Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
Erith22

CCC don't matter this year, only Shots on Target?

Recommended Posts

I've been frustrated this last season of FM so I went back through my last 13 matches and did a little math.

Over that stretch my side generated:

35 Clear Cut Chances

67 Shots on Target

16 goals

My opponents generated

9 Clear Cut Chances

46 Shots on Target

12 Goals

Notice that the conversion rate of SoT to Goals has a pretty high correlation, about %25 for both sides. But for CCC there is no correlation at all.

For years the mantra has been 'quality not quantity' for shooting and I have stressed that with my tactics. But the results have not corresponded at all.

A few notes. I am playing a mid-table side in La Liga. My top striker is above average for the league but hardly Ronaldo.

Has anyone else observed this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is quite amazing the amount of clear cut chances that get missed. Complete 1 on 1s always shot wide or miraculously saved by the keeper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CCC's dont matter, goals matter. You dont need a CCC to score a goal, as much as creating a CCC doesnt necessarily lead to a goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CCC's dont matter, goals matter. You dont need a CCC to score a goal, as much as creating a CCC doesnt necessarily lead to a goal.

Sorry, but that's just a completely meaningless statement that adds nothing to this conversation.

Of course, goals are what matter. And of course you don't need CCC's to score goals.

The point is, a CCC is supposed to indicate a high-percentage scoring chance. And the statistics seem to indicate there is no correlation between high-percentage scoring chances and scoring. Only the number of shots matter.

Thus, CCCs are either inaccurately (or misleadingly) calculated, or there's a bug in the way they are converted.

Since we have very limited statistics available, we have to rely on the few that the ME gives us, CCC being the best one we have relating to shooting. So if the best stat we have is meaningless, it makes it that much harder to manage matches and set up tactics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should remove the CCC stat from the game, its far too misleading, and open to interpretation. It was never needed before, i have no idea why they wanted to add it.

There could be a bug in how the game calculates what is a CCC but i find the stat pretty irrelevant anyway so i dont pay any attention too it. I find people get too hung up on it, concentrate on goals, not chances. Of course goals come from chances, but i find people look at the fact the game has told them they have created 6 CCC's and scored 1 goal, and use that as a beating stick for the ME, rather than look at why they are not scoring enough goals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What FM classes as a CCC clearly needs some work, I've seen good chances not classed as a CCC and poor chances which are classed as a CCC.

Its arguably more important than ever to create quality chances though as we've seen from a number of threads this past six months, you just need to recognise what is a quality chance and looking at the number of CCCs created doesn't always tell the story.

It is quite amazing the amount of clear cut chances that get missed. Complete 1 on 1s always shot wide or miraculously saved by the keeper.

Its really not, its a perception issue.

If you watch a real football match objectively there are a number of times when good chances aren't taken for a number of reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is one thing that bothers me about this years fm or current Ai system, the one on one shots most of the time miss even if you got likes of messi and ronaldo in the team, perhaps this is something that needs be looked at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is, a CCC is supposed to indicate a high-percentage scoring chance

Which your opponents are managing to convert given your example, and you're not. What would be your conclusion be to that evidence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, but that's just a completely meaningless statement that adds nothing to this conversation.

Of course, goals are what matter. And of course you don't need CCC's to score goals.

The point is, a CCC is supposed to indicate a high-percentage scoring chance. And the statistics seem to indicate there is no correlation between high-percentage scoring chances and scoring. Only the number of shots matter.

Thus, CCCs are either inaccurately (or misleadingly) calculated, or there's a bug in the way they are converted.

Since we have very limited statistics available, we have to rely on the few that the ME gives us, CCC being the best one we have relating to shooting. So if the best stat we have is meaningless, it makes it that much harder to manage matches and set up tactics.

Your logic is flawed.

There is as much or as little correlation between goals and CCCs as between goals & shots. So you can't draw a conclusion that only shots matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The data provided in the OP are an interesting bit of information, which may be worth investigating further. Of course 13 matches is a really low sample size, but if one took a larger amount of data (like ten times that) then one could indeed argue that the initial assumption has been proven :thup:

What strikes me about FM14 is that I find that the identification of chances as clear cut ones seems a little flawed. My team often has chances counted as clear cut when I would argue that they weren't. For instance, shot from 15 years, closer to the edge of the area than to its centre, with a man right on. Then again, I see other chances which I can't believe were missed are not counted as CCC.

