I'm Done.

[wwfan]

Yeah, no worries, wwfan.

Your your amusement here is the missed "goal" I described above:

Bellamy should have got 2 goals for hitting the crossbar from there!

That's hardly three yards. At least eight yards out, more likely nine, just at the extremity of angle that begins to make scoring far more difficult.

As Andy H said, it is not a pkm, so it is difficult to determine whether the ball was at a good height or on his stronger foot. If it wasn't, the chance is pretty tough.

[wwfan]

Ball trajectory is the big one and I'm sure this is one of the key aspects being worked on in the match engine. In real life a ball will float when you hit it over 40+ yards. On FM, defenders can laser 50-yard balls that shoot through the air. Combine this with attackers clearly having a quicker response time than defenders, and the result is countless 'end to end' attacks that usually end up with more attackers than defenders. Particularly from corners, when the defending team should theoretically have most of its players in its own box. Yet one laser clearance later (and an attacker that is already moving while the defenders aren't) and it's down the other end for a corner within five seconds.

Yup. 100% agree, except for the bolded part. I think that is down to player physics also being problematic, meaning turns don't work as they should.

[Alex W]

I'd suggest that your mentality settings are causing the disjointed play you are complaining about. I suspect you have two sets of players playing very differently.

Your defence believes the overall strategy is to be cautious and sit back. Hence, when the scoreline is level late in the game, they'll be content to pass it amongst themselves. If the other team is fired up and pushing, this will cause some dodgy moments and losses of possession.

In contrast, your attack believes they must attack as much as possible. They will be getting the ball forward quickly, which will stop the more defensively minded players from getting involved as often as they should, if at all. This will result in the other team being able to break up moves by overmanning the attack and attackers shooting hurriedly, snatching their shots as they are being harried and have no support.

Whereas your manually set instructions might offer a good balance between attack and defence, they will also cause both the above scenarios, more so when players are nervous or complacent.

Losing the ball isn't a worry of mine when attacking, my formation is set up as much that if i'm really going forward I have the numbers and if not then my main focus is defending anyway. And again, teams lose the ball in this way all the time. My concern is with how the ball ends up in the net, my tactics can't be causing people to slow down for no reason or goalkeepers to stand and watch the ball instead of picking it up.

My play is sometimes disjointed, so to speak, but if it is it's because i'm happy with those players staying back. My issue isn't with the general play, it's these infuriating events that result in goals that're unexplainable in modern football. The only one that can be is the full-back and centre-backs passing between each other, but this will go on for 20 passes or so, I don't understand why my players don't simply turn and pass it to the winger who is always wide open in space. This is particularly noticeable at my left-back spot, as my inside forward is usually hugging the touchline. When this happens, it's almost always a goal, if not then they miss a sitter or my goalkeeper out-does himself to stop it. There is no reason for it, particularly as my left-backs are stuck to very little creativity and always passes to the left winger if this 'bug/tactical error' does not occur.

The rest of the faults cannot be explained by my mentality or tactics however surely, why would a player with a throw-in set to throw the ball 'short' and with only one option launch it long into a box that has three opposing defenders in it but no strikers? He never does this usually, but every so often he'll do it, they easily take possession, and instantly score. That one surely isn't down to mentality? Again, why would a goalkeeper who always passes it short to my full-backs, when under no pressure, suddenly launch it long for no apparent reason which will ultimately result in a goal against me? I have to presume these things are bugs, I know you said you have history of modding the series, but surely these have to be programming errors rather than tactical mis-judgements?

There is nothing I can do to stop these things.

[wwfan]

My play is sometimes disjointed, so to speak, but if it is it's because i'm happy with those players staying back. My issue isn't with the general play, it's these infuriating events that result in goals that're unexplainable in modern football. The only one that can be is the full-back and centre-backs passing between each other, but this will go on for 20 passes or so, I don't understand why my players don't simply turn and pass it to the winger who is always wide open in space. This is particularly noticeable at my left-back spot, as my inside forward is usually hugging the touchline. When this happens, it's almost always a goal, if not then they miss a sitter or my goalkeeper out-does himself to stop it. There is no reason for it, particularly as my left-backs are stuck to very little creativity and always passes to the left winger if this 'bug/tactical error' does not occur.

