themadsheep2001

Moderators
  • Content count

    9,763
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

1 Follower

About themadsheep2001

  • Rank
    Moderator

Recent Profile Visitors

7,065 profile views
  1. Nice data analysiis although I don't how accurate a reflection it will be as on SI will have all the data. That said, I don't think you can draw qualitative analysis on what SI should focus on based from it. I don't think FM bloggers cover anywhere near wide a enough a spectrum for the fan base (I don't think this forum covers a wide enough spectrum tbh)
  2. What you believe and what is said by people who actually are part of the game are completely different, with respect you are not in any position to dispute their words.
  3. This isnt the case, it's not rubber banded and you know it. We've been here so many times with you that this thread isn't staying open.
  4. But you don't have to make a lot of assumptions, certainly not ones that lead down this road. Doesnt mean there is room for better feedback, but some of the extrapolations get very left field
  5. This thread is looking like a good example of how some aspects of FM get overthought, even the ME for all its complexity.
  6. So FM should start locking the rep to the required level then. Add an unrealistic input, get an unrealistic output. Avoid this by locking starting reps to the minimum rep required for that level.
  7. Yeah that's not even close to being true, as sales have grown each of the last 4 years Thread closed as OP is currently banned
  8. Funnily enough there has been lots of discussion. When you are able to drop the insults and awful attitude, and can post something that actually is constructive and useful, you'll be able to join in.
  9. Stepping in and closing this thread as nothing of value is going to be gained from this. We've been here far too many times with you
  10. Si have stated that's the defensive shape. Again the fact that you don't actually see it mentioned is part of the problem. That formation you see tells you nothing about either their attacking or defensive shape. They will look very different in attacking and defensive transitions. FM doesn't do well in showing you either.
  11. It has been made clear the formations are the defensive shape in FM. This is the very crux of the issue. Which is why the Wide strata's should be blended as one aera. As someone who did football match analysis, they are a mish mash, which is where the confusion comes from. But they certainly are not the attacking shapes generally. FM's use of formations is incredibly static, and until we start showing all 4 phases, the German Researcher way is one of showing it
  12. There is no real reason (any coding issues aside) why the AML/R and ML/R shouldn't have the same roles. Certainly something that needs to change
  13. As we've said, the Bundesliga was that way when the German researchers we doing it. It played some very well rounded football. AI selection in those shapes was no more an issue there than in a 4-2-3-1 etc.
  14. Scoring goals from 4-1-4-1 isn't a problem And there German researchers already had AML/R players with ML/R ratings
  15. This absolutely nails it for me. In those t iterations of the match engine, the German researchers methods was the best way of doing it, and i would have open up some of the roles attached to AML/AMR up to the ML/MR strata. Even now i still think that's the right way to approach it