If the initial assumption turned out to be correct, this second observation might serve as an explanation.

Would you agree with this second observation as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They should remove the CCC stat from the game, its far too misleading, and open to interpretation. It was never needed before, i have no idea why they wanted to add it.

There could be a bug in how the game calculates what is a CCC but i find the stat pretty irrelevant anyway so i dont pay any attention too it. I find people get too hung up on it, concentrate on goals, not chances. Of course goals come from chances, but i find people look at the fact the game has told them they have created 6 CCC's and scored 1 goal, and use that as a beating stick for the ME, rather than look at why they are not scoring enough goals.

I have to contradict here. I find them very useful (as long as their evaluation works).

Before, one could simply look at the amount of shots, but that didn't really tell you anything, because all shots were treated in the same manner.

Now, you can analyse the quality of chances too. That again may lead you to a better anaylsis of your tactics and the reasons for failure.

If you don't use then fair enough, but there are plenty of people who use this to great effect

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your logic is flawed.

There is as much or as little correlation between goals and CCCs as between goals & shots. So you can't draw a conclusion that only shots matter.

However, there should be with respect to the former.

If not then I would take this as a strong hint for the evaluation of chance quality being flawed.

As far as I understand the OP this is more or less what he is getting at too. The correllation between CCCs and goals should be higher than the one between shots on target and goals.

Of course, 13 matches are just enough for a first assumption, not for a claim that there is something wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally dont see how it can be useful, when at the moment its highly debatable if the game is actually calculating them correctly in the first place. Like others i see chances giving as a CCC that never was, and vice versa, which is why i really ignore it. I tend to decide myself if i think im creating enough good chances to score, not by that stat. Fair enough others may differ and as usual my posts read along the lines of, "im right your wrong" which i dont intend on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive already pretty conclusively disproved this tbh

someone please link my tactics forum thread, I'm on my mobile and it hates this forum.

That is one thing that bothers me about this years fm or current Ai system, the one on one shots most of the time miss even if you got likes of messi and ronaldo in the team, perhaps this is something that needs be looked at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only if you ignore tactical influences, I'm betting. Its far too complex to just add up some numbers and draw conclusions.

However, there should be with respect to the former.

If not then I would take this as a strong hint for the evaluation of chance quality being flawed.

As far as I understand the OP this is more or less what he is getting at too. The correllation between CCCs and goals should be higher than the one between shots on target and goals.

Of course, 13 matches are just enough for a first assumption, not for a claim that there is something wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I personally dont see how it can be useful, when at the moment its highly debatable if the game is actually calculating them correctly in the first place. Like others i see chances giving as a CCC that never was, and vice versa, which is why i really ignore it. I tend to decide myself if i think im creating enough good chances to score, not by that stat. Fair enough others may differ and as usual my posts read along the lines of, "im right your wrong" which i dont intend on.

I agree with you in terms of having some suspicion about a possible flaw in the determination of the quality of chances atm, see my other post above.

Of course, if that determination is flawed, then the use of the CCC stat is seriously impaired.

I also agree that in theory it should be possible to make an analysis of matches one has watched in sufficient detail (i.e. extended at least in FM14).

However, we are both on board for long enough to know better as far as many users on here are concerned :(

On top, collected data is always better than gut feeling (at least I don't count shots or chances while watching matches, I just have a feeling that usually turns out to be supported by the data I look at later).

That said, I would assume that the stat potentially helps enoug hpeople to warrant its continued existence :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Players have rather complained about having dozens of shots per match but no goals. So this alone seems to imply that there is no easy-to-spot correlation of shots and goals...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players have rather complained about having dozens of shots per match but no goals. So this alone seems to imply that there is no easy-to-spot correlation of shots and goals...