I thought I'd already explained this. You have told your DCs and FBs to play cautiously (defensive mentality). You have given them little creative freedom. Hence, they will choose to make safe passes if they think a forward pass is too risky. Increasing their mentalities and / or CF is likely to stop this happening.

The rest of the faults cannot be explained by my mentality or tactics however surely, why would a player with a throw-in set to throw the ball 'short' and with only one option launch it long into a box that has three opposing defenders in it but no strikers? He never does this usually, but every so often he'll do it, they easily take possession, and instantly score. That one surely isn't down to mentality? Again, why would a goalkeeper who always passes it short to my full-backs, when under no pressure, suddenly launch it long for no apparent reason which will ultimately result in a goal against me? I have to presume these things are bugs, I know you said you have history of modding the series, but surely these have to be programming errors rather than tactical mis-judgements?

Which version are you using? There was a bug that meant headed balls off goal kicks too easily resulted in a goal. However, it was fixed in 12.1 I think. There is another possibility, in that the keeper (having low mentality?) thinks the long kick is the safest option (for whatever reason). Your disjointed d-line / mentality settings result in a fair bit of space in front of the back line that a quickly returned ball takes advantage of. This is purely speculation though.

Never seen the throw in issue. I'd suggest it is partly a bug, partly down to the takers CF / decision making and partly down to your throw in settings.

[bullybeef]

That's hardly three yards. At least eight yards out, more likely nine, just at the extremity of angle that begins to make scoring far more difficult.

As Andy H said, it is not a pkm, so it is difficult to determine whether the ball was at a good height or on his stronger foot. If it wasn't, the chance is pretty tough.

Who mentioned three yards? I said 6 without even viewing the clip, so I wasn't far off. That's a difficult chance?? It's harder to actually hit the woodwork, which he did. If open goal misses come down to a matter of opinion, then we've got no chance. An open goal is what it is; if a human misses them, they're human, when a computer control avatar misses them, it's so dodgy.

Anyways, I've uploaded the PKM to the relevant FM file folder.

[wwfan]

Who mentioned three yards? I said 6 without even viewing the clip, so I wasn't far off. That's a difficult chance?? It's harder to actually hit the woodwork, which he did. If open goal misses come down to a matter of opinion, then we've got no chance. An open goal is what it is; if a human misses them, they're human, when a computer control avatar misses them, it's so dodgy.

Anyways, I've uploaded the PKM to the relevant FM file folder.

Apologies. It was another poster that mentioned 3 yards.

However, I still stand by my original analysis. It is not that easy a chance even without taking into account the ball position. He's right at the angle that research on goal conversion suggests makes a chance massively harder to convert. If he were a yard closer to the post, I'd agree that it is a pretty bad miss. Because he's that much wider, I'd argue that missing is somewhat more likely than scoring.

[milnerpoint]

Is there really an argument over the ME being bugged because of a missed chance? Do we need to start digging out the youtube vids of the worlds worst misses?

[upthetoon]

Apologies. It was another poster that mentioned 3 yards.

However, I still stand by my original analysis. It is not that easy a chance even without taking into account the ball position. He's right at the angle that research on goal conversion suggests makes a chance massively harder to convert. If he were a yard closer to the post, I'd agree that it is a pretty bad miss. Because he's that much wider, I'd argue that missing is somewhat more likely than scoring.

it depends on who the striker is at the end of it. if he has brilliant composure finishing first touch technique, 8/10 he should be putting it in the back of the net. i highly doubt players like ibrahimovic, messi, ronaldo, podolski, papiss cisse, mario gomez is going to miss from there in an empty net.

problem with the game is the ME is trying to balance things out and it totally doesn't consider player stats anymore. regardless of the players' stats they either miss or hit and almost totally by luck. stats hardly matter when through on goal based on this ME.

[bullybeef]

Apologies. It was another poster that mentioned 3 yards.

However, I still stand by my original analysis. It is not that easy a chance even without taking into account the ball position. He's right at the angle that research on goal conversion suggests makes a chance massively harder to convert. If he were a yard closer to the post, I'd agree that it is a pretty bad miss. Because he's that much wider, I'd argue that missing is somewhat more likely than scoring.

