Why is the AI so much better at finishing?

[ArsenalFan7]

I've changed it so that the sweeper is now a centre back and I've moved the CM into the CDM position, we'll see how this tightens things up at the back.

Thanks.

[ArsenalFan7]

A quick question, is 2 CM's in the centre set to advanced play maker overkill or can it work?

[Äktsjon Männ]

Yeah, Biggus is absolutely right. The basic positioning for the two central defenders looks like this:

Seeing that should set the alarm bells ringing in an instant. The first barca goal comes from this (a pass goes to the striker in acres of space):

Now that's what you call a clear cut chance! In that amount of space he could make a coffee, drink it, read the morning papers and still have plenty of time left to finish off the chance. The other goal is due to bugged marking during throw-ins, but still.

With that kind of set-up you absolutely do have to prevent shots altogether to stop them from scoring.

[ArsenalFan7]

Next game against Betis they have 3 SOT and get 3 goals.

1 close range header, a curling screamer from outside the box and a through ball to their striker who's on the edge of the box who then turns and places it into the net.

Mmmmmmmmmmmmm.

[BiggusD]

Just play with two identical Stoppers and move the BWM to DM-Defend (no Hold up ball, Hard Tackling), and all your defensive problems will go away. I don't know if this will have any negative consequences for your attacking play, though. It seemed fine in the second attempt where I won 2-0. I set both MC's to Attacking instead of Support duties as well.

[ArsenalFan7]

Cheers BiggusD, I'll give your recommendations a go.

[bullybeef]

ArsenalFan7, all I can say is what works for me defensively.

I use the TC to set up a very fluid, highly creative, counter attacking system, and I try to out number players attacking my defence, and ditto for my forwards attacking them:

I keep practically all settings and player instructions set to default, accept time-wasting (which can be a personal affect dependant on opponents), and I have tried CA ticked, but I prefer to try to keep the ball more. And I instruct my FBs and IFs to CROSS-BALL OFTEN and MIXED AIM:

Hope this helps.

[ArsenalFan7]

Cheers for all your help :-)

[achilles-the-victorious]

I've had success (in FM11) using 3 at the back, LB CB RB, but IMO it needs 3 central midfielders to support it, that allows 4 attacking players (assymmetrical 3-4-3), which more often than not for me means a LW-FW-FW-FW, because I don't have a RW nearly as good as my top 5 or 6 strikers. It does concede a few goals, esp. on the counter, but its what I use against teams I figure will set up shop, not too often against my main rivals. The fullbacks are fast, the CB is extremely dominant aerially, but I find having too high a line doesn't help my forwards, who are all quicks, so they like to have a bit of space to run into.

[ArsenalFan7]

Using the advice given but the AI has still had a stupid SOT to goal conversion rate.

I can dominate all I like, it's not much use lately.

[Äktsjon Männ]

Basically your tactic is so attacking that whenever the AI do get a half decent break they'll have all the space in the world to exploit. That's always going to be the trade off. If you want this to improve you have to sacrifice a bit of your attacking power and have more men back to help out. Alternatively, as you're doing just fine in the bigger picture, you could just accept that you can't have an awesome all-conquering attacking tactic that won't get you caught short-numbered at the back sometimes.

[TSH]

Basically your tactic is so attacking that whenever the AI do get a half decent break they'll have all the space in the world to exploit. That's always going to be the trade off. If you want this to improve you have to sacrifice a bit of your attacking power and have more men back to help out. Alternatively, as you're doing just fine in the bigger picture, you could just accept that you can't have an awesome all-conquering attacking tactic that won't get you caught short-numbered at the back sometimes.

This is an educated guess at best. With your kind of logic, he should also score a lot more because he may not have all the space in the world but he's having many chances. Unless you want to justify this by saying that having many chances means that most of his chances are not real chances, which would be ridiculous.

When SI fixes (not that they are going to) this yearly problem then people who try to make sense of it will come around and say, "yeah, that needed fixing.."

[Äktsjon Männ]

This is an educated guess at best. With your kind of logic, he should also score a lot more because he may not have all the space in the world but he's having many chances. Unless you want to justify this by saying that having many chances means that most of his chances are not real chances, which would be ridiculous.

When SI fixes (not that they are going to) this yearly problem then people who try to make sense of it will come around and say, "yeah, that needed fixing.."

Did you take a look at his tactics? Or the pkm of the Barcelona match? It's an ultra attacking 4-3-3 without wide forward players and full backs that basically hug the byline at the other end of the pitch. Only defensive players are the centre backs who have to cover all the space across the backline. It almost never concedes possession - Barca barely got out of their half in that match - but when it does there's insane amount of space for the opposition to exploit. His chances on the other end are against packed defenses - and he takes them at a league leading rate. Where's the problem exactly?

[ArsenalFan7]

Next game, Almeria (relegation zone side) get one shot on target and it's a goal. (a header from a indirect free kick)

I think I may be cursed or just insanely unlucky?

[Guest]

This is an educated guess at best. With your kind of logic, he should also score a lot more because he may not have all the space in the world but he's having many chances. Unless you want to justify this by saying that having many chances means that most of his chances are not real chances, which would be ridiculous.