This thread is not about shots, but shots on target.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the ene it comes back to something I am finding inceasingly frustrating about the FM series, the lack of useful statistics. 10 years ago FM had better stats than were available to real life managers but now the reverse is true. For example, you frequently see stats used in commentary articles such as touches per game, chances created, shot distance, pass distance, etc etc. But none of this is available easily in FM. As tactics have become more and more important and challenging, we aren't getting more tools to interpret what I'd hapoening . While the match engine visual quality has improved, it still frequently provides a disconnect between what is being shown and what we believe is happening.

People on this thread seem to agree that CCC are useless. But since we don't have any other stat to use, it makes interpreting what is happening that much harder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you used the analysis tool?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, you can replay every shot your team has at the touch of a button whilst viewing a graphical overview of where the shots were taken from.

This is where better game documentation would be handy. I'd wager many players either don't know you can click each shot on that page for a replay of the incident, or even know the analysis tool exists at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In 14.2 I noticed that my top class strikers (playing Arsenal in 2028) were missing too many CCC (quite a few of which were one on one's).

So I decided to raise a bug to see what SI thought.

The bug I raised was reviewed today by a member of the testing team at SI.

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/381929-Reviewed-14.2-Missing-a-lot-of-one-on-ones-with-top-class-strikers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my most recent save I get at least one 1 on 1 break with Suarez every game, usually two or three, today he actually converted one, I almost fell out of my chair! Then a few games later he did it again! I was so amazed... until these two 1 on 1 scores I had yet to see it happen in this game. It is now the end of the season, he played in 46 games, for sake of argument we will just say he only had one 1 on 1 per game (though it was way more), that is still only two goals in 46+ 1 on 1's. This is an obvious flaw but, one that has been talked about in multiple threads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They should remove the CCC stat from the game, its far too misleading, and open to interpretation. It was never needed before, i have no idea why they wanted to add it.

There could be a bug in how the game calculates what is a CCC but i find the stat pretty irrelevant anyway so i dont pay any attention too it. I find people get too hung up on it, concentrate on goals, not chances. Of course goals come from chances, but i find people look at the fact the game has told them they have created 6 CCC's and scored 1 goal, and use that as a beating stick for the ME, rather than look at why they are not scoring enough goals.

I'm not entirely bothered by it but I can definitely see what people are saying from my save in the second season. IRL how often does a striker score when in on goal 1 on 1 against the goalie?

I don't think I'd be far off saying it's 90% of the time if not more if we're talking professionals here. In the ME though I see so many 1 on 1 CCC's that are missed and saved that it's ridiculous. Right now the ME makes it look like you have only have a 20% chance of scoring on a breakaway. I'd agree that it appears like most of my breakaways are saved or my star striker decides to push it wide.

Also there are FAR too many woodwork hits still in the game. Between my opponent and me the woodwork gets hit at least twice each game which isn't very realistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not entirely bothered by it but I can definitely see what people are saying from my save in the second season. IRL how often does a striker score when in on goal 1 on 1 against the goalie?

I don't think I'd be far off saying it's 90% of the time if not more if we're talking professionals here. In the ME though I see so many 1 on 1 CCC's that are missed and saved that it's ridiculous. Right now the ME makes it look like you have only have a 20% chance of scoring on a breakaway. I'd agree that it appears like most of my breakaways are saved or my star striker decides to push it wide.

Also there are FAR too many woodwork hits still in the game. Between my opponent and me the woodwork gets hit at least twice each game which isn't very realistic.

90% is far too high, Its very dependent on the situation and the angle but it would be much closer to around 60% I suspect if anyone can find stats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
people have strange habit to remember things they do not like and easily forget those they do. you convert more than you think but it is stll low percentage. those who think 90 or 60 should land on earth and check their facts.

why? because the best premiership strikers convert less than 30 per cent of CCC's in real. For example van persie last year converted only 23 percent.

http://eplindex.com/27890/how-well-does-your-team-convert-chances-premier-league-stats-comparison.html

Hmmm I know the general figures that used to be quoted were around 25% to 33% but I thought that was of shots (on target?) not of clear chances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I played 1000+ hours of FM2013 and could see a clear pattern with CCC there: You usually had 1-3 per game, sometimes more, but mostly quite closely related to your final score. 3 CCC and 0 goals usually meant that you had dominated the game but simply were pretty unlucky.

