Football Manager 2014 - Update 14.2.2 - Feedback Thread

[Jimbokav1971]

The corners thing has to be improved, it's completely ruining this version of the game. Almost every corner is at least a clear cut chance, not from the corner itself, goals direct from corners are probably realistic in their volume. It's the goals direct from the clearance that annoy me. A defender heads it away and it's lashed in. Over and over and over again.

I'm being really serious here.

What can you do to stop that?

1. You can try and put your players there, (but there are not loads of options to do that).

2. You can try and do something to stop the AI players from being there.

Is that enough of a hint?

[busngabb]

I'm being really serious here.

What can you do to stop that?

1. You can try and put your players there, (but there are not loads of options to do that).

2. You can try and do something to stop the AI players from being there.

Is that enough of a hint?

No, be more specific. I've got it setup pretty realistically, a couple of small, pacey players staying up in case of a break, my best headers marking their best headers. The smaller players on the edge of the box. Tell me what you'd recommend.

[Cougar2010]

Probably not the place to ask but worth a shot. About these crossing issues that I have, ie full backs constantly blocking my wide men's crosses, I was googling earlier and came across a theory that using a playmaker could be part of the problem because wingers may look for a possible ball to the PM before making any cross therefore a delay in the decision process. Logical possibility or load of bumph?!?!

Interesting theory, might have to have a look at it.

I wonder if using a target man up front would help as well.

[Jimbokav1971]

Well I will tell you what worked for me, (and importantly why), and then you can tweak it a little because I doubt you have quite the behemoths in your team that I have in mine.

1. When it comes to winning the 2nd or 3rd ball, you don't really have many options, (marking short corner, or lurking are really your only options). So what I do is I keep my 3 poorest defenders upfield. (This does not include my AF). So I have 2 wingers and an AMC kept up the pitch. Because I am playing very wide, (or perhaps because of other instructions), they don't just stand in the centre-circle, (because when they do that it's rubbish). Instead 1 stands in the centre circle and the other 2 each stand on a touchline. In order for the AI to look after the 3 very spread players, it invariably defends with 4 defenders + a GK. 1 defender marks each wide attacker, a 3rd defender marks the central attacker and a 4th sits in front.

So I have so far used 3 players, and it is costing the AI 4 defenders and the GK to mark them. The big thing here is that they don't defend with wingers or something else. Their back 4 often defends en masse.

2. So next I have to deal with the positions that we can win the ball back with. You must must must have someone "lurking". It doesn't so much matter how good they are at defending. They must be a little creative and be able to pass. (Central midfielder is ideal). The AI will counter this by also having someone "lurk", although this is not 100%. If he doesn't lurk, great, brilliant in fact. You don't want him to lurk. Most of the time however he will.

This means that they now have a GK back, 4 defenders back, someone lurking and another player taking the corner. That's 7 players. They only have 11 in the team so that means that the players you have left only have to contend with 4 attackers, (none of whom are going to be big centre backs). In order to counter these 4, you have a GK, both centre-backs, both full-backs, and assuming what sort of formation you are playing, probably either 2 midfielders, (or if you are like me 1 midfielder and a striker).

You only have a few options. now.

They have 4 attackers so I select 4 man-marking roles. (How you split that up is up to you, but to be honest I'm not sure it matters. There are only 4 bodies to mark and you want 4 defenders marking them). Whether you do that my mark tall, mark small, or man mark, is up to you. Who does what again will be down to the individual players.

This will leave you with 2 players free. With these 2 you have the option of marking 1 post, (which is up to you but I would suggest trial and error), and using the last player to do something different in the hope that he will take up a position that will see him pick up 2nd balls, or marking both posts and having nobody "spare". If what a is doing is not working, (whether it be on a post or something else, move him and ytrty something else). What will work for me won't exactly work for you, (because we have different players), but that's the gist of it. You may even want to mark the short corner area, (even though they are never in a million years going to take one of the 4 players out to take it short), and the benefit of doing this is that if the ball is cleared in that direction, (as it quite often is), then you will get there 1st.

3. The last thing is, if the ball is cleared wide and backwards, (so away from the corner-taker), then your attacker on the half-way line on that side should be easily able to get there before the AI lurker. He will get there 1st, (or at least stop then attacking with freedom), and it is the "lurker" that will then act as the link mad to get the ball going the other way again.

Just give it a try and when it doesn't work, don't give up on it, think to yourself what bit of it didn't work and then try and deal with that tiny little bit.

