Official Football Manager 2015 Feedback Thread 15.2.1

[isignedupfornorealreason]

I'm still having transfer issues. Clubs bid for a youngster and their bids are accepted while I'm told he will never be sold to me.

Bids from opposition are 8.5 and 9.5million.

My bids? They'll only negotiate a 15+million bid.

We're not rivals, we're not even in the same country, the two opposition teams are from Portugal, I'm from England; the club I'm attempting to buy from is in Brazil.

I bug reported this before, when I had everton selling players to anyone except me (i'm not a rival) and they were accepting AI bids of 10million or whatever but demanding 60+million off me... O_o

What am I missing here? =/

[santy001]

Are they bids for just 8.5/9.5 million or 8.5/9.5 million with the + sign next to them? If so then there are future clauses in place based on criteria such as the per league game, after league games etc.

I signed Sergei Samper who was transfer listed at £19m (down from an original demand of £87m after waiting it out for 6 months) for £4.5m up front and £6m over 24 months. He hasn't played much for Spain so I put £1m in after 10 international appearances, £5m after 50 league appearances and £4m after 50 league goals.

If he stays and does well at the club and I keep hold of him Bayern will end up receiving just over £20m for him, however, if he has one or two good seasons and I decide to cash in (which is quite likely if he does well as I aren't the biggest club in the world, his unhappiness at Bayern was the main reason behind being able to sign him) then they'll only receive £10.5m.

In a little over 10 seasons I've only paid over £10m upfront for players twice.

[Some Guy!]

SI seemingly not taking issues seriously, doesn't exactly bode well for the future.

[Dr. Hook]

SI seemingly not taking issues seriously, doesn't exactly bode well for the future.

What do you think they aren't taking seriously, exactly?

[Some Guy!]

What do you think they aren't taking seriously, exactly?

The save time issue. They've broken it twice now, which on top of numerous other bugs and things which in most circumstances should come under testing prior to release, have been happening a lot this version.

It would be much better if they made a clear, visible statement and apology for this happening a second time, but instead what we get is lovely silence as they've left it to fester over the Christmas period. The closest we've gotten to a response is a short "they know about it" when prompted (when they actually bother to respond). Who knows what they're doing in the background, but ultimately what's happened here is they've had a serious issue, fixed it, then had it reoccur, and both times it's happened it has taken a hugely unacceptable period of time to fix, and at this point there is no indication that the issue is even being taken seriously enough for them to fix prior to the next major patch.

[jumbohotdog]

IMO save time is a really minor issue compared to other "issues" you will just have to wait for a longer time to save your game

[CityAndColour]

It's a big issue if you manually save regularly, or have regular auto saves going.

[HUNT3R]

The save time issue. They've broken it twice now, which on top of numerous other bugs and things which in most circumstances should come under testing prior to release, have been happening a lot this version.

Many issues, including the save times issue, doesn't seem to be happening to everyone. This makes it difficult to pick up. You also have no idea what causes the issue. Neither do I, before you ask, but in this case I know it isn't as simple as you make it out to be.

It would be much better if they made a clear, visible statement and apology for this happening a second time, but instead what we get is lovely silence as they've left it to fester over the Christmas period. The closest we've gotten to a response is a short "they know about it" when prompted (when they actually bother to respond). Who knows what they're doing in the background, but ultimately what's happened here is they've had a serious issue, fixed it, then had it reoccur, and both times it's happened it has taken a hugely unacceptable period of time to fix, and at this point there is no indication that the issue is even being taken seriously enough for them to fix prior to the next major patch.

So you got a response that SI are aware of the problem and, being SI, they'll be working on a solution and as soon as they have one, we'll receive it.

Define unacceptable? Do you want them to fix it faster than it's possible to fix? Again, you don't know what is involved, so it isn't possible to put a time frame to it or say that it was an unacceptable period of time. This time, as you mentioned, it happened over the festive period when most companies shut down. They're human too. Are you expecting them to work over Christmas and New Year? Anyway, the issue has cropped up again, but most likely has a different cause they have to find that first before starting to fix it. It's not as simple as flicking a switch.

All SI (and ourselves) are asking for, is patience.

[Some Guy!]