One of the first things I realized playing FM2014 was that suddenly the number of CCC had gone up quite steep. During the first games, I interpreted this in the FM13 style and thought I had build a team which was good at creating high class chances. Then I realized that this was not the case at all, so indeed suddenly the value of interpreting CCC has dropped significantly.

Very happy to see that other people are wondering as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Payaso
I'm not entirely bothered by it but I can definitely see what people are saying from my save in the second season. IRL how often does a striker score when in on goal 1 on 1 against the goalie?

I don't think I'd be far off saying it's 90% of the time if not more if we're talking professionals here. In the ME though I see so many 1 on 1 CCC's that are missed and saved that it's ridiculous. Right now the ME makes it look like you have only have a 20% chance of scoring on a breakaway. I'd agree that it appears like most of my breakaways are saved or my star striker decides to push it wide.

Has anyone got stats about how common these one on ones actually are in real football? I still think that the bigger problem is that these one on ones are far too common in the match engine, even after slow attacks where defenders have had time to position themselves and 'parked the bus'.

I haven't had bad issues with finishing at all but IMO in the future SI should think more alternative ways to score goals instead of these cheap one on ones where the defenders just fall asleep after some basic passing. They just aren't that common in real football.

I've played amateur football for years and we don't have even the offside rule and don't remember opponents ever having a through on goal chance against our team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Has anyone got stats about how common these one on ones actually are in real football? I still think that the bigger problem is that these one on ones are far too common in the match engine, even after slow attacks where defenders have had time to position themselves and 'parked the bus'.

I haven't had bad issues with finishing at all but IMO in the future SI should think more alternative ways to score goals instead of these cheap one on ones where the defenders just fall asleep after some basic passing. They just aren't that common in real football.

I've played amateur football for years and we don't have even the offside rule and don't remember opponents ever having a through on goal chance against our team.

I agree this is the problem. This year the ME has more boneheaded defender moves than normal, that result in these sorts of situations. The ME is always full of these sorts of issues. Basically opportunity X happens way too often compared to real life, so they have to tone down the conversion percentage of X to keep the scoring numbers accurate. Whether that be free kicks, corner kicks, penalties, long shots, or one on ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 per cent of all chances created in EPL year ago were CCC's (in December).

Best team was MAn utd which almost every 5th chance was clear cut. Almost 20 per cent of chances Man UTd created were CCC's. Opposed to worst team in league, Stoke who managed to carve the opponent with clean chance only at 6 per cent rate.

basicaly on average if you have 3 CCC's you would have arond 30 shots on goal. in real. If you are Man utd, it would be only 15.

so, yes, it seems there are way too many. but how opta counts clear chances and how does FM do it is completly unclear and basicaly it is difficult to get an informed opinion.

http://thefootballfront.blogspot.it/2012/12/clear-cut-chances-and-premier-league.html

Yep this is why I'm no fan of the of the CCC stat, its an subjective in game definition of a stat that is subjective in real life. It would be of far more use for people to actually look at the shot itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yep this is why I'm no fan of the of the CCC stat, its an subjective in game definition of a stat that is subjective in real life. It would be of far more use for people to actually look at the shot itself.

Exactly my take on it as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^ Just bad luck bud.

I`ve seen a few games over the years where one side has totally dominated but have failed to convert then the other side has one attack, and scores....but then again, you are Liverpool haha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yep this is why I'm no fan of the of the CCC stat, its an subjective in game definition of a stat that is subjective in real life. It would be of far more use for people to actually look at the shot itself.

Unfortunately, I do look at the shot itself. The amount of one on ones my forwards miss are quite high every single game. I have Jovetic playing up front. The guy scored 45 goals this year, 12 of them in champions league. I don't even want to imagine the amount of goals he'd score if his conversion rate was even 25% with one on ones. Sadly it's more like 10%.