He was more likely to miss?? Give over, you're having a laugh. So was he more likely to hit the crossbar from there than score too! I've love to see the odds on that bet. If that's not bias I don't know what is.

Do you want to tell Craig Bellamy or shall I? Mmmm, I'll think tweet him, see what he thinks.

[Coentrao]

Ball trajectory is the big one and I'm sure this is one of the key aspects being worked on in the match engine. In real life a ball will float when you hit it over 40+ yards. On FM, defenders can laser 50-yard balls that shoot through the air. Combine this with attackers clearly having a quicker response time than defenders, and the result is countless 'end to end' attacks that usually end up with more attackers than defenders. Particularly from corners, when the defending team should theoretically have most of its players in its own box. Yet one laser clearance later (and an attacker that is already moving while the defenders aren't) and it's down the other end for a corner within five seconds.

I think this is a good point, it was the main cause of the infamous goal kick bug that finally got fixed on the last patch(though sometimes there are still dangerous chances created from cleared long kicks) the combination of ball physics+difference of acceleration and pace between attackers and defenders can lead to some freak goals.

[wwfan]

it depends on who the striker is at the end of it. if he has brilliant composure finishing first touch technique, 8/10 he should be putting it in the back of the net. i highly doubt players like ibrahimovic, messi, ronaldo, podolski, papiss cisse, mario gomez is going to miss from there in an empty net.

problem with the game is the ME is trying to balance things out and it totally doesn't consider player stats anymore. regardless of the players' stats they either miss or hit and almost totally by luck. stats hardly matter when through on goal based on this ME.

That really isn't the case. Research indicates that the following things need to happen for a chance to be a good one.

1: Player needs to be in one yard of space (check for the chance)

2: Player needs to be within 12 yards of goal (check for the chance)

3: Pass prior to shot must have some degree of lateral angle (check for the chance)

4: Player must be able to shoot with his 1st or 2nd touch (check for the chance)

5: Player must be within a zone stretching out from the posts and bisecting the edge of the 6-yard box (borderline for the chance)

You can then add other variables (velocity / height of pass, player being able to use stronger foot, goalkeeper's position), which change the likelihood of scoring. In the pictured chance, all of the key variables match bar one (the angle), which is borderline. Research would suggest that because of this, the player will have slightly less than a 50% chance of scoring. If the goalkeeper were in a solid position, then it would be closer to 20%. Great players will be better than that, but not by 30%. Football has far finer margins than that.

For example, a penalty is converted roughly 82% of the time at all levels. However, that figure is higher early in the match (when a miss is perhaps less costly) and lower later on (especially so in penalty shoot outs). Great penalty takes (i.e. Le Tissier), obviously convert them at a higher rate. However, for the above chance to be an 8/10 shot, it would have to be considered as easy as a penalty, which it patently isn't. So, even considering the greatness of the player, you'd be pushed to go above a 70% chance of conversion.

It's harder to actually hit the woodwork, which he did.

It is always harder to hit the woodwork.

[wwfan]

He was more likely to miss?? Give over, you're having a laugh. So was he more likely to hit the crossbar from there than score too! I've love to see the odds on that bet. If that's not bias I don't know what is.

Do you want to tell Craig Bellamy or shall I? Mmmm, I'll think tweet him, see what he thinks.

If the ball was perfectly placed onto his stronger foot, then the odds of conversion would go up. If it isn't, then down. However, just below 50% would be about right given all the variables of how easy the ball is to strike / control for a good, but less than great, player.

[upthetoon]

You can then add other variables (velocity of pass, player being able to use stronger foot, goalkeeper's position), which change the likelihood of scoring. In the pictured chance, all of the key variables match bar one (the angle), which is borderline. Research would suggest that because of this, the player will have slightly less than a 50% chance of scoring. If the goalkeeper were in a solid position, then it would be closer to 20%. Great players will be better than that, but not by 30%. Football has far finer margins than that.

.

You are really telling me that in that screenshot, that angle is a TIGHT ANGLE? Stop kidding yourself.