The achilles heel of this tactic is the AI "lurker". He's not being marked specifically so if he decides not to "lurk" and instead decides to attack the ball, then you need to either win it, or just hope that he can't get a proper run at a good delivery, (and maybe that's something to think about when it comes to the position of that last full-back or midfielder).

[Edit]

Well there has been no response to this and it's been a while so maybe everyone is just speeding through the games without conceding from corners, or alternatively they are too busy making Jimbolike voodoo dolls.

[Edit]

On the other hand, it could just be late.

[Jimbokav1971]

Interesting theory, might have to have a look at it.

I wonder if using a target man up front would help as well.

I actually thought that a TM was part of the problem.

I play an attacking W on 1 side and a support IF on the other side with an attack AF and the play I am seeing is incredible. Full backs haven''t got a scooby. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure they will improve, but at the moment it's fill yer boots time.

[rp1966]

Well I will tell you what worked for me, (and importantly why), and then you can tweak it a little because I doubt you have quite the behemoths in your team that I have in mine.

1. When it comes to winning the 2nd or 3rd ball, you don't really have many options, (marking short corner, or lurking are really your only options). So what I do is I keep my 3 poorest defenders upfield. (This does not include my AF). So I have 2 wingers and an AMC kept up the pitch. Because I am playing very wide, (or perhaps because of other instructions), they don't just stand in the centre-circle, (because when they do that it's rubbish). Instead 1 stands in the centre circle and the other 2 each stand on a touchline. In order for the AI to look after the 3 very spread players, it invariably defends with 4 defenders + a GK. 1 defender marks each wide attacker, a 3rd defender marks the central attacker and a 4th sits in front.

So I have so far used 3 players, and it is costing the AI 4 defenders and the GK to mark them. The big thing here is that they don't defend with wingers or something else. Their back 4 often defends en masse.

That sounds great and I'm sure it is successful, but ultimately it's exploiting a weakness in the ME, isn't it? (Which is probably why people aren't much interested in following your lead)

In the unlikely event that a team did try that IRL the opposition would bring pacey players back, not the defenders they need to attack the corner. The fact that the ME leaves the big guns back is a flaw and shows a very simplistic approach to analysing corner setups. Leaving 3 up should disadvantage you more often than it works in your favour, in reality.

It doesn't really address the issue of how corners are working in a realistic situation - which takes us back to the original problems of clearances into the wrong areas, poor first touch ping-pong etc.

[Sussex Hammer]

Interesting theory, might have to have a look at it.

I wonder if using a target man up front would help as well.

It could make sense especially if you have say a left sided DLP D and a left sided winger S. I'm really struggling with a lone forward role in a 4231 or a 433. Tried a DLF S and a TM S neither with an success. Even with a SS I am struggling to get players in the box. However when I do get a four lined up across their area crosses either get blocked or a square or back ball is played, even with cross more often picked. I have thought about playing a TM attack but a lone striker on attack seems frowned upon!

[MTM1977]

Is there any way to block agent offer for certain players?

Agents often keep offering the same players, but if i have already scouted the player and decided that i am not interested, it would be nice not to receive offers about him anymore.

The only agent filters i have found are on very general level.

If the "block agent offer for player x" is not possible, then it could be a good addition in the future?

[TitouCythe]

I can't wait for the new update so people can find something else to endlessly argue about.

A little patience will be rewarded !

[HTC]

I understand mods desperation over moaning but you have to understand there is something wrong here.

The problem is most of us just cant stop play the game even if we know frustrating things happen.

We just keep find a way to bypass them again and again.

In my last game, i won 1-0. I had 11 shots, 2 CCCs. My opponent had 4 shots, 2 on target, 1 long, 1 HC, 1 CCC.

Guess who MOM was. My goalkeeper !!! Its like once again ME desided that i have to lose and my hero gollie stopped it.

2 shots on target for mother of god and my gollie was the man of the match.

His stats : 21 passes 20 completed, 1 svh, 1 svp, and thats it.

And again its a shame really because ME has so much potential.

[themadsheep2001]

I understand mods desperation over moaning but you have to understand there is something wrong here.

The problem is most of us just cant stop play the game even if we know frustrating things happen.

We just keep find a way to bypass them again and again.

In my last game, i won 1-0. I had 11 shots, 2 CCCs. My opponent had 4 shots, 2 on target, 1 long, 1 HC, 1 CCC.

Guess who MOM was. My goalkeeper !!! Its like once again ME desided that i have to lose and my hero gollie stopped it.

2 shots on target for mother of god and my gollie was the man of the match.

His stats : 21 passes 20 completed, 1 svh, 1 svp, and thats it.