When SI fixes (not that they are going to) this yearly problem then people who try to make sense of it will come around and say, "yeah, that needed fixing.."

If you go back through this thread you will realise that he does score significantly more than his opponents, his concern was for the apparent efficiency of the AI's finishing which in all likelihood can put but down to the lack of a coherent defensive structure to his tactic.

Giving that he took the time to upload it & a few of us have had a look at it I think most of what has been said since is more than educated guesswork.

Edit: Beaten to it.

@ArsenalFan - it will take time for your players to adjust their new tactical instructions, I assume you have set a few extra players to a more defensive mindset?

It is also worth remembering that the stats your team are consistently putting up are also unrealistic, you need to find a balance within your tactical approach & if that means you have half as many chances but increase your conversion rate by 3 times then that all is well.

Edit 2: Have you tried watching the full match for a few games? I managed to nailed down & iron out a number of flaws in my tactics after switched to watching the entire match, it's very time consuming but worth it as you see so much more of what is wrong in the bits that the highlights do not show.

[bullybeef]

To save you messing, ArsenalFan7, you can take a look at my tactic here: https://rapidshare.com/files/1463409196/433count.tac

See what you make of it, and use it at your leisure.

This is the kinda stats it can display:

[Guest]

I think we've reached the point where you might want to considered heading over to the tactics forum.

[Cougar2010]

Next game, Almeria (relegation zone side) get one shot on target and it's a goal. (a header from a indirect free kick)

I think I may be cursed or just insanely unlucky?

I'm confused as to why you think you are cursed or insanely unlucky?

You've already stated earlier in the thread that you've let less goals in than any other team in the league and we've already seen that your scoring ratios are similar or better than the AI.

What do you expect to achieve?

Are your expectations realistic?

[ArsenalFan7]

Because virtually every shot the AI gets on target ends up in the net as a goal?

I expect to win and I am doing this for the most part but I'm trying to get to the bottom of the issue as to why I'm constantly conceding so simply.

[ArsenalFan7]

To save you messing, ArsenalFan7, you can take a look at my tactic here: https://rapidshare.com/files/1463409196/433count.tac

Cheers again, I'll give it a shot but will have to adjust the formation.

I think we've reached the point where you might want to considered heading over to the tactics forum.

I shall take a look at some of the threads over there and further adjust tactics.

[Cougar2010]

Because virtually every shot the AI gets on target ends up in the net as a goal?

I expect to win and I am doing this but I'm trying to get to the bottom of the issue as to why I'm constantly conceding so simply.

But thats only your perception.

You crunched the numbers earlier and your stats show that the AI teams are scoring 0.51 goals for each shot on target against you.

In comparison you are scoring 0.46 goals per shot on target from your own calculations - very similar.

Other forum members have also pointed out how your tactics are extremely attacking. The downside of using tactics like that are when the opposition do get behind and counter attack you are going to give up decent/good scoring opportunities.

If you want to have a better defence you need to sacrifice some of the attack.

[achilles-the-victorious]

Its a dominating ATTACK, not a dominating tactic. Its imbalanced, and there is nothing wrong with that, but the imbalance means when the opposition gets a chance its going to be a good chance. Its a tradeoff, and even though you feel hard done by this is your choice of tactic and style of play. Another tactic could easily get you as many goals, but its unlikely to keep as much possession or generate as many half chances. If you like possession and half chances, and being scored on, on the counter, then you already have the perfect tactic

I prefer goals. If scoring 4 means conceding 1 then I very much prefer that over scoring two, with chance of clean sheet. Thats why one of my favorite formations is using a RM, and on the other flank a LW. Decent for defending, and good for attacking as well.

[wwfan]

Because virtually every shot the AI gets on target ends up in the net as a goal?

I expect to win and I am doing this for the most part but I'm trying to get to the bottom of the issue as to why I'm constantly conceding so simply.

When we were working on the TC, we tested a number of classic formations, including the totatvoetball tactic. We also tested the Pyramid, the Metodo, the Swissbolt, the Catenaccio, the Zona Mista and a few others. There were two reasons for the testing. Firstly, to see if the TC could produce realistic looking football in any formation. Secondly, to see if modern tactics got better results in the ME, which is importance for its robustness. We found that the closer the tactical shape to modern formations, the better it tended to perform. Hence, the Swissbolt tended to beat the Pyramid, the Zona Mista the Swissbolt, the totalvoetball the Zona Mista, and the modern 4-2-3-1 all of them.

The classic tactic section of TT&F evolved out of these tests, with Millie, especially, interested in seeing whether it were possible to recreate a successful totalvoetball style and have it be competitive against modern formations. I never fully agreed with the final shape, believing that the totalvoetball formation played with a DMC and Sweeper, not a DC and Sweeper. I also believed it should never be more attacking than the Standard strategy, and that most roles should be Defend or Support. However, it was Millie's project and that was the extent of my input.

As the OP has illustrated, the tactic obviously works, but does have some predictable issues in defence, especially if the user is playing very aggressively. As others have pointed out, the full backs play very high and wide, which, while helping keep possession by providing extra passing options, also results in the opposition, should they win the ball, having acres of space to exploit on the break. This space is not helped by the DC and Sweeper playing so close to each other, which I believe is partly a bug and partly inherent to the formation as theorised in TT&F.