And your research is moot, when players with excellent attributes miss 1 on 1 on very occasional basis. Players like Giroud Persie missing 2 to 3 one on ones every game so that the ME will prevent the scoreline to be really very high. The ME is extremely poor and no amount of your justification will prove otherwise.

[wwfan]

You are really telling me that in that screenshot, that angle is a TIGHT ANGLE? Stop kidding yourself.

And your research is moot, when players with excellent attributes miss 1 on 1 on very occasional basis. Players like Giroud Persie missing 2 to 3 one on ones every game so that the ME will prevent the scoreline to be really very high. The ME is extremely poor and no amount of your justification will prove otherwise.

There's opinion and there's fact. I can't help what research on chance conversion has revealed.

One on ones are converted, on average, between 25% and 35%, with the higher number being pretty close to world class. The keeper is always the favourite.

If you complained about how easy it was to create one on ones, especially with down the middle through balls, I'd agree with you. However, you aren't going to get me to reshape reality and tell you that one on ones are easier to convert than they are.

[Cleon]

There's opinion and there's fact. I can't help what research on chance conversion has revealed.

One on ones are converted, on average, between 25% and 35%, with the higher number being pretty close to world class. The keeper is always the favourite.

If you complained about how easy it was to create one on ones, especially with down the middle through balls, I'd agree with you. However, you aren't going to get me to reshape reality and tell you that one on ones are easier to convert than they are.

Plus in terms of FM Bellamy isn't the most focused player and is mentally weak. All which would have a huge baring on the chance he had. But without actually viewing the clip it's hard to say for sure. But I think the chance isn't as easy as the screen and OP make out.

[wwfan]

57 seconds in!

Just saying, like!

It's even got Gerrard crossing, the keeper miles out of position, and Bellamy hitting the woodwork. Only difference is that it is far easier than the pictured chance.

Also suggest people taking notice of just how far away from goal the corner of the 6-yard box actually is.

[glyndav]

I have to agree with wwfan that the angle Bellamy is at does not make it more likely he will score rather than miss.

I think people are being a bit too quick to forget the amount of chances in real life games that are not scored, chances that pundits will regularly say "he should have scored that one". I'm a Man City season ticket holder and I can think of countless games this season where we have had over 15 shots on target, some that I would consider clear cut chances, and won 1 or 2 nil, or indeed been held to a goalless draw. In fact, I would say this is true for every game I have ever seen - there is always at least one opportunity that I feel should be converted that isn't.

I have to be honest, I am yet to see anything in FM that I have not seen a real life counterpart for. There are times where I don't think the 3d engine replicates the chance or goal as well as it could do, however I think that is more a graphical representation rather than a ME fault.

[wwfan]

I have to agree with wwfan that the angle Bellamy is at does not make it more likely he will score rather than miss.

I think people are being a bit too quick to forget the amount of chances in real life games that are not scored, chances that pundits will regularly say "he should have scored that one". I'm a Man City season ticket holder and I can think of countless games this season where we have had over 15 shots on target, some that I would consider clear cut chances, and won 1 or 2 nil, or indeed been held to a goalless draw. In fact, I would say this is true for every game I have ever seen - there is always at least one opportunity that I feel should be converted that isn't.

I have to be honest, I am yet to see anything in FM that I have not seen a real life counterpart for. There are times where I don't think the 3d engine replicates the chance or goal as well as it could do, however I think that is more a graphical representation rather than a ME fault.

City had the best chance conversion ratio in the EPL as well, at least in January, which is when I last looked. Might have slipped a bit since then.

[milnerpoint]

What about Torres earlier this season? It was harder to put the ball wide than to score from where he was.

[Alex W]

I thought I'd already explained this. You have told your DCs and FBs to play cautiously (defensive mentality). You have given them little creative freedom. Hence, they will choose to make safe passes if they think a forward pass is too risky. Increasing their mentalities and / or CF is likely to stop this happening.

Which version are you using? There was a bug that meant headed balls off goal kicks too easily resulted in a goal. However, it was fixed in 12.1 I think. There is another possibility, in that the keeper (having low mentality?) thinks the long kick is the safest option (for whatever reason). Your disjointed d-line / mentality settings result in a fair bit of space in front of the back line that a quickly returned ball takes advantage of. This is purely speculation though.