And again its a shame really because ME has so much potential.

The ME doesn't decide you have to lose. So there isn't much more to add here.

[Blaupunkt]

That sounds great and I'm sure it is successful, but ultimately it's exploiting a weakness in the ME, isn't it? (Which is probably why people aren't much interested in following your lead)

In the unlikely event that a team did try that IRL the opposition would bring pacey players back, not the defenders they need to attack the corner. The fact that the ME leaves the big guns back is a flaw and shows a very simplistic approach to analysing corner setups. Leaving 3 up should disadvantage you more often than it works in your favour, in reality.

It doesn't really address the issue of how corners are working in a realistic situation - which takes us back to the original problems of clearances into the wrong areas, poor first touch ping-pong etc.

When Mourinho first managed Chelsea i remember an interview he did where he stated that he left 2 or 3 players up the pitch when defending corners, that way the opposition has a choice to make, either they keep some men back to mark them 2v2 or 3v3 or maybe an have an extra man so they don't and run the risk of being out numbered should the defending team win the ball back and manage a quick counter attack.

To suggest teams do not do this type of thing in real life is just wrong, who they choose to stay back and mark these players is open for debate, i also do not agree that this will in fact hinder the defending team IRL i believe the less bodies you have to defend against when defending a corner the easier it is to defend providing your players are alert and do their jobs correctly.

[forameuss]

When Mourinho first managed Chelsea i remember an interview he did where he stated that he left 2 or 3 players up the pitch when defending corners, that way the opposition has a choice to make, either they keep some men back to mark them 2v2 or 3v3 or maybe an have an extra man so they don't and run the risk of being out numbered should the defending team win the ball back and manage a quick counter attack.

To suggest teams do not do this type of thing in real life is just wrong, who they choose to stay back and mark these players is open for debate, i also do not agree that this will in fact hinder the defending team IRL i believe the less bodies you have to defend against when defending a corner the easier it is to defend providing your players are alert and do their jobs correctly.

Dundee United have done it a lot this season, at least when I've seen them. I remember it seeming strange to me, but it's a calculated gamble. It forces the defence to make a decision, like you say.

[Pelz]

I've just had a very sudden drop in tactical familiarity - have three tactics I use, and have been pretty much 100 percent familiar with them for three seasons now but all of a sudden the 'formation' aspect of my main tactic has dropped from completely fluid to awkward. Have made absolutely no changes, it's mid December so no new players have come in (haven't signed any for a season and a half now anyway) and all other aspects of this and the other two tactics are still at 100 percent.

Possible bug? Only noticed as I thought things looked a little funny as we had our 13 game domestic winning streak ended by Utrecht... bit of an annoyance, as I have quite the little spat going on with their manager Jan Wouters.

Or possible punishment from Jose for just knocking him out the CL Group stage?

[Rob4590]

How much match training are you doing? And is it on tactics or one of the other options?

[Pelz]

Currently using 30 percent match training (sometimes drop it a little lower dependent on match congestion, or in the second half of the season) - as I say, i've been completely fluid in all the tactics for three seasons now. And it's literally just the 'formation' aspect of the 4-1-2-2-1 I use most often. Every other part of this and the other two tactics is still at 100%. Very odd.

[Jimbokav1971]

Pelz. Have you signed new players who need to be integrated into the system?

[looking busy]

Don't know if the mods read this, but one thing I'd like added, would be pretty simple as well, is - I was managing in the Skrill Prem, and I'd got the board to agree to take the club professional. Between the time of them agreeing and it happening we were subject to a take over. The new owners said nothing about the club planning to go pro. But the next close season came and went and we remained semi-pro.

Clearly the new board had decided to reverse the decision, but it was never communicated to me. Can SI please add that following any take-over the new owners inform you of any decisions they have taken that reverses what was previously in place.

[Pelz]

Pelz. Have you signed new players who need to be integrated into the system?

Nope... It's mid December - and I haven't signed a first team player in a season and a half. New signings would affect all aspects of this one and my other tactics as well anyway, so it can't be anything like that. I did promote one B team player into the first team ranks a few weeks ago but it can't be that.

What's even stranger is after dropping my wing backs back a little, then back up, the tactic went from 'awkward' to 'fluid' and then to 'competent'.

Might just be having a nervy spazz.

[CityAndColour]

When Mourinho first managed Chelsea i remember an interview he did where he stated that he left 2 or 3 players up the pitch when defending corners, that way the opposition has a choice to make, either they keep some men back to mark them 2v2 or 3v3 or maybe an have an extra man so they don't and run the risk of being out numbered should the defending team win the ball back and manage a quick counter attack.