What I would suggest to the OP is that he gives up on trying to make relatively experimental tactical shapes deliver perfect football results. The ME tends to reward modern shapes better than classic ones. If one prefers to play controlled or counter attacking football, I'd recommend a 4-2-3-1 deep, the Mourinho 4-5-1/4-3-3, or the formation posted by bullybeef above. If one wants to play a little more aggressively and directly, then the 4-4-2 is a great option. Once you have mastered the basic modern formations, you can then showboat with more experimental ones such as totalvoetball, the 4-6-0, the 3-6-1 etc. Or try to recreate national styles, such as the Argentinian 4-3-1-2, with the one being an enganche. To do so, however, you need to be really comfortable with the logic of the TC and real life football tactical theory.

Or, of course, just be happy with the football you are playing and the results you are getting, while accepting that you will concede soft goals against because of the inherent weakness of the totalvoetball shape.

[wwfan]

This is an educated guess at best. With your kind of logic, he should also score a lot more because he may not have all the space in the world but he's having many chances. Unless you want to justify this by saying that having many chances means that most of his chances are not real chances, which would be ridiculous.

When SI fixes (not that they are going to) this yearly problem then people who try to make sense of it will come around and say, "yeah, that needed fixing.."

Although this has already been replied to twice, I feel it is still worth commenting on. The AI conversion problem is one all of the users' own making, in terms of tactical approach and perception bias. The evidence gathered in this thread alone is overwhelming. You can add to this evidence all the evidence we've gathered from similar threads over the years, all, and I mean all, of which have shown that the perceived problem in conversion is always either down to perception bias or an unbalanced tactic.

It won't be fixed as there's nothing that needs fixing. What might happen, however, is that the AI and ME becomes robust enough to stop aggressive tactics dominating the match stats so heavily. That this is possible is the issue, not that the conversion ratios are flawed. If anything, they are too liberal. It is too easy to convert.

[deathspawn666]

Although this has already been replied to twice, I feel it is still worth commenting on. The AI conversion problem is one all of the users' own making, in terms of tactical approach and perception bias. The evidence gathered in this thread alone is overwhelming. You can add to this evidence all the evidence we've gathered from similar threads over the years, all, and I mean all, of which have shown that the perceived problem in conversion is always either down to perception bias or an unbalanced tactic.

It won't be fixed as there's nothing that needs fixing. What might happen, however, is that the AI and ME becomes robust enough to stop aggressive tactics dominating the match stats so heavily. That this is possible is the issue, not that the conversion ratios are flawed. If anything, they are too liberal. It is too easy to convert.

the evidinces you're talking about here don't address 1 thing: player stats. you can say all you want about tactics but not all players will score 1 goal on a CA in 1 chance through a whole match. and about the evidence here it also shows that world class strikers are as good as a lower league striker. again player stats don't matter.

and since there is no bias, why is it that when i CA through the wings the AI FR/FL are able to keep up with my winger and intercept the cross but my FBs are also able to keep up with their wingers and pressure them and yet their cross is perfect into the lonely striker that is between 2 DCs? and i'm talking about general AI teams, small big whetever, my wingers have better stats and yet in same situations the result is totally different. and morale is fine.

EDIT:

and regarding the statistics they prove nothing, they show that overall the conversion ratio are fine, they don't show any quality of gameplays and they don't show anything about player stats. you can cry all you want that the statistics are fine but ppl started this thread compalaining about specific matches and you are trying to make it go to overall matches because you know that will be good for your side. nothing in this discussion was answered by you or any other mods about our strikers missing 1vs1 which happens ALOT against AI meanwhile i had Casillas defend ZERO 1vs1 in 3 seasons and hardly see any AI striker missing a 1vs1 be it a good or a bad player. it's not hard to put the ME "force" the statistics and in fact it seems that our players are missing way too many goals to keep the statistics right because if they didn't waste so many shots on taget as they did the results would be unrealistic.

Another problem is also long shots, any moron AI player will score from outside the box if they are the underdogs, now put xavi alonso, william, douglas costa, ronaldo making long shots with no opposition and see how many times they waste them...

Another problem mods never answer is why is a 1 striker alone in the box, 2 DCs near him and noone else near the area and neither will pressure the striker. and i'm talking about world class DCs.

you know what else the statistics show? that any AI coach is able to make a good tactic or counter us. that ain't realistic...unless you think everyone else here is a bad manager or in RL all teams have the same statistics even though they have different tactics, morale, managers and players...

[milnerpoint]

unless you think everyone else here is a bad manager

Not everyone, but those who struggle most are usually those with the least tactical knowledge, even if they think different.