Many issues, including the save times issue, doesn't seem to be happening to everyone. This makes it difficult to pick up. You also have no idea what causes the issue. Neither do I, before you ask, but in this case I know it isn't as simple as you make it out to be.

So you got a response that SI are aware of the problem and, being SI, they'll be working on a solution and as soon as they have one, we'll receive it.

Define unacceptable? Do you want them to fix it faster than it's possible to fix? Again, you don't know what is involved, so it isn't possible to put a time frame to it or say that it was an unacceptable period of time. This time, as you mentioned, it happened over the festive period when most companies shut down. They're human too. Are you expecting them to work over Christmas and New Year? Anyway, the issue has cropped up again, but most likely has a different cause they have to find that first before starting to fix it. It's not as simple as flicking a switch.

All SI (and ourselves) are asking for, is patience.

The time frame isn't the issue, the lack of any definite statement from SI that they realise that it is a serious issue that this happened again, and the seriousness with which they take it is what is worrying. If it's going to take time, that's fine, but a statement from them, preferably one that can be stickied on the forum simply stating: "We are aware of this problem, and we see it as very significant and apologise for it occurring again and any issue it causes."

As for working over Christmas and New Year, they shouldn't be pushing things out prior to New Year if they haven't tested them or have time to fix them. That is an issue for management to discuss, negotiate and sort though. Personally I work over Christmas and New Year, but that's another story.

This is the thing though, if things are going to take time, they should be making nice, clear, visible statements at this point, rather than utter silence with a sprinkle of "they know" and censorship.

[jumbohotdog]

It's a big issue if you manually save regularly, or have regular auto saves going.

I do save regularly but its not that big an issue for me.

[HUNT3R]

The time frame isn't the issue, the lack of any definite statement from SI that they realise that it is a serious issue that this happened again, and the seriousness with which they take it is what is worrying. If it's going to take time, that's fine, but a statement from them, preferably one that can be stickied on the forum simply stating: "We are aware of this problem, and we see it as very significant and apologise for it occurring again and any issue it causes."

As for working over Christmas and New Year, they shouldn't be pushing things out prior to New Year if they haven't tested them or have time to fix them. That is an issue for management to discuss, negotiate and sort though. Personally I work over Christmas and New Year, but that's another story.

This is the thing though, if things are going to take time, they should be making nice, clear, visible statements at this point, rather than utter silence with a sprinkle of "they know" and censorship.

They do the same for all issues/bugs. When someone reports it, SI will thank the person, apologise and let them know that it is a known issue or getting looked into. Nothing devious or sinister about it.

[Some Guy!]

They do the same for all issues/bugs. When someone reports it, SI will thank the person, apologise and let them know that it is a known issue or getting looked into. Nothing devious or sinister about it.

It's not devious or sinister, it's just a lack of communication. I am on the edge of asking for a refund at this point, as the game has been rendered virtually unplayable and not of the quality that was expected at purchase. The lack of communication is causing concern on this front as it is coming across as though they don't see the issue as all that serious.

[HUNT3R]

They're treating it as a serious issue. Just because they don't post every day saying that, doesn't mean they're not. There's has been communication about it and it's silly to post "it's still a serious issue" every day. That's why, where we can, we do it.

For now, save your game less often. That's all I can say. :shrugs:

[CityAndColour]

For now, save your game less often. That's all I can say. :shrugs:

Unless you're annoyed by player interaction that is.

[forameuss]

Out of curiosity, what exactly would "more communication" achieve given that with or without that communication, it'll still get fixed in the same period of time? Seems awfully needy. Next it'll be webcams in the SI offices and a free stick to beat them with with every copy.

[Some Guy!]

They're treating it as a serious issue. Just because they don't post every day saying that, doesn't mean they're not. There's has been communication about it and it's silly to post "it's still a serious issue" every day. That's why, where we can, we do it.

For now, save your game less often. That's all I can say. :shrugs:

Again, making it look like the response is to palm the issue off as minor. This kind of comment does not help the situation.

Out of curiosity, what exactly would "more communication" achieve given that with or without that communication, it'll still get fixed in the same period of time? Seems awfully needy. Next it'll be webcams in the SI offices and a free stick to beat them with with every copy.