To suggest teams do not do this type of thing in real life is just wrong, who they choose to stay back and mark these players is open for debate, i also do not agree that this will in fact hinder the defending team IRL i believe the less bodies you have to defend against when defending a corner the easier it is to defend providing your players are alert and do their jobs correctly.

I think the point was that from Jimbo's post, the AI was leaving four defenders back, which would suggest both centre halves aren't going up for the corner. Unless by defenders he just meant AI players in general?

[nikus]

Does not make sense write about making a mistake she, because the SI will fix it to a lesser extent than you to think. On previous issued patches can be seen in what is focused SI - no significant changes in

[Ben Delat]

The ME doesn't decide you have to lose. So there isn't much more to add here.

I think this response is being a little elusive.

Everyone knows, and it's been expressed time and time again, that other factors can and do determine match results before the game has begun. Press conferences, last game, handling of individuals, Moral, etc. It's been expressed that, saving the game right before a match, saves all this stuff, so playing the same game over and over again, can often lead to similar outcomes.

Thus, we have the ME, not necessarily implementing scripted events, but playing along with pre-determined likeliness. So when people see things like. My goalkeeper was man of the mmatch after only saving two shots, or my opponent won 5-0 and only had one shot on target, and all the other nonsense that occurs. It can very much seem like the ME has it in for you. Or that, the moment the game starts, the result is out of your control and the ME is going to create a series of scenario's to comply with pre-match circumstances. Now, I don't mean that the game creates scripted events. More like, your strikers are going to have real trouble scoring today. Something along those lines perhaps.

So when you see your goalkeeper dive to the ground as the ball is bouncing towards him ever so slowly, simply so the ball can then bounce over him as he continues to do angels in the dirt, you're often left wondering. Is the ME just really bad, or was this meant to happen. Is this occurrence simply enabling an almost pre-determined outcome? The ME tends to create some very unrealistic lines of play, often it seems, to enable a desired outcome.

It's these things that leave people upset and confused. Nothing real life is happening here, but this is a computer program with limitations.

So, The ME can decide that you lose. Just not always strictly in those terms.

Science is deterministic of course. Meaning, that if we understand the state of something at one point in time, we understand at all points in time.

[Jimbokav1971]

That sounds great and I'm sure it is successful, but ultimately it's exploiting a weakness in the ME, isn't it? (Which is probably why people aren't much interested in following your lead)

In the unlikely event that a team did try that IRL the opposition would bring pacey players back, not the defenders they need to attack the corner. The fact that the ME leaves the big guns back is a flaw and shows a very simplistic approach to analysing corner setups. Leaving 3 up should disadvantage you more often than it works in your favour, in reality.

It doesn't really address the issue of how corners are working in a realistic situation - which takes us back to the original problems of clearances into the wrong areas, poor first touch ping-pong etc.

I could say that you are wrong, but you just wouldn't believe me.

Instead let Pat Nevin and his analysis tell you that you are wrong.

In each instance that he shows you, as well as listening and watching, actually count the defending players in view. If they aren't defending, then where exactly are they?

[Blaupunkt]

I think the point was that from Jimbo's post, the AI was leaving four defenders back, which would suggest both centre halves aren't going up for the corner. Unless by defenders he just meant AI players in general?

yes, he did say that, hence why i said it was open for debate on who the opposition would leave down field to mark the players who had not come back to defend the corner, he also said that and i quote In the unlikely event that a team did try that IRL I.E leaving multiple players up field for a corner, i read that he does not think any team IRL would do this, and quoted again Leaving 3 up should disadvantage you more often than it works in your favour, in reality - as i stated i dont believe this to be the case, again thats open for debate, as i said i believe the less people you have to defend against as a corner comes in the easier it is to defend, also, should the ball not be cleared properly the less chance you have a shot being deflected etc.

[themadsheep2001]

I think this response is being a little elusive.

Everyone knows, and it's been expressed time and time again, that other factors can and do determine match results before the game has begun. Press conferences, last game, handling of individuals, Moral, etc. It's been expressed that, saving the game right before a match, saves all this stuff, so playing the same game over and over again, can often lead to similar outcomes.

Thus, we have the ME, not necessarily implementing scripted events, but playing along with pre-determined likeliness. So when people see things like. My goalkeeper was man of the mmatch after only saving two shots, or my opponent won 5-0 and only had one shot on target, and all the other nonsense that occurs. It can very much seem like the ME has it in for you. Or that, the moment the game starts, the result is out of your control and the ME is going to create a series of scenario's to comply with pre-match circumstances. Now, I don't mean that the game creates scripted events. More like, your strikers are going to have real trouble scoring today. Something along those lines perhaps.