What I do not understand is why is this not happening with AI teams. Only my team has 20-45 shots per game (How can you even take 45 shots in 90 mins? :) ) and is repeatedly blasting away one on ones or pot shots from inside the box. And in case you're feeling a little pedantic; I have shoot less often turned on for every position I can stick it to, and also have work the ball into the box in my team tactics. They don't change much once you start dominating games.

So please stop defending the game. We all like it, and we all play it. Why else would we be here? We just want to help improve it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unfortunately, I do look at the shot itself. The amount of one on ones my forwards miss are quite high every single game. I have Jovetic playing up front. The guy scored 45 goals this year, 12 of them in champions league. I don't even want to imagine the amount of goals he'd score if his conversion rate was even 25% with one on ones. Sadly it's more like 10%.

What I do not understand is why is this not happening with AI teams. Only my team has 20-45 shots per game (How can you even take 45 shots in 90 mins? :) ) and is repeatedly blasting away one on ones or pot shots from inside the box. And in case you're feeling a little pedantic; I have shoot less often turned on for every position I can stick it to, and also have work the ball into the box in my team tactics. They don't change much once you start dominating games.

So please stop defending the game. We all like it, and we all play it. Why else would we be here? We just want to help improve it.

Considering its nothing to do with "defending" the game you have entirely missed my point. Try not to jump to incorrect conclusions.

If its only your team, then perhaps you should be looking at the situations your side is missing the one on ones in? After all the ME is the same. But here lies the issue with a celear cut change, in game and in real life. Some are more clear than others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5ln6.png[/url]

Thoughts?

Ultra defensive opponents frustrate your players. The more frustrated they get, the more your strikers blow the good chances they get.

Opponents counter you easily most likely due to a lack of solid defensive shape when attacking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Considering its nothing to do with "defending" the game you have entirely missed my point. Try not to jump to incorrect conclusions.

A big problem is that people always expect their players to be 100% perfect for 100% of the match.

This just never happens, and the more you dominate without converting chances, the worse it'll get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

The CCC thing has affected my watching of real football too. When Rosicky went clean through against Spurs in the FA Cup, I was convinced he wouldn't score because I've been conditioned to accept that in FM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A big problem is that people always expect their players to be 100% perfect for 100% of the match.

This just never happens, and the more you dominate without converting chances, the worse it'll get.

People often forget about the mental impacts on the player (it's why I shun shotgun approach play, and attempt to create fewer but more measured chances), and also don't realise you can turn them to your advantage. One of my favourite things to do is to fire up my players at kick on half time, and then take an aggressive approach straight away, before settling back into my standard play. Score a good number of quick fire goals this way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Payaso
Ultra defensive opponents frustrate your players. The more frustrated they get, the more your strikers blow the good chances they get.

Against ultra-defensive professional team you just shouldn't be getting that many chances to score. Okay Liverpool has great attacking ability available but there is something really wrong with defending generally if they're walking to scoring chances against a parked bus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Against ultra-defensive professional team you just shouldn't be getting that many chances to score. Okay Liverpool has great attacking ability available but there is something really wrong with defending generally if they're walking to scoring chances against a parked bus.

Ultra-defensive is back off, get everyone behind the ball, pack out the box - and then maintain that shape and philosophy when counter attacking.

This leads to loads of long distance and rushed chances and, because they hold their defensive shape even when attacking, even counter attacking them is difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Payaso
Ultra-defensive is back off, get everyone behind the ball, pack out the box - and then maintain that shape and philosophy when counter attacking.

This leads to loads of long distance and rushed chances and, because they hold their defensive shape even when attacking, even counter attacking them is difficult.