[deathspawn666]

Not everyone, but those who struggle most are usually those with the least tactical knowledge, even if they think different.

yes but that's only 1 part of the equation, you also have morale, reputation, player stats, AI manager stats (do they even matter???)), weather conditions, playing home or away, adepts, and maybe referees mistakes but this would be dangerous to put in the game...you can be a bad manager but if you get a good team and good players you should be able to at least run for the top of the table...just look at Mancini, tbh i find him a bad manager and yet he's on 2nd place in PL...is this possible in FM12? NO because players stats hardly matter and any AI manager will be better then you and able to exploit you tactics weakness and keep in mind that just because you know the opposition weakness and you know how to counter it it doesn't mean that your players should be able to do it and yet in FM12 any AI manager will be able to see the weakness and AI players will be able to do the new tactic the AI gives them

[achilles-the-victorious]

So pretty much you are in denial (saying statistics prove nothing is illogical). And you don't rate Mancini as a manager.

If your teams weaknesses have been exposed ONE time, by one manager, then other managers can view footage of that game, and use the same exploit, if you haven't resolved the problem!

I manage two teams simultaneously, and I've had 3 European finals AGAINST myself, in the last 5 seasons. So I am pretty sure the opposition aren't THAT clever!

yes but that's only 1 part of the equation, you also have morale, reputation, player stats, AI manager stats (do they even matter???)), weather conditions, playing home or away, adepts, and maybe referees mistakes but this would be dangerous to put in the game...you can be a bad manager but if you get a good team and good players you should be able to at least run for the top of the table...just look at Mancini, tbh i find him a bad manager and yet he's on 2nd place in PL...is this possible in FM12? NO because players stats hardly matter and any AI manager will be better then you and able to exploit you tactics weakness and keep in mind that just because you know the opposition weakness and you know how to counter it it doesn't mean that your players should be able to do it and yet in FM12 any AI manager will be able to see the weakness and AI players will be able to do the new tactic the AI gives them

[Äktsjon Männ]

yes but that's only 1 part of the equation, you also have morale, reputation, player stats, AI manager stats (do they even matter???)), weather conditions, playing home or away, adepts, and maybe referees mistakes but this would be dangerous to put in the game...you can be a bad manager but if you get a good team and good players you should be able to at least run for the top of the table...just look at Mancini, tbh i find him a bad manager and yet he's on 2nd place in PL...is this possible in FM12? NO because players stats hardly matter and any AI manager will be better then you and able to exploit you tactics weakness and keep in mind that just because you know the opposition weakness and you know how to counter it it doesn't mean that your players should be able to do it and yet in FM12 any AI manager will be able to see the weakness and AI players will be able to do the new tactic the AI gives them

The AI can't exploit anything. It's extremely basic in it's nature - it can only see reputation, match odds and the shape of your tactic. It can also do basic reactins to some specific conditions like going a goal down or taking a lead. If you use a balanced TC tactic you are on a level playing field and you absolutely can take Man City to 2nd in the league with hardly any extra effort.

[milnerpoint]

yes but that's only 1 part of the equation, you also have morale, reputation, player stats, AI manager stats (do they even matter???)), weather conditions, playing home or away, adepts, and maybe referees mistakes but this would be dangerous to put in the game...

Which are tied into each other, if you have a good tactic and good control over your players moral will be good, reputation will increase and eventually you will be top dog. Good tactics breed success, which breeds happiness. Bad tactics encourage threads like this.

you can be a bad manager but if you get a good team and good players you should be able to at least run for the top of the table...just look at Mancini, tbh i find him a bad manager and yet he's on 2nd place in PL...is this possible in FM12? NO because players stats hardly matter and any AI manager will be better then you and able to exploit you tactics weakness and keep in mind that just because you know the opposition weakness and you know how to counter it it doesn't mean that your players should be able to do it and yet in FM12 any AI manager will be able to see the weakness and AI players will be able to do the new tactic the AI gives them

There is a big difference to you thinking someone is poor and them actually being poor, Mancini is a good manager, otherwise City would not be 2nd and pushing for the title. You should not be able to succeed at this game if your terrible at it, same goes for every game out there.

The AI does not attack ME weaknesses and i think your giving the AI too much respect. Its not this all seeing AI that will pick you appart unless your a tactical genius, it uses the same tools we do, and usually much worse than we can.

[deathspawn666]

So pretty much you are in denial (saying statistics prove nothing is illogical). And you don't rate Mancini as a manager.

If your teams weaknesses have been exposed ONE time, by one manager, then other managers can view footage of that game, and use the same exploit, if you haven't resolved the problem!

I manage two teams simultaneously, and I've had 3 European finals AGAINST myself, in the last 5 seasons. So I am pretty sure the opposition aren't THAT clever!

hahaha denial? you are the one who doesn't know what an average statistic mean...average doesn't show the the maximum, neither minimum and neither other things that are important to analyze something. making assumptions based only on average goals ratio is dumb, it doesnt say if you had 4 shots and 2 goals or 8 shots and 4 goals and neither does say about the quality of those shots so using them to say that ME is fine is pure fail. and from your point of view the ME could even make the stats even if they didn't make any sense for the tactic you're using and you would still accept it lol.

also about the part of the weakness, by our logic once a tactic shows a weakness everyone can see it and will be able to counter it. do you even watch football??? just beacuse you know the weakness and theorical aproach to counter it it doesnt mean you will be able to do it, it doesn't mean your players wil be able to do it...in FM they WILL be able to do it always. yeah it's realistic alright.

and i don't rate mancini as manager? wait what? i can't have my opinion? if he's such a good manager why didn't he win the champs with the same team as mourinho did? right mancini is really good and mourinho just sucks.