So when you see your goalkeeper dive to the ground as the ball is bouncing towards him ever so slowly, simply so the ball can then bounce over him as he continues to do angels in the dirt, you're often left wondering. Is the ME just really bad, or was this meant to happen. Is this occurrence simply enabling an almost pre-determined outcome? The ME tends to create some very unrealistic lines of play, often it seems, to enable a desired outcome.

It's these things that leave people upset and confused. Nothing real life is happening here, but this is a computer program with limitations.

So, The ME can decide that you lose. Just not always strictly in those terms.

Science is deterministic of course. Meaning, that if we understand the state of something at one point in time, we understand at all points in time.

That's still wrong though. Because along with that is everything that has happened before the game, you still have to account happen in game though. there is no such thing as your strikers are going to have a bad day. Your strikers might be arriving in poor form and lacking confidence for whats happened before, but that doesn't mean he is going to have a bad day, because you still have the means to adjust in game.

So, no, the ME cannot decide that you lose. Because the ME doesn't decide anything in order to enable a desired outcome.

[Ben Delat]

That's still wrong though. Because along with that is everything that has happened before the game, you still have to account happen in game though. there is no such thing as your strikers are going to have a bad day. Your strikers might be arriving in poor form and lacking confidence for whats happened before, but that doesn't mean he is going to have a bad day, because you still have the means to adjust in game.

So, no, the ME cannot decide that you lose. Because the ME doesn't decide anything in order to enable a desired outcome.

I was being black and white, obviously it's more complex that what I wrote. It's starts getting silly when there are so many contradictions and or circular logic floating about that you don't know who or what to believe.

It's been suggested that saying the wrong thing in a press conference can let's say, annoy a certain player, and thus, he could not have the best game of his career. Again, I'm putting this simply. So, it's very possible that because of this pre-determined event, let's say the player in question is a striker, could end up being uninterested or simply refuse to put chances away. We've all seen it, we've all been on the end of weird unrealistic lines of play, super-human goalkeepers etc, let's not ignore that. Then it becomes possible to say that, because my striker was acting like a diva and decided not to score. I lost a game that I otherwise dominated. I never said that the ME decides that you lose, but it does implement all prior statistics and circumstances which can and does effect the result of the game. So, it's like, the ME is deciding, and like I said, not strictly in the terms of others saying, the ME is making me lose.

Of course, you do have the means to adjust this in game. Maybe you can say something to your striker to get his focus back. Play someone else in his place. However, like it's also been said before, the ME doesn't know the difference between AI and player, so the AI is also capable of this. Which is also why, sometimes it seems like the AI has an I win button. This isn't the ME deciding on the outcome, merely giving us a visual representation of pre-determined events.

Football Manager is not Random, random things can't happen.

[Dagenham_Dave]

There is so much wrong with that post, it's hard to know where to begin.

EDIT - But fundamentally, you need to learn the basic difference between 'influence' and 'determine'.

[themadsheep2001]

I was being black and white, obviously it's more complex that what I wrote. It's starts getting silly when there are so many contradictions and or circular logic floating about that you don't know who or what to believe.

It's been suggested that saying the wrong thing in a press conference can let's say, annoy a certain player, and thus, he could not have the best game of his career. Again, I'm putting this simply. So, it's very possible that because of this pre-determined event, let's say the player in question is a striker, could end up being uninterested or simply refuse to put chances away. We've all seen it, we've all been on the end of weird unrealistic lines of play, super-human goalkeepers etc, let's not ignore that. Then it becomes possible to say that, because my striker was acting like a diva and decided not to score. I lost a game that I otherwise dominated. I never said that the ME decides that you lose, but it does implement all prior statistics and circumstances which can and does effect the result of the game. So, it's like, the ME is deciding, and like I said, not strictly in the terms of others saying, the ME is making me lose.

Of course, you do have the means to adjust this in game. Maybe you can say something to your striker to get his focus back. Play someone else in his place. However, like it's also been said before, the ME doesn't know the difference between AI and player, so the AI is also capable of this. Which is also why, sometimes it seems like the AI has an I win button. This isn't the ME deciding on the outcome, merely giving us a visual representation of pre-determined events.