Never seen the throw in issue. I'd suggest it is partly a bug, partly down to the takers CF / decision making and partly down to your throw in settings.

But surely a pass to the player just infront of them rather than one across my defence is the safest option? Their mentalities were one 'up' into normal and without creativity. That is surely the best way to do what I want? That can't be a mentality issue.

These bugs have appeared on both the standard and the january update version (if indeed that was patched together). There is no particular space infront of my defence, infact there is more infront of my strikers. This is the thing, in a ME the keeper shouldn't boot the ball out under no pressure when told not to. This kind of thing needs fixing. It's even more annoying to know that it only happens when the ME wants to set into motion a goal, as the keeper often holds onto the ball and tempts players on before passing it in usual highlights involving him in this situation.

Something in the new ME, however it be designed, needs to cut these things out. It ruins what is otherwise a well made managerial game. The aggravating part of it all is that the thing holding the FM series back right now, atleast to me, is the part I buy it for and key component.

[Alex W]

What about Torres earlier this season? It was harder to put the ball wide than to score from where he was.

If that's the chance at United I felt quite sorry for him when I saw it, he was twisting to hit it with his left foot and lost his balance while striking it. It's still a bad miss, but not as bad as people made it out to be.

[wwfan]

But surely a pass to the player just infront of them rather than one across my defence is the safest option? Their mentalities were one 'up' into normal and without creativity. That is surely the best way to do what I want? That can't be a mentality issue.

It will result in what you are seeing, which is safe passes across the back line. You have two options. Firstly, continue to follow your own interpretation of how things work and continue to be frustrated. Secondly, take my advice, change the things I'm suggesting you change, and start seeing the difference. You'll then also start learning how things really work.

All you need to do is make sure your defenders' mentality is closer to the forwards' and give them a little CF.

[milnerpoint]

If that's the chance at United I felt quite sorry for him when I saw it, he was twisting to hit it with his left foot and lost his balance while striking it. It's still a bad miss, but not as bad as people made it out to be.

Thanks, because that was my next point, people seem to be under the illusion that every player in FM is taking on a chance with both feet firmly planted, in perfect balance with no distractions that could maybe make them miss, which is not the case at all, unfortunately with the limited animations its easy to see why this is the case, but if people started looking at these things through a footballing context and not just as simple as "he is 8 yards out he cannot miss" then we wouldnt have these threads. As you have shown, being even a tiny bit off balance can make a £50m (out of form) striker miss from what 5/6 yards when the goal was open.

[wwfan]

Thanks, because that was my next point, people seem to be under the illusion that every player in FM is taking on a chance with both feet firmly planted, in perfect balance with no distractions that could maybe make them miss, which is not the case at all, unfortunately with the limited animations its easy to see why this is the case, but if people started looking at these things through a footballing context and not just as simple as "he is 8 yards out he cannot miss" then we wouldnt have these threads.

Not entirely fair. SI's over liberal interpretation of what a CCC is doesn't actually help. I'd suggest that, at most, 50% of their CCCs would be considered good chances in reality.

[blala]

why SI not bring 3d staff to build professional new ME cuz it seems that SI don't have the experience in 3d ,it's not shame to get help from another to improve the main area in the game

[milnerpoint]

Not entirely fair. SI's over liberal interpretation of what a CCC is doesn't actually help. I'd suggest that, at most, 50% of their CCCs would be considered good chances in reality.

Yeah the CCC stat is awful and god knows why they persist with it, its done nothing but annoy people since it was added. I ignore it completely. My point was more aimed towards these easy misses tho, with the Bellamy one above and in the other thread its impossible to tell how prepared he was for the shot because of the animations, it just appears to have been assumed he was ready, in balance and everything else, the reality is we dont know at all.

[Kriss]

why SI not bring 3d staff to build professional new ME cuz it seems that SI don't have the experience in 3d ,it's not shame to get help from another to improve the main area in the game

They do, they have the resources of the whole Sega group to call on and do use them, I'd dispute that it's the main area of the game:)

[themadsheep2001]

Not entirely fair. SI's over liberal interpretation of what a CCC is doesn't actually help. I'd suggest that, at most, 50% of their CCCs would be considered good chances in reality.