[deathspawn666]

The AI can't exploit anything. It's extremely basic in it's nature - it can only see reputation, match odds and the shape of your tactic. It can also do basic reactins to some specific conditions like going a goal down or taking a lead. If you use a balanced TC tactic you are on a level playing field and you absolutely can take Man City to 2nd in the league with hardly any extra effort.

and why should i use a balanced tactic? how many games do you see big team playing defensive against smallt teams? very few times. how many times small teams win due to CA tactics and other team going too offensive? very few. now try that in FM...

[deathspawn666]

Which are tied into each other, if you have a good tactic and good control over your players moral will be good, reputation will increase and eventually you will be top dog. Good tactics breed success, which breeds happiness. Bad tactics encourage threads like this.

There is a big difference to you thinking someone is poor and them actually being poor, Mancini is a good manager, otherwise City would not be 2nd and pushing for the title. You should not be able to succeed at this game if your terrible at it, same goes for every game out there.

The AI does not attack ME weaknesses and i think your giving the AI too much respect. Its not this all seeing AI that will pick you appart unless your a tactical genius, it uses the same tools we do, and usually much worse than we can.

i am already the big dog, playing with RM, thrashing Barcelona every time we face off with at least 3 goals difference because my players actually play good on that match. then comes the small team and suddenly players have even better oportuneties due to lower pressure from AI and now they can't hit the nets, shots go way off the GK... same tactic, morale good, teamtalk didn't do any problem and yet they play like morons. if it was 1 game i could live with it, in RL if that happens once manager will talk to players, explain situation, tell them what was bad and if they're good they will learn. now let's go to FM, you have stupid teamtalks that will only affect morale but not fix their attitude in future games against small teams...

[achilles-the-victorious]

So did you see Wigan vs Man U the other day, by any chance?

[achilles-the-victorious]

You are asking players to fix their attitudes towards small teams. You just admitted you play small teams pretty much the exact same way you would play Barcelona, and win 3-0.

The game is telling you that the matches against small opponents require a different approach, but you are being stubborn, or you are just not a fast learner.

i am already the big dog, playing with RM, thrashing Barcelona every time we face off with at least 3 goals difference because my players actually play good on that match. then comes the small team and suddenly players have even better oportuneties due to lower pressure from AI and now they can't hit the nets, shots go way off the GK... same tactic, morale good, teamtalk didn't do any problem and yet they play like morons. if it was 1 game i could live with it, in RL if that happens once manager will talk to players, explain situation, tell them what was bad and if they're good they will learn. now let's go to FM, you have stupid teamtalks that will only affect morale but not fix their attitude in future games against small teams...

[Äktsjon Männ]

and why should i use a balanced tactic? how many games do you see big team playing defensive against smallt teams? very few times. how many times small teams win due to CA tactics and other team going too offensive? very few. now try that in FM...

How often do you see any team going all gung ho from start to finish against anyone? Do you think a high tempo kick and rush approach is effective against stacked defenses? Of course big teams will be more attacking in their approach against smaller teams but that does not mean they don't have to know how to be patient in their build up.

And by balanced tactics I meant a logical set up of roles and duties, not defensive mentality. Why do you have to you use a balanced tactic? You don't. It's your choice. Just as it is your choice to be frustrated if your approach fails against a team defending well and getting their share of good fortune against you. Your ranting here serves no useful purpose though.

[wwfan]

the evidinces you're talking about here don't address 1 thing: player stats. you can say all you want about tactics but not all players will score 1 goal on a CA in 1 chance through a whole match. and about the evidence here it also shows that world class strikers are as good as a lower league striker. again player stats don't matter.

Statistical variations between levels do not exist. World class strikers in top leagues convert at exactly the same ratio as a good striker for the level at any level. Studies on this have measured conversion levels between the World Cup and US Ladies College Soccer. There are no recorded instances of any striker, anywhere converting any type of chance other than penalties at a better ratio than 1 goal in 3 shots over the course of a career. And even that is pretty much unheard of.

and since there is no bias, why is it that when i CA through the wings the AI FR/FL are able to keep up with my winger and intercept the cross but my FBs are also able to keep up with their wingers and pressure them and yet their cross is perfect into the lonely striker that is between 2 DCs? and i'm talking about general AI teams, small big whetever, my wingers have better stats and yet in same situations the result is totally different. and morale is fine.

EDIT:

and regarding the statistics they prove nothing, they show that overall the conversion ratio are fine, they don't show any quality of gameplays and they don't show anything about player stats. you can cry all you want that the statistics are fine but ppl started this thread compalaining about specific matches and you are trying to make it go to overall matches because you know that will be good for your side. nothing in this discussion was answered by you or any other mods about our strikers missing 1vs1 which happens ALOT against AI meanwhile i had Casillas defend ZERO 1vs1 in 3 seasons and hardly see any AI striker missing a 1vs1 be it a good or a bad player. it's not hard to put the ME "force" the statistics and in fact it seems that our players are missing way too many goals to keep the statistics right because if they didn't waste so many shots on taget as they did the results would be unrealistic.