More communication will offer some insight into exactly what is going on, what's gone wrong and somewhat mitigate what looks like the worst release of FM15 in terms of testing in years. At this point in times it looks like they're pushing things out with insufficient testing, and simply leaving for long periods of time. As HUNT3R has said, we don't know what it's like on their side, but that's exactly because they don't actually communicate with us about it in any way. Within testing and bug fixing different companies do different things in different ways, and from my experience some use metrics based on "severity" of bugs to decide where effort goes first. The worry from this side is that it can come across as lazy testing and patching, and simply not taking the problem seriously enough.

It's all well and good to say "they acknowledged it" or words to that effect, but from the thread I raised in the bugs forum this is as close to an official response I got:

Yes it's an issue we're aware of and we're looking into it. Thanks for taking the time to raise it.

That was 21 days ago at this point, a staggering near 6% of the release cycle and nothing I have seen as shown that they take it any more seriously than a minor issue. We're now 17% into the release lifetime of FM15, and yet this kind of technical problem is not only present, but it has actually occurred twice now. With the time that it took to fix it last time, and the time now, a huge amount of the time the game has been released for has had these problems. To give some context though:

5.1.3 Released 10/11/14: has the save game issue

5.1.4 Released 27/11/14: save game issue fixed (17 days)

5.2.0 Released 10/12/14: still fixed (13 days)

5.2.1 Released 17/12/14: save game issue again (7 days)

Now 8/1/15: still no fix (22 days)

It's been 62 days since release and a staggering 39 of those have had this issue. That's 63% of the release so far. If it takes them more and more time from here, that's fine. If it's dragging on because they're taking a Xmas break, that's fine. The thing is, they should give us a better explanation than: "Yes it's an issue we're aware of and we're looking into it."

That response is meaningless beyond being an acknowledgement, and you wouldn't see it unless you're looking for it. They should visible talk about such issues, they should have made a statement by now, just detailing that they do see it as a big issue, are working on it, but it'll take patience. An apology would be nice too. Apparently though it's completely unreasonable to expect a basic quality of product from SI now, and having been a near rabid defender of SI over the years, this is just a kick in the face from them. One round of all this was bad enough, but having it occur a second time in near deafening silence is just not acceptable.

[RTHerringbone]

Some Guy! You seem to lack an appreciation of the complexity of software development, especially where this is a game which caters for multiple operating systems and the multiple hardware configurations running those OS's.

Yes, it is unfortunate it occurred in the first instance, and it is also a shame that it regressed after being fixed and is now affecting some configurations again. SI have acknowledged it and they are working hard to resolve it. I'm not sure what more you want? A daily post in here from Neil to say "we're still looking at it"? Should SI comment on every single bug, every single day?

As HUNT3R has pointed out, the vast majority of formally logged bug reports are receiving official and courteous SI responses within a very reasonable timeframe for such a small development and testing team. If you want devs / testers to repost in threads which are already acknowledged on a regular basis, just to "communicate", then nothing will ever get fixed.

[forameuss]

More communication will offer some insight into exactly what is going on, what's gone wrong and somewhat mitigate what looks like the worst release of FM15 in terms of testing in years.

It's not even close. And what can they say other than "we're working on it, and it isn't fixed yet", which is all you would realistically hope to get anyway.

At this point in times it looks like they're pushing things out with insufficient testing, and simply leaving for long periods of time.

Yeah, they're all of in Reno right now, and absolutely not sitting exactly where they should be, at their desks, you know, doing their job and working on the game. Nah.

Also, what exactly would be "a sufficient level of testing"? Having everything working flawlessly? Fair enough, so would that mean insufficient would be anything other than that? Then it'll always be insufficient. There will always be bugs, and there will always be parts of the code that aren't tested as much as they would like to, either through resource constraints (they can't physically test everything, that's impossible) or through it just not being possible to test. They just need to cover as best they can, and hope that the biggest things are covered. Which they are. But noooo, it's clearly the worst thing ever.

As HUNT3R has said, we don't know what it's like on their side, but that's exactly because they don't actually communicate with us about it in any way.