Is the interpretation going to be looked for future releases, because i find from my experience its so liberal that i don't actually pay attention to it any more.

[wwfan]

why SI not bring 3d staff to build professional new ME cuz it seems that SI don't have the experience in 3d ,it's not shame to get help from another to improve the main area in the game

They have specialised 3d animators. Animation is not ME design. Completely different things.

[wwfan]

Is the interpretation going to be looked for future releases, because i find from my experience its so liberal that i don't actually pay attention to it any more.

Certainly hope so. OPTA do actually record CCCs in real life now. Not sure how much, if at all, their interpretation differs from the research I've read. However, it is going to be far tighter than SI's current interpretation.

[blala]

thank you mates , i'm now frustrated with the game after this damn topic

[Alex W]

It will result in what you are seeing, which is safe passes across the back line. You have two options. Firstly, continue to follow your own interpretation of how things work and continue to be frustrated. Two, take my advice, change the things I'm suggesting you change, and start seeing the difference. You'll then also start learning how things really work.

All you need to do is make sure your defenders mentality is closer to the forwards and give them a little CF.

But I don't want the defenders to have a closer mentality to the forwards? I don't want them being involved in any way in attacking movements, they merely pass to the players who should. A players mentality shouldn't need to be changed to ensure they don't continuously pass between each other, that's common logic. And even then, why does the game mostly make them do as I say and without warning stick them into a game of one-two that eventually ends in disaster? Why do these things happen under exactly the same circumstances yet with completely different outcomes?

I cannot believe that someone would code such a thing to play out as such if you don't select a certain setting, i've barely tampered with the full-backs and yet for no apparent reason they will do such ridiculous things when in the same situation 90% of the time they'll be fine? As with the free-kicks and the goalkeepers leaving balls to players 20 yards further away? I shouldn't have to ensure with a certain setting that such things don't happen, they should be impossible to achieve without the strictest instruction to do exactly that.

My interpretations of how things should work do so 95% of the time, my concern is with the other times that when under sometimes even less pressure and for no apparent reason, ridiculous goals crop up out of situations that would never happen in real-life, and nor should they in this ME unless once in a blue-moon, as in real-life.

Regardless, i've found out what I posted the thread for, that this isn't just me thinking this and it's a re-curring problem. I hope they fix these problems when creating the new ME, they shouldn't be in it.

[bullybeef]

57 seconds in!

Just saying, like!

It's even got Gerrard crossing, the keeper miles out of position, and Bellamy hitting the woodwork. Only difference is that it is far easier than the pictured chance.

Also suggest people taking notice of just how far away from goal the corner of the 6-yard box actually is.

So, in the words of a mod, in that RL clip he was marked, closed down, and put off by a defender....sound right? But again, his miss was human error, FM players aren't human.

So are we saying when FM players miss, they're meant to miss, in order simulate RL events? Mmmm controversial. Are we suggesting the ME cheats?!

[Alex W]

Thanks, because that was my next point, people seem to be under the illusion that every player in FM is taking on a chance with both feet firmly planted, in perfect balance with no distractions that could maybe make them miss, which is not the case at all, unfortunately with the limited animations its easy to see why this is the case, but if people started looking at these things through a footballing context and not just as simple as "he is 8 yards out he cannot miss" then we wouldnt have these threads. As you have shown, being even a tiny bit off balance can make a £50m (out of form) striker miss from what 5/6 yards when the goal was open.

Very true, but i'm not arguing that misses like that will happen chap, I believe that was bullybeef as he was concerned about his Bellamy chance (among others). The way to fix that would be better animation work with the 3D engine, hopefully it continues to improve and shows what actually happens. If the strikers are missing chances because of those types of issues, which are entirely fair, I think they should create some new animations to show a player slipping when shooting or such things. A small detail, but a very useful one.

[Kriss]

So are we saying when FM players miss, they're meant to miss, in order simulate RL events? Mmmm controversial. Are we suggesting the ME cheats?!