This is all perception bias. Over the years I've been sent and watched many pkms in which the user has complained the ME/AI is against him. In every one, the user's chances were extremely one-dimensional and nowhere near as good as they had stated in their complaint. Moreover, they usually relied on the corner exploit to score their first goal (which the AI doesn't and can't do), after which they tended to score more as the AI team was forced to open up more in search of an equaliser.

Indeed, in one match I was forwarded, the user complained he only won 2-1 in ET after dominating the shot count by circa 35-8. However, on viewing the pkm, it was patently obvious that maybe only 3 (maximum) of the 35 shots were of the same quality as any of the AI's eight. The user was actually very lucky in winning. In another experiment, I proved that the "best super-tactic" massively underperformed a dynamic TC-style tactic in which users were making logical, in-match decisions, with the former having a very poor open play goal conversion (again relying on the corner exploit) whereas the latter scored open play goals from all angles. A similar experiment in FML illustrated how logical in-match decision making nearly always beat "super-tactics", having roughly a 70%-20%-10% WDL record against them.

The AI cannot make decisions with anywhere near this level of sophistication. However, it does use the same basic logic, which at least keeps it competitive against any form of exploitive tactic.

Another problem is also long shots, any moron AI player will score from outside the box if they are the underdogs, now put xavi alonso, william, douglas costa, ronaldo making long shots with no opposition and see how many times they waste them...

It will be down to the space they are in, which will be a tactical issue (often down to users playing 4 attacking mentality players in the AM/F strata, defensive mentality defenders, and only two MCs protecting the middle). In contrast, AI tactics built on TC logic do not leave this space.

Another problem mods never answer is why is a 1 striker alone in the box, 2 DCs near him and noone else near the area and neither will pressure the striker. and i'm talking about world class DCs.

There is a bug in defensive tracking, which can leave strikers in too much space. However, it affects user and AI alike.

you know what else the statistics show? that any AI coach is able to make a good tactic or counter us. that ain't realistic...unless you think everyone else here is a bad manager or in RL all teams have the same statistics even though they have different tactics, morale, managers and players...

The TC guarantees some level of structural logic, which means none of the AI tactics will be inherently bad. However, the AI cannot make sophisticated in match decisions, giving the proactive user a massive, massive advantage. As the stats illustrate, the user manager has a huge conversion advantage, even when he thinks he hasn't. As long as the user isn't doing anything stupid, he'll always have the edge.

i am already the big dog, playing with RM, thrashing Barcelona every time we face off with at least 3 goals difference because my players actually play good on that match. then comes the small team and suddenly players have even better oportuneties due to lower pressure from AI and now they can't hit the nets, shots go way off the GK... same tactic, morale good, teamtalk didn't do any problem and yet they play like morons. if it was 1 game i could live with it, in RL if that happens once manager will talk to players, explain situation, tell them what was bad and if they're good they will learn. now let's go to FM, you have stupid teamtalks that will only affect morale but not fix their attitude in future games against small teams...

This is not a morale issue. It is a tactical one common to users who play with big sides and expect to dominate every match without working hard at it. As you've summed up here...

and why should i use a balanced tactic? how many games do you see big team playing defensive against smallt teams? very few times. how many times small teams win due to CA tactics and other team going too offensive? very few. now try that in FM...

... you don't have a good grasp of real life tactical theory or how FM interprets it. Only the Defend and Contain strategies are "defensive". All the other strategies are focused on beating the opposition. Counter Attack is somewhat defined by the notion of "Attack", keeping the ball deep then striking ruthlessly as space opens up. Standard and Control are all about trying to patiently break the opposition down. Attacking is about trying to dominate in the final third (Overload more so), which is obviously difficult to do if the opposition are packing bodies into it. You simply have to play more patiently against packed defences. If you don't, you start to rely on the ability of high quality players to convert difficult chances at pace and under pressure. Only the individual quality of the player begins to matter. In this instance, a player's form and morale begin to be key.

[deathspawn666]

can you link the study please? (not doubting you btw, would really like to pu my eyes on it)

about the long shots, when i have 1 DC or DM right in front of the AI player less then 1 meter from him and he still shoots like he's free and scores then there is clearly a problem and the GK is not advanced. my long shot players need to be completely alone to be able to score from a long shot.

about the dcs bug, hum would you then agree that teams playing with 1 striker that gets between 2 dcs have an advantage over teams with 2 strikers? goes both ways ofc (AI and human). i usually play with 2 strikers and usually don't have the "advantage" of the bug and that might give me the feeling that is biased.

about the AI tactics, i've seen AI change tactics in the half time and i've had conceed goals in the first minute of the 2nd half without being able to do any tactic adjustment after the match starts. even if it's not biased my advice for future improvement would be to "avoid" those situations on the ME because we aren't able to see the AI tactic changes effects in the 1st minute. i know this can happen in RL but i never was able to do it.

about underdogs, no i don't expect to dominate the match against small teams however my problem is i actually do dominate but strikers just go dumb mode and miss CCC, i would rather not dominate, create less chances and score. and yes the goal chances are good, lots 1vs1, how better can you get??...should i avoid that? btw i noticed GKs never goes out of the net to try to reduce the angle, maybe a future improvement for the game?

intereristing statement about the CA tactic on FM interpretation, i thought it was mainly defensive

[ArsenalFan7]

I am now 11 league games into my new season and I have scored 40 whilst only conceding 2, 1 of those being a penalty, so I believe with your help and a few defensive, tactical adjustments the issue is no longer there, at least from what I've seen from the opening to the season.