Football Manager is not Random, random things can't happen.

you don't need to worry about contradictions. after PaulC (ie the man behind the match engine) has often spoken about how it works. Which is why its not really a debate on how it works. And random things can happen. The problem is you're trying to simplify something that is incredible complex, and thus it doesn't add up. The Me doesn't make you lose or win. It's really not a point that's up for debate, its part of how it works.

[themadsheep2001]

Annoying I actually have Paulc's posts about the match engine. I really need to start bookmarking them

[sirgiorgio]

Club: Juventus

Games played: 10, won 10

Goals: 25 scored, 3 conceded.

Goals from corner: 14 scored, 1 conceded.

Top goalscorer: Chiellini (D C) 9 apps, 9 goals. His backup Ogbonna 2 apps, 2 goals. Instruction: attack far post.

Funny thing is, I change tactics, but I use more or less the same instructions with every team I manage. In my Millwall save the total amount seems to be just right and there's also a decent variety (not just the "attack far post" guy). I trashed my Watford save: if I don't use a very tall central defender I can be sure I concede AT LEAST one goal from corner every match. I trashed my Udinese save after I conceded 2 goals in a row directly from corner (the taker tried an in-swinging corner and the keeper put the ball in his own net) and I trashed my West Ham save after the first 2 competitive matches: goals scored 3, from corner 2, both from the "attack far post" guy. Goals conceded 5, from corner 3 + 2 own goals.

[andu1]

Club: Juventus

Games played: 10, won 10

Goals: 25 scored, 3 conceded.

Goals from corner: 14 scored, 1 conceded.

Top goalscorer: Chiellini (D C) 9 apps, 9 goals. His backup Ogbonna 2 apps, 2 goals. Instruction: attack far post.

Funny thing is, I change tactics, but I use more or less the same instructions with every team I manage. In my Millwall save the total amount seems to be just right and there's also a decent variety (not just the "attack far post" guy). I trashed my Watford save: if I don't use a very tall central defender I can be sure I concede AT LEAST one goal from corner every match. I trashed my Udinese save after I conceded 2 goals in a row directly from corner (the taker tried an in-swinging corner and the keeper put the ball in his own net) and I trashed my West Ham save after the first 2 competitive matches: goals scored 3, from corner 2, both from the "attack far post" guy. Goals conceded 5, from corner 3 + 2 own goals.

AI is incapable of defending corners, that's my opinion. I've just removed specific instructions for attacking corners because it's gamebreaking for me for a defender to be among the top scorers of my team.

[jc1]

I was being black and white, obviously it's more complex that what I wrote. It's starts getting silly when there are so many contradictions and or circular logic floating about that you don't know who or what to believe.

It's been suggested that saying the wrong thing in a press conference can let's say, annoy a certain player, and thus, he could not have the best game of his career. Again, I'm putting this simply. So, it's very possible that because of this pre-determined event, let's say the player in question is a striker, could end up being uninterested or simply refuse to put chances away. We've all seen it, we've all been on the end of weird unrealistic lines of play, super-human goalkeepers etc, let's not ignore that. Then it becomes possible to say that, because my striker was acting like a diva and decided not to score. I lost a game that I otherwise dominated. I never said that the ME decides that you lose, but it does implement all prior statistics and circumstances which can and does effect the result of the game. So, it's like, the ME is deciding, and like I said, not strictly in the terms of others saying, the ME is making me lose.

Of course, you do have the means to adjust this in game. Maybe you can say something to your striker to get his focus back. Play someone else in his place. However, like it's also been said before, the ME doesn't know the difference between AI and player, so the AI is also capable of this. Which is also why, sometimes it seems like the AI has an I win button. This isn't the ME deciding on the outcome, merely giving us a visual representation of pre-determined events.

Football Manager is not Random, random things can't happen.

I decided to test your theory and played the same game 3x over with exact same players/ same shouts/ same pre match talk etc and the results are as followed Hibs 1 Stuttgart 3/ Hibs 4 Stuttgart 1, Hibs 2 Stuttgart 2.

So there you have it, same game, all identical as far as players/tactics/shouts/talks etc go and 3 different results, so who decided these results, the ME decided to be fair and have a win each and a draw to be nice or maybe it was all just random and these results can happen and nothing decides who's going to win or lose.

People need to be less paranoiac and start to see that like in real life results go various ways, ask the Liverpool team from the other night when Howard Webb decided to not see a blatant penalty, then later didn't send off Gerard for a second yellow offence.

[IMT]

Literally? Would be curious to see proof of that. Not saying you're lieing, but seems a bit far-fetched.

Actually, in recent years the exaggerated, non traditional use of the word, has been added to it's definition in the dictionary, meaning to use it in such a manner is now allowed:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/literally

Anyway, back on topic, I find the opposite where I rarely score, nor concede from corners.