In the ME they're subjected to exactly the same pressures as a rl player (proximity of defender etc) whether they hit or miss is as subject to chance as it is in rl.

[milnerpoint]

Very true, but i'm not arguing that misses like that will happen chap, I believe that was bullybeef as he was concerned about his Bellamy chance (among others). The way to fix that would be better animation work with the 3D engine, hopefully it continues to improve and shows what actually happens. If the strikers are missing chances because of those types of issues, which are entirely fair, I think they should create some new animations to show a player slipping when shooting or such things. A small detail, but a very useful one.

Definitely we need more animations that show these kinda things otherwise people will carry on getting annoyed with it all.

[pigfacemonkeyman]

Not entirely fair. SI's over liberal interpretation of what a CCC is doesn't actually help. I'd suggest that, at most, 50% of their CCCs would be considered good chances in reality.

Yeah the CCC stat is awful and god knows why they persist with it, its done nothing but annoy people since it was added. I ignore it completely. My point was more aimed towards these easy misses tho, with the Bellamy one above and in the other thread its impossible to tell how prepared he was for the shot because of the animations, it just appears to have been assumed he was ready, in balance and everything else, the reality is we dont know at all.

I have to go along with the above. (I just hope milnerpoint didn't hurt himself when he fell out of his chair. )

[Alex W]

So, in the words of a mod, in that RL clip he was marked, closed down, and put off by a defender....sound right? But again, his miss was human error, FM players aren't human.

So are we saying when FM players miss, they're meant to miss, in order simulate RL events? Mmmm controversial. Are we suggesting the ME cheats?!

Of course the ME cheats, it's a ME, I would imagine and put alot of money on it having a script already written. No end of these bizarre goals come in the last 5 minutes, it will want the goal it needs for your opponent and so creates the chance out of nothing, even if it goes against everything that a football would do. (My own defender shooting into the top corner being a good example)

However, all engines do such things, play on any RTS games and whether they're meant to or not, on a decent enough setting the game will respond to your troop choices etc even if it's not meant to, because it's a game engine. It stands to reason that the ME would score goals any way it can from any 'highlight' it stocks in its database, even if that means something absolutely ridiculous having to happen for the goal to happen.

[CityAndColour]

There are 8,000,000 bigger issues with the current match engine than open goals being missed.

[milnerpoint]

I have to go along with the above. (I just hope milnerpoint didn't hurt himself when he fell out of his chair. )

I'm marking this date down, ill use this against you at some point hahahahaha

[blala]

They do, they have the resources of the whole Sega group to call on and do use them, I'd dispute that it's the main area of the game:)

in my opinion and also many other people , ME is the main interest because in the end if the ME not good i will not benefit with new other features which may be very good

They have specialised 3d animators. Animation is not ME design. Completely different things.

yes , animation different and not ME design the problem is that may be the design is good but animation is not good enough so ME overall will be not good

[pigfacemonkeyman]

But I don't want the defenders to have a closer mentality to the forwards? I don't want them being involved in any way in attacking movements, they merely pass to the players who should. A players mentality shouldn't need to be changed to ensure they don't continuously pass between each other, that's common logic. And even then, why does the game mostly make them do as I say and without warning stick them into a game of one-two that eventually ends in disaster? Why do these things happen under exactly the same circumstances yet with completely different outcomes?

I cannot believe that someone would code such a thing to play out as such if you don't select a certain setting, i've barely tampered with the full-backs and yet for no apparent reason they will do such ridiculous things when in the same situation 90% of the time they'll be fine? As with the free-kicks and the goalkeepers leaving balls to players 20 yards further away? I shouldn't have to ensure with a certain setting that such things don't happen, they should be impossible to achieve without the strictest instruction to do exactly that.

My interpretations of how things should work do so 95% of the time, my concern is with the other times that when under sometimes even less pressure and for no apparent reason, ridiculous goals crop up out of situations that would never happen in real-life, and nor should they in this ME unless once in a blue-moon, as in real-life.

Regardless, i've found out what I posted the thread for, that this isn't just me thinking this and it's a re-curring problem. I hope they fix these problems when creating the new ME, they shouldn't be in it.