So yes, thanks all, I guess that's all.

[BiggusD]

can you link the study please? (not doubting you btw, would really like to pu my eyes on it)

about the long shots, when i have 1 DC or DM right in front of the AI player less then 1 meter from him and he still shoots like he's free and scores then there is clearly a problem and the GK is not advanced. my long shot players need to be completely alone to be able to score from a long shot.

about the dcs bug, hum would you then agree that teams playing with 1 striker that gets between 2 dcs have an advantage over teams with 2 strikers? goes both ways ofc (AI and human). i usually play with 2 strikers and usually don't have the "advantage" of the bug and that might give me the feeling that is biased.

about the AI tactics, i've seen AI change tactics in the half time and i've had conceed goals in the first minute of the 2nd half without being able to do any tactic adjustment after the match starts. even if it's not biased my advice for future improvement would be to "avoid" those situations on the ME because we aren't able to see the AI tactic changes effects in the 1st minute. i know this can happen in RL but i never was able to do it.

about underdogs, no i don't expect to dominate the match against small teams however my problem is i actually do dominate but strikers just go dumb mode and miss CCC, i would rather not dominate, create less chances and score. and yes the goal chances are good, lots 1vs1, how better can you get??...should i avoid that? btw i noticed GKs never goes out of the net to try to reduce the angle, maybe a future improvement for the game?

intereristing statement about the CA tactic on FM interpretation, i thought it was mainly defensive

Yes 1-on-1 striker vs gk chances in FM aren't really good chances. Trying to create other types of chances (especially the ones where you outplay the opponent by squaring inside the box; or diagonal passes to a striker who runs from the edge of the area to a position 1-2 meters to the right or left from the penalty kick spot and then shoots first time) is highly advised.

If you get a 1-on-1 you need the player to come in from a certain angle and have no-one nearby. So you want either one-touch-shots or tap-ins, or you want more than enough time and space to trick the keeper into making the move first and stuff like that. Anything in-between and the odds are stacked against the attacker. I don't know if that is realistic, but that's quite frankly irrelevant. SI, when plumbing ME holes, has made sure that just cramming everyone in the centre and throughballing like crazy won't work - so it doesn't.

[Guest]

This is about as good as it gets when playing against a weaker side, it shows how effective a balanced & patient attacking approach can be.

From the start I reigned in the attacking instincts of my players, once we had the 3 goal lead did I slowly start to give them more freedom when in possession & I never felt the need to use the attack or overload mentality instructions whereas a year ago I would have started with an all out attack assault & ran the risk of coming unstuck early on.

[video=youtube;1wZAWrLGx48]

The one aspect that I have compromised on is width but there isn't a tactic out there that doesn't have some form of compromise & it's all about ensuring that your weaknesses are not alarming obvious & more to the point problematic when defending, the one saving grace in my style is that if things are getting too crowded in the middle I can easily push players out wide without drastically altering the overall shape of the team.

Thinly veiled bragging

[Äktsjon Männ]

Yep, that's common logic pretty much. It's important to not give the smaller sides any encouragment. If you come out guns blazing, missing shots everywhere and letting the opponent know there are opportunities to break the chances are your players will get nervous when they don't score and the opposition can grow in confidence. If you deny them the ball and patiently work to find a good opening it demoralizes them.

I don't think you necessarily have to fully compromise, I like to make sure that my tactics enable crossing opportunities, shooting opportunities, chances to break while still being built around possession build-up. You need to be able to shift the focus though.

[Sussex Hammer]

""Not everyone, but those who struggle most are usually those with the least tactical knowledge, even if they think different.""

I have to say I find comments like this do get my goat a bit. I have managed and played for 25 years and as a Manager at both Youth and Adult levels have won Cups and League Championships and yet I am at present struggling with the new patch in FM. First two patches were fine and in fact my first season and a half of the new patch was ok but the wheels have now fallen off and it is very frustrating. In this incarnation tactics (mine at least) seem to fall apart after a very successful 10 games or so and yet in FM for years I have never had any major issues with building a good tactic or two. So I apparently according to some who post on here tactically inept.

Maybe it's because I play the game as a Sunday League Footballer in which your players take 25 years to become motivated to play for you but maybe it's also because quite honestly in FM you cannot 100% replicate real life football. It's already been admitted that defensive tracking back doesn't work too well and your wingers have never heard of helping out your fullbacks, and I have Adebayor up top who IRL wouldn't scuff his 5 chances a game feebly wide.