So again, what do you want? A video diary outlining a developer's day? A time-sheet? Let me give you something from my own personal experience. I used to work in one of the World's largest Investment Banks. As you can imagine, mega corporate, much red tape, very little wow. You spend most of your day in meetings, planning things, talking about what's going to be done and of course - the piece de resistance - discussing why things went wrong and who to blame when it did. It was dreadful. You know what you don't spend most of your day doing? Actually coding. Now I'm at a smaller company with very few meetings, and - joy of joys - I actually get to do what I've been hired to do, without spending most of my day talking to the business about things they don't know or particularly care about.

Have a think and see where that anology falls into this situation. Having SI come and report to the ungrateful and entitled every day just to say "we're working on it, it isn't ready" is just going to distract them from actually doing what they're supposed to be doing, and are doing.

Within testing and bug fixing different companies do different things in different ways, and from my experience some use metrics based on "severity" of bugs to decide where effort goes first. The worry from this side is that it can come across as lazy testing and patching, and simply not taking the problem seriously enough.

How is prioritising the most severe bugs "lazy"?

[Some Guy!]

Some Guy! You seem to lack an appreciation of the complexity of software development, especially where this is a game which caters for multiple operating systems and the multiple hardware configurations running those OS's.

Yes, it is unfortunate it occurred in the first instance, and it is also a shame that it regressed after being fixed and is now affecting some configurations again. SI have acknowledged it and they are working hard to resolve it. I'm not sure what more you want? A daily post in here from Neil to say "we're still looking at it"? Should SI comment on every single bug, every single day?

As HUNT3R has pointed out, the vast majority of formally logged bug reports are receiving official and courteous SI responses within a very reasonable timeframe for such a small development and testing team. If you want devs / testers to repost in threads which are already acknowledged on a regular basis, just to "communicate", then nothing will ever get fixed.

This isn't about the software development side, this is about the communication and transparency side. As I have said, just some kind of clearly visible statement, even something as simple as:

Stickied: Save Game Time Issue Mk. II

Sadly at this time we have had a reoccurrence of the save game issue seen around version 5.1.3, game updated to 5.2.1 appear to be able to have such issues. At this time we are working hard to solve the issue, but due to the large number of configurations and issues to consider, this is taking some time. Sadly with this coinciding with the holiday period this process has been slowed somewhat, but this issue is at the front of our concerns for the next patch. We apologise for any inconvenience caused and will update when we have more information.

Thank you

Maybe even a bit of information about why it occurred last time, but ultimately just something. A small acknowledgement in thread works for singular bug reports, but for large technical issues with are literally taking 3+ weeks to resolve, and have been in the game for over half it's release so far deserve some kind of proper acknowledgement to make it clear how seriously it's being taken.

Personally I think that there should be an aggregated list of known bugs and issues, with some note to their priority so people can understand what is already found, but that's another story all together.

It's not even close. And what can they say other than "we're working on it, and it isn't fixed yet", which is all you would realistically hope to get anyway.

See above.

Yeah, they're all of in Reno right now, and absolutely not sitting exactly where they should be, at their desks, you know, doing their job and working on the game. Nah.

I'm absolutely certain that the development team are working hard right now, and we know they have acknowledged that the issue is an issue. The concern is the the priority given, attention for future releases and the lack of communication (see above) about the fiasco. My problem isn't with the development team, but rather with the lack of communication and explanation.

Also, what exactly would be "a sufficient level of testing"? Having everything working flawlessly? Fair enough, so would that mean insufficient would be anything other than that? Then it'll always be insufficient. There will always be bugs, and there will always be parts of the code that aren't tested as much as they would like to, either through resource constraints (they can't physically test everything, that's impossible) or through it just not being possible to test. They just need to cover as best they can, and hope that the biggest things are covered. Which they are. But noooo, it's clearly the worst thing ever.

There will always be issues with a game with as much depth as Football Manager. You could probably read back through my own posts to hear my own defence for the team in old threads such as "Why have yearly releases with so many bugs?" (or words to that effect, a few years back), but it seems that a lot of old posts simply don't exist on the forum anymore. The issue is that it's a problem is that this isn't the first time it's occurred in this release cycle (again, over 60% of the release so far has had this issue) and this isn't a small, "this particular league" or "this particular rare hardware configuration". Even if it's not on all set ups, it's on a very sizable amount. Saving times and such should not have such issues, they should have been tested thoroughly, particularