dark arts behind the scenes, playing clubs off against each other to get the best deal.
I know we occasionally get contacted by agents about better offers or a willingness to renegotiate, but in my mind there is a lot more agenty business going on. Just like in real life sadly.
Yeah. I can superimpose any number of perfectly reasonable narratives on this stuff. Again, I'm not worried about it.
But I *really* want to understand the actual under-the-hood mechanics of this stuff. I want to understand why the the AI appears to react differently to human player actions than it does to other AI actions.
I promise, I really get it that human players do this too. I really get it that it "makes sense" in the context of the game's presentation. No problem at all. Really. (This last bit is not directed at you or anyone in particular kentonizking. But all the answers offered so far are related to how the game is presenting the world it's simulating, rather than what the simulation is doing beneath that veneer.)
0 -
30 minutes ago, Sneaky Pete said:
If you only look at scoring sequences, sure, I can see an argument there.
If you watch FM21 on comprehensive there is a veritably absurd amount of "run towards byline, bang cross against shins of a defender for corner". The FM22 ME has its issues, but the fact that wide players will actually turn and recycle the ball when a cross isn't on is an unfathomably large improvement over the maddening idiocy seen in FM21.
I can watch FM22 on comprehensive for hours if need be - FM21 makes me outright angry within 10-20 minutes at most.
This is the first comment that has made me curious about moving to 22 from 21.
Blocked Cross Simulator is so very infuriating. As you say, if the first match of a session starts with a handful of those moments, the whole session suffers from the frustration.
0 -
Eh. I think I've done a poor job asking questions. I understand that it is presenting bandwagon behavior and that human players will inevitably do this too. I'm not bothered by the way that AI transfer behavior is presented in the game.
I'm just interested in what is actually happening under the hood.
Specifically, I'm interested in the AI's decision making regarding "interest" as displayed in the transfer screen. Even more specifically, I'm interested in understanding why it *seems* like there's such a strong relationship between human manager actions and AI manager actions in the market.
I'm interested in whether the AI acquires scouting knowledge in the same way the human player does. For example, does every AI manager have an actual shortlist (seems plausible)? Does every team "see" a different set of masked or partially-masked attributes until they've fully scouted a player (seems vanishingly unlikely)? Ultimately, this is not about actually playing the game. It's about the black box. It's about how the game manages the innumerable interactions between one module and another, one spreadsheet and another.
There have been a lot of posts about the shortcomings of AI squad building logic. These questions are relevant to many aspects of the game. I've just been inspired to consider and ask about them because of this most recent episode with the young Mr. Escobar.
Once again, this isn't a complaint and it's not about playing the game. It's about what the game is *actually* doing and why.
Sorry if I'm doing a lousy job explaining this? There are a lot of elastic terms that mean one thing when talking about playing the game and another thing when talking about how the game itself works.
0 -
43 minutes ago, Mars_Blackmon said:
Stories get leaked.
i do this to the AI. If I don’t have much info on a guy and I see other bigger clubs or equal clubs interested in him, I’ll try to sign him or scout further if I need that position badly.
Sure, I get that. I've seen the dreaded "Transfer story leaked" messages many times before. And, of course, when the AI makes a bid for a player I'm interested in, I'm motivated to move more quickly. In the class of cases about which I'm curious, the leak message doesn't pop and there is no notable AI interest prior to player manager action in the market.
An additional detail in the Pablo Escobar episode referred to above is that Colchester made an offer to him a few days before I did. It was only after I made an offer that additional clubs became interested in, and subsequently offered contracts to, this player. The list of interested teams grew by 16 exactly one "continue" after I made an offer. For weeks prior to my offer, only Colchester and Cambridge City, teams in League 1 (I'm a very low rep Kingstonian in the Championship), had shown interest. I accept, of course, that this is just one anecdote, but it's the most recent of many.
I'm not super concerned about losing out on "the next Claudio Bravo"; I'm sure he'll be happy at Everton. Honestly, I don't know why any club that needed a goalkeeper wasn't absolutely drooling over him. I'd just like to understand the nature of the AI behavior that I've described. I'm interested in how the AI acquires scouting knowledge and applies it to its transfer decisions. Simple questions, I guess. In what sense does the AI have to deal with attribute masking? What are "major interest" and "minor interest", and what's the difference to the AI? Why does it *seem* like the AI's interest is particularly responsive to the player manager's actions in the transfer market, even if that's not exactly what's happening?
0 -
31 minutes ago, budslim said:
Nope. I’m an idiot. One of my players signed a new deal in-between. Completely missed that.
Ha! Sometimes the best explanation is the most obvious explanation!
0 -
Did they have different squad status demands?
Maybe players higher up the pecking order can be allotted a higher percentage of your wage budget? There is, after all, the wage breakdown by squad status in the financials page. It must relate to something, right?
1 -
We've all been there.
You've scouted an interesting player. You've brought him in on a trial. Things look good. Interest from a couple of teams in a division below. No worries.
You offer your trialist a contract. He accepts! Nice.
One continue and 20 in-game minutes later, fifteen teams have offered him a contract, including obviously more reputable teams. Ugh. That sinking feeling...
So what's going on here? Did these teams have scouting info on this fellow or not? If they did, why were they not already interested in him? If they didn't, how did they conclude that it would be worth offering him a deal?
In a particularly irritating/amusing episode, several teams were asking after my GK, who is on low wages considering his ability. Because of the interest being shown, I decided to give this young, obviously superior, Chilean GK (named Pablo Escobar, of all things!) a try. The weird thing is that the teams that were after my GK only made an offer to young Pablo *after* I did. So it *looks* to me like they were unaware of him until I made an offer. They wouldn't have bothered with my guy if they knew about him. But, again, if they didn't know about him, why would they offer him a contract without any scouting info?
Thoughts?
Do AI-managed teams acquire scouting knowledge the same way the player does? I understand that the player's agent might have thrown his name out there, but that wouldn't provide potentially-interested teams with any scouting info, would it? I'm sure there's a reasonable explanation, but it looks like shenanigans to me.
3 -
18 hours ago, stevemc said:
Similar with the Data Hub, had a play around at the beginning but I rarely go in there now. When I'm winning, I never use it. Problem is (unless I'm missing something) I regularly swap between 3 tactics depending on the team or situation I'm facing, but the data in the Data Hub doesn't split out the information by which tactic I'm using, so It's kind of pointless for me to work with? (please correct me if I can actually do this).
This right here. I want to be able to compare how my standard midfield pairing perform as I change things around them.
Or sometimes I change formation mid-game. Looking at positional heatmaps is not at all helpful considering it will use average position over the whole match. Move a player from DM to RB? Good luck!
1 -
On 29/01/2022 at 06:15, xLdRoN said:
There is a situation in the fm series that I have not understood for years, I would be very happy if anyone who knows can help.
When I set up the tactic with any team and start to get good results, like November-December, the team's performance drops unbelievably and we start to get negative results one after another. For some reason, I experience this situation more in underdog teams.
When you play as a dominant team, you're favored in every match. At the beginning of the season, you'll be favored in roughly every match. Halfway through the season, provided you haven't tanked the team, you'll still be favored in roughly every match.
On the other hand, when you play as an emerging team, at the beginning of the season you're likely to be underdogs in nearly every match. Halfway through the season, if you're outperforming expectations, you'll be underdogs in considerably fewer matches. Teams will adjust not to your tactic, as is sometimes claimed, but to your relative change in reputation.
Match odds are a very revealing tidbit in the game. They tell you what the game world "thinks" about the relative merits of teams. Do not ignore match odds. (I don't like it that match odds are now only available the day prior to the match. They used to be visible in the schedule about two weeks in advance.)
2 -
@..Valhalla..Yeah, I think I understand what you're getting at.
I guess I'm just more inclined to chalk their injury history up to luck than some quality relating to injury resistance. And I think injury-related luck is an almost necessary component in most greats' rise to greatness.
The potential for muscle and ligament damage does seem to be a sort of static value IRL. Bone breaks and the like defy that though.
I don't really know what injury proneness affects, but I *think* it applies to all injuries. Perhaps it should just relate to chronic injuries to muscles and ligaments and not apply to things like concussions and bone breaks? I don't know.
0 -
Eh. There's a lot of coincidence in this stuff. The rise to greatness inevitably involves luck. If a player is unlucky enough to be injured with any regularity early in their career, it's [very generally speaking] unlikely they will ascend to greatness, irrespective of their raw talent. Conversely, if a player is lucky enough to be able to play regularly early on, they'll certainly have a better shot at becoming a legend.
The guys you mention are all reaching the tail end of their careers, which pretty obviously will predispose them to a greater risk of injury.
None of this is to say that there are not players that are particularly physically resilient and robust, but even that is no inoculation against a broken leg or concussion or whatever freak injuries can occur.
I feel like the injury proneness rating does a pretty good job.
1 -
Hahahahahahahaha
We're watching a really roughly abstracted depiction of a terribly complicated simulation. There's very little chance we'll ever get "realistic" animations.
Many of the animations that make us lose our minds (defenders running away from onrushing attackers, players standing face-to-face without either trying to tackle or evade the other, etc.) are actually just missing animations. It looks ridiculous because the interaction that is being rendered is too complicated to be satisfied with any of the existing animations. But, once we understand what we're *not* seeing, the frustration with what we do see can be diminished (to an extent).
The sprites don't even really interact at all. They show an approximation of, again, interactions too complex to be rendered properly with the limited number of animations available. We're a long way from realism in the FM's match presentation.
And, to be fair, I can't think of any really deep sims that display "realistic" animations. Dwarf Fortress, Aurora 4x, roguelikes, etc all rely on crude abstractions of the simulation. And, in the end, FM is far more like Dwarf Fortress than it is like FIFA, despite the subject matter.
0
*Official* Football Manager 2023 Feedback Thread
in Football Manager General Discussion
Posted
Just another half-implemented feature.