Bear in mind that a players mentality is relative to his position and even a full on attacking mentality for a DC won't see him acting like a Striker.

[Kriss]

yes , animation different and not ME design the problem is that may be the design is good but animation is not good enough so ME overall will be not good

Yes, but don't forget it has to work on some pretty basic PC's, so there's a big limitation there.

[wwfan]

But I don't want the defenders to have a closer mentality to the forwards?

In order for you to be able to make that statement, you need to know what mentality does. In the simplest terms, it tells your team how to play (which is why mentality is the core setting for the strategy element of the TC). It behooves the user to ensure that mentalities are not spread far apart, as by doing so, each group of different mentality players thinks the match strategy is different (i.e. the defenders think the manager wants them to play cautiously, whereas the attackers want to attack willy-nilly). If you do this, play will often look disjointed and illogical. However, the players are only doing what they are told to do. Non-existent CF makes this worse, as they have no option to override your instructions.

Lower mentality doesn't make the defenders defend better. It just makes them more cautious. If their mentality is far away from the d-line setting or the midfield cover, low mentality will actually make them defend worse.

I don't want them being involved in any way in attacking movements, they merely pass to the players who should.

At least one FB needs to be getting involved in attacks on a reasonably regular basis, or you risk moves being bogged down.

A players mentality shouldn't need to be changed to ensure they don't continuously pass between each other, that's common logic.

No, it is your interpretation. YOUR settings are causing this because players are obeying them. Low mentality and no CF translates as "don't make risky forward passes unless you are very sure they are on." If the player thinks the forward pass is even slightly risky, he won't take it.

And even then, why does the game mostly make them do as I say and without warning stick them into a game of one-two that eventually ends in disaster? Why do these things happen under exactly the same circumstances yet with completely different outcomes?

It might be to do with many things. The opposition pressing a little more. The ball player getting nervous. The potential ball receiver being a little tired and not showing properly for the pass. Or, that the highlights only show the times in which many lateral passes result in a chance against and that it happens more than you think without being displayed. Or all the above.

I cannot believe that someone would code such a thing to play out as such if you don't select a certain setting, i've barely tampered with the full-backs and yet for no apparent reason they will do such ridiculous things when in the same situation 90% of the time they'll be fine? As with the free-kicks and the goalkeepers leaving balls to players 20 yards further away? I shouldn't have to ensure with a certain setting that such things don't happen, they should be impossible to achieve without the strictest instruction to do exactly that.

This is actually an example of how robust the ME actually is. Even with dodgy instructions, players tend to do the logical thing. You are only seeing the few times in which they don't.

[wwfan]

Of course the ME cheats, it's a ME, I would imagine and put alot of money on it having a script already written. No end of these bizarre goals come in the last 5 minutes, it will want the goal it needs for your opponent and so creates the chance out of nothing, even if it goes against everything that a football would do. (My own defender shooting into the top corner being a good example)

However, all engines do such things, play on any RTS games and whether they're meant to or not, on a decent enough setting the game will respond to your troop choices etc even if it's not meant to, because it's a game engine. It stands to reason that the ME would score goals any way it can from any 'highlight' it stocks in its database, even if that means something absolutely ridiculous having to happen for the goal to happen.

There is no rubber banding in the ME or FM.

[bullybeef]

In the ME they're subjected to exactly the same pressures as a rl player (proximity of defender etc) whether they hit or miss is as subject to chance as it is in rl.

So that's a yes then, because FM isn't RL, it's simulation. So if something artificial copies something real, it's programmed to perform premeditated/calculated mistakes based upon differing variables.

[Kriss]

So that's a yes then, because FM isn't RL, it's simulation. So if something artificial copies something real, it's programmed to perform premeditated/calculated mistakes based upon differing variables.

Wrong, random variables mean he may score and he may miss.

[blala]

Yes, but don't forget it has to work on some pretty basic PC's, so there's a big limitation there.

what is the problem if animation is very good ,ok and fit with design and it will work on basic PC's , why SI limit themselves !!!

[pigfacemonkeyman]

Wrong, random variables mean he may score and he may miss.

So his random variables got in the way, happens to me sometimes!

[blala]

i wanna know something is currently ME worth playing ?????