IRL I play a 4-4-2 and a 4-5-1 very successfully but you cannot as far as I can see replicate that in this years FM because IRL players do close down, do mark properly from time to time and cross the ball with a reasonable success rate and big strong forwards can hold the ball up as instructed. And one defeat after a good run of wins doesn't always send your players running in tears to a phsycologist.

I am not a master FM tactitian and can certainly do better and understand the ME better but at the same time some people need to acknowledge that there are quite a few serious issues in the game that need addressing before you can seriously claim that FM is realistic and not just fob off people who are struggling as "those with the least tactical knowledge."

[Rouge77]

Well, I've played Football Managers and Championship Managers since the 90s and beyond what the eternal optimists claim, the AI always scores more goals per shots on goal and probably always will. Through the years it has been pretty much the same for me no matter the tactics; I need, on average, 3 shots on goal to score and the AI needs 2. Individual games have differences, but that's how it evens out for me in the long run.

[themadsheep2001]

Well, I've played Football Managers and Championship Managers since the 90s and beyond what the eternal optimists claim, the AI always scores more goals per shots on goal and probably always will. Through the years it has been pretty much the same for me no matter the tactics; I need, on average, 3 shots on goal to score and the AI needs 2. Individual games have differences, but that's how it evens out for me in the long run.

Did you even read the thread, or indeed look at the stats posted on the previous page. The OP actually has the best shots to goal in ratio in the league, and quite comfortably so. Its only againt him, because of the hole his approach that made them or clinical again him on the counter.

Anything the AI can do, you can do better. The question you should be asking yourself is why are you a worse finisher than the AI.

[themadsheep2001]

""Not everyone, but those who struggle most are usually those with the least tactical knowledge, even if they think different.""

I have to say I find comments like this do get my goat a bit. I have managed and played for 25 years and as a Manager at both Youth and Adult levels have won Cups and League Championships and yet I am at present struggling with the new patch in FM. First two patches were fine and in fact my first season and a half of the new patch was ok but the wheels have now fallen off and it is very frustrating. In this incarnation tactics (mine at least) seem to fall apart after a very successful 10 games or so and yet in FM for years I have never had any major issues with building a good tactic or two. So I apparently according to some who post on here tactically inept.

Maybe it's because I play the game as a Sunday League Footballer in which your players take 25 years to become motivated to play for you but maybe it's also because quite honestly in FM you cannot 100% replicate real life football. It's already been admitted that defensive tracking back doesn't work too well and your wingers have never heard of helping out your fullbacks, and I have Adebayor up top who IRL wouldn't scuff his 5 chances a game feebly wide.

IRL I play a 4-4-2 and a 4-5-1 very successfully but you cannot as far as I can see replicate that in this years FM because IRL players do close down, do mark properly from time to time and cross the ball with a reasonable success rate and big strong forwards can hold the ball up as instructed. And one defeat after a good run of wins doesn't always send your players running in tears to a phsycologist.

I am not a master FM tactitian and can certainly do better and understand the ME better but at the same time some people need to acknowledge that there are quite a few serious issues in the game that need addressing before you can seriously claim that FM is realistic and not just fob off people who are struggling as "those with the least tactical knowledge."

Hence why he said, not everyone.

[Rouge77]

Did you even read the thread, or indeed look at the stats posted on the previous page. The OP actually has the best shots to goal in ratio in the league, and quite comfortably so. Its only againt him, because of the hole his approach that made them or clinical again him on the counter.

Anything the AI can do, you can do better. The question you should be asking yourself is why are you a worse finisher than the AI.

Oh, I've read most of the thread, but the claims about AI not being better are already well known for me from previous years. Tactics do influence on how many shots on goal the AI gets, but in the long run, on average, the AI does the same amount of goals per chance. So, yes, limiting chances influences how many goals you let in, but it doesn't change the rate on which the AI converts it's chances, which stays on the same level and that level is higher than which the players can achieve.

[themadsheep2001]

Oh, I've read most of the thread, but the claims about AI not being better are already well known for me from previous years. Tactics do influence on how many shots on goal the AI gets, but in the long run, on average, the AI does the same amount of goals per chance. So, yes, limiting chances influences how many goals you let in, but it doesn't change the rate on which the AI converts it's chances, which stays on the same level and that level is higher than which the players can achieve.

The best AI team in my last save scores 1 goal every 6.88 shots.

I score 1 every 5.47 shots.

Even the OP had a scoring ratio that outstripped anything the AI did.

Entirely possible, and actually relatively easy to be more clinical than the AI over the long run.

[Rouge77]

Shots on goal or shots overall? I guess those are shots overall. I'm talking about shots on goal, those which would go in without a goalkeeper saving them or a player blocking the shot.

[themadsheep2001]

Shots on goal or shots overall? I guess those are shots overall. I'm talking about shots on goal, those which would go in without a goalkeeper saving them or a player blocking the shot.

He out does them on both (see http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/303143-Why-is-the-AI-so-much-better-at-finishing?p=7731641&viewfull=1#post7731641 and scroll down for the rest of the teams he's up against.

His ratio for goals from shots on target is 0.43 goals per shot. No side gets better than that, and only one side gets above 0.4 (0.402).

I'll have to load my save up to check mine, and ill post it later.