There are 6 long shots and 8 clear cuts... This tells me that Liverpool have been getting a lot of good chances to win the game and apparently 28 shots from inside the box, doesn't sound too solid defending to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We'd need to see a screenshot from the analysis tool to decide that - and even then we wouldn't be able to decide properly without actually watching the match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Payaso
We'd need to see a screenshot from the analysis tool to decide that - and even then we wouldn't be able to decide properly without actually watching the match.
That might help but by looking at the stats I would really draw a conclusion that defending actually isn't working the way it should. Okay those one touch passes and passing generally is too precise and running with ball is too effective tool but the main problem here seems to be the defending... I haven't played the game elsewhere than in the lower leagues except some individual games with Chelsea. I remember the game in Super Cup against Bayern where Robben and Ribery from Bayern and Hazard and Mata from my Chelsea literally ran the game; all of them had something like 10-16 succesful dribbles in the game and I was playing with quite defensive mentality... Torres scored two 'cheap' goals in a row where Mata just released him through on goal from middle of 4-5 Bayern's defensive players. I know it's just one game but still awful. I also won Arsenal in my first game of the season 2 or 3 to nothing and the chances just flowed even from short handed attacks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if all of those shots come from incredibly narrow angles where itll be an easy save for the goalkeeper?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Payaso
What if all of those shots come from incredibly narrow angles where itll be an easy save for the goalkeeper?
I still wouldn't be that impressed. If my team is allowing opponents get inside the penalty area to take shots the least I would like to see is to get most of those shots blocked. For me the penalty area is 'untouchable' area where the opposition should have no business if they are not crossing the ball there. Midfielders should do the intercepting job that allows them not get there by playing along the ground and big centre backs dealing with most of the crosses and defensive minded midfielders hoofing away the loose balls if first clearances fall short.

I remeber having great defending for example FM 09 where I played with Finnish national team. We didn't necessarily win the games but didn't allow teams like Germany take 20-30 shots from good areas. It was just joy to watch teams like Russia, Holland and Germany trying attack against us and produce as good chances as possible and my boys tackling, keeping shape and limiting chances. I lost both Germany and Russia away 1-0 against Germany and 2-0 to Russia but neither team got more than 10-15 shots away... That's what I like to see from my team when defending. Like I said; not necessarily win but still doing a great job limiting the better team.

Here are highlights from Spain - Finland qualifying game IRL. Spain one of the best national teams in the world playing at home and not getting too many good chances to score even though trying to break the defence all game long. These are maybe Comprehensive highlights, I think.

Those highlights would be nice to see...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A big problem is that people always expect their players to be 100% perfect for 100% of the match.

This just never happens, and the more you dominate without converting chances, the worse it'll get.

I'm sorry but this is an assumption. As I stated, Jovetic scored 45 goals. I don't consider to my player to be unsuccessful, and I do not expect him to be 100% all the time. I don't spend my time making one single tactic and enforcing it. I'm well aware of the mental states of the players, and I'm quite happy with the amount of effect their mental capacities have on the outcome. In fact, this is one of the reasons Jovetic is my starting striker. He doesn't crumble down easily.

I also get dominated sometimes. I have Jovetic but that doesn't necessarily mean I have a top flight team. I'm playing with Galatasaray, who I'd consider a second tier team in Europe if I am generous about it. When I get dominated and have to defend wave after wave of attacks, against PSG for example, they don't get 40 shots and 5-6 one on ones. When they do get a one on one, I'm screwed more often than not :)

I'd also like to say that I'm not even trying to draw comparisons to real life, which would still be fair since this is a simulation game. I'm trying to point out that things are not working the same way for the player and the AI, even if the conditions are similar. We can talk about player mistakes here all we want. But if I am using ALL the tools given to me to restrict the amount of shots being taken, and they are still taking 45 shots in a game, then maybe something needs to get looked at.

@themadsheep sorry, I should have clarified a bit more. I didn't mean you were defending the game with your CCC stat comment. I only used that to start my post but retrospectively all seems directed at you :) That was more meant for everyone on the thread, because these threads generally start and get spammed by "the game sucks" "no, you suck, the game is doing it right" sort of comments. They don't get us anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Payaso
But if I am using ALL the tools given to me to restrict the amount of shots being taken, and they are still taking 45 shots in a game, then maybe something needs to get looked at.

Agreed. IMO no team in the worlds should be regularly getting more than 20 shots away and that would happen if there wasn't these games where only one team is trying to play football and the other is just kicking the ball away and trying to do nothing. It really isn't rewarding to win games against smaller opponents in the game as it seems that they're not even trying. For me the game should be more about reacting to things during matches and those reactions should be required from both AI managers and us to be succesful.

And 45 shots per game = for me, atleast something in defending is badly lacking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...