[rp1966]

I think the point was that from Jimbo's post, the AI was leaving four defenders back, which would suggest both centre halves aren't going up for the corner. Unless by defenders he just meant AI players in general?

My big gripe with Jimbo's system and the reason I consider it an exploit is this - "The big thing here is that they don't defend with wingers or something else. Their back 4 often defends en masse." - Most teams leave 1 or 2 players up. Push a 3rd up and you are in gambling territory. They may well decide to defend in numbers (if they consider your players enough of a counter attack threat), but you can bet they won't keep the centre backs to do it. However they are just as likely to call your bluff and take the chance that a) they'll win the ball from the corner and b) pin you in your area and prevent you breaking using the players you left up.

[forameuss]

Actually, in recent years the exaggerated, non traditional use of the word, has been added to it's definition in the dictionary, meaning to use it in such a manner is now allowed:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/literally

Anyway, back on topic, I find the opposite where I rarely score, nor concede from corners.

Ah yes, the Jamie Redknapp method.

[lpcinder]

I actually think Ben Delat's post made a lot of sense. I wouldn't exactly go as far as him, but I can see where he's going. Since a week of two though I decided to have another go with the game, totally reviewing my tactics with arsenal and making some changes. I have really had a lot of success with my nice and young team, winning the premier league, championsleague and cup. What I noticed though is that most of the conceded goals for my team were corners, and also that my strikers missed a lot of nice chances. My main goalscorer was actually my right side IF, Julian Draxler, who banged in 26 goals. That was very pleasing. I like the game a lot, but I do really still think that some things are not really working as intended. Anyway, fingers crossed for the update.

[sporadicsmiles]

Science is deterministic of course. Meaning, that if we understand the state of something at one point in time, we understand at all points in time.

This is a digression, but my goodness you have got this one wrong. The Universe is extremely non-deterministic. You cannot even know everything about the Universe at one time, and so it is impossible to then know outcomes at all times. Indeed, the Universe is very likely chaotic; this means that even tiny changes in initial conditions can lead to massive changes in outcomes (we all know the butterfly effect). I know this is insanely off topic, but I couldn't let that one slide =}.

[Ben Delat]

This is a digression, but my goodness you have got this one wrong. The Universe is extremely non-deterministic. You cannot even know everything about the Universe at one time, and so it is impossible to then know outcomes at all times. Indeed, the Universe is very likely chaotic; this means that even tiny changes in initial conditions can lead to massive changes in outcomes (we all know the butterfly effect). I know this is insanely off topic, but I couldn't let that one slide =}.

Wrong Science is deterministic. Quoted from Hawking himself, Look it up. Bugger it, i'll do it for you "For more than 200 years, we have believed in Scientific determinism, that is, that the laws of science, determine the evolution of the universe. This was formulated by La~plass as, If we know the state of the universe at one time, the laws of science will determine it at all future and past times." Quoted here http://www.hawking.org.uk/into-a-black-hole.html. And probably lots of other places too. This doesn't mean that we're capable of understanding everything at all points in time. Just that with sufficient knowledge we would be. We live in an infinite universe with a finite possible number of outcomes to individual events. The only thing in the universe as far as we are aware that disobey's the laws of science as we understand it are black holes. That's it. Random things don't happen, only what is possible. These possibilities might be hard to predict at times, but never random. Only in the case of Black Holes. Football Manager is not a Black Hole, therefore, obeys the laws of science. Therefore, predictable. With sufficient knowledge.

I recommend anyone with any interest in the Universe, read that article, it's awesome

Stay in school. Or education.

Back on topic

[Ben Delat]

There is so much wrong with that post, it's hard to know where to begin.

EDIT - But fundamentally, you need to learn the basic difference between 'influence' and 'determine'.

It's the same thing.

In a larger picture. Take chess, something similar, but with less variables. A sufficiently good player, can think and plans many turns in advance. This player would be able to influence the moves available to you, should they want to. Let's say, they've put you in check. The available moves are obvious, but there are only so many. From this point on, the opponents lines of play can both be manipulated, predicted and influenced, until there are no moves available. Thus, the moment this game became determined, was much sooner than the game was actually, physically over.

[Fond Foat]

Wrong Science is deterministic. Quoted from Hawking himself,

Stay in school. Or education.

Back on topic

Instead of yelling out wrong at people, you should recognize that there are different theories some which support deterministic systems and some that support non-deterministic systems (quantum physics as an example). There are people who disagree with Hawking on many points as well. Just because you have fell in love with one idea does not make it the only possible answer, and does not make people who disagree with that idea wrong.

[aiston]

No. As has already been answered this evening, it will be ready when it is ready.

A little more patience will be rewarded.

I was hoping my patience in waiting until xmas to buy the game would be rewarded, clearly wasn't.

[Deisler26]

What I have noticed is that there are serious discrepancies between what happens on the pitch & ratings.

Just conceded a goal where a defender and my goalie messed up short passes between each other for the time it took an opposing forward to run from the halfway line to my six-yard box and just tap the ball in.

Fine, not arguing. It happens. But NEITHER of the defending players was penalised for f'ing it up. It was pure & simple a mistake from both players, but neither of them got below a 6.9 (I won 4-3 on 88 mins)

[DuncanBarr]

Done a few experiments today and I must say the amount of crosses blocked or intercepted is really ruining the game. Wingers with far better acceleration and pace than the full back are not delivering as instructed. They seem to go past the defender and check thus allowing said defender to get a block in. Done experiments with drill, float, cross early and standard and it seems the same across the board. This obviously causes the problem in a lone tall striker not scoring goals.

This, the fact it happens at all is a huge flaw in the 3D and how we make decisions based on what we can see.

Its why many feel the ME3D is poor....as you should never see a fullback done for pace only to find your winger waits for him to get back into position to make a challenge, it smacks of balancing against pacy wingers as even the least aware/composed winger with pace once they have beaten their man will sling in a cross (however poor), not just wait for the defence to get back.

[DuncanBarr]

What I have noticed is that there are serious discrepancies between what happens on the pitch & ratings.

Just conceded a goal where a defender and my goalie messed up short passes between each other for the time it took an opposing forward to run from the halfway line to my six-yard box and just tap the ball in.

Fine, not arguing. It happens. But NEITHER of the defending players was penalised for f'ing it up. It was pure & simple a mistake from both players, but neither of them got below a 6.9 (I won 4-3 on 88 mins)

I see this a lot too, unlike previous versions FM14 doesnt recognise mistakes that are obvious to those watching. So of course because the ME doesn't recognise them they aren't statistically anomalous and therefore its assumed its not an issue. The widely recognised keeper errors are not seen as issues in the match engine.

[Dagenham_Dave]

as you should never see a fullback done for pace only to find your winger waits for him to get back into position to make a challenge,.

In over 1200 hours game time, I've still never seen this happen the way it gets reported here.

Sure, I've seen defenders block crosses, but whenever my winger gets into space after beating the fullback he always either crosses it or cuts it back to an onrushing centre mid. (or mis-controls/overruns it out for a goal kick)The only time I've ever seen a blocked cross when the winger has been clear is when there is no crossing option and he has to wait a second for a team mate to get into a viable position thus giving the full back(s) time to get back. But even then, that's pretty rare.

I'd like to see an uploaded video of such an instance, as it maybe does happen and I'm just oblivious to it.

[Jimbokav1971]

I don't get it either Dave. We've posted video's of our wingers fizzing down the line and pinging good balls in with the full-backs trailing in their wake. I get the hump if the full-back gets anywhere near one of my speed merchants when they are in full flight. "Taxi for Maicon" .

It obviously is happening or they wouldn't keep saying it, but it just doesn't make sense.

What instructions do the wingers have as to who to cross to or where?

What role does your striker/s play?

Are they playing as W(a) W(s) DW(s) DW(s) or something else?

I just don't know what to suggest.

Would love to see a video of it.

[PhroX]

I don't have this problem to the extent some seem to have, but I've definitiely noticed a tendacy for widemen to sometimes appear to have beaten their man, only to hesitate for a second or so before crossing and allow the defender to get back and block it. I feel it's more of a graphical representation problem than a ME one, as my overall crossing seems to achieve realistic levels of success (i.e. not a huge amount, but some), but when the crosses are blocked, I keep seeing that hesitation after beating the defender, and it's irritating, as it makes it look like your player is making a mistake by waiting before crossing. If the defender just kept up with my winger and blocked the cross, it wouldn't bother me nearly as much.

[RTHerringbone]

Logically, ratings will be one of the last things to be tuned.

The inputs into how ratings calculate are ME based, so until that is finalised, the ratings won't be.

[petergoddard]

Why is the Hold Position PI active for the Trequartista :confused: ???

this is even better the Trequartista has both PIs active to hold position and roam from prosition

[Ackter]

No it doesn't? It has them both unselectable as roam from position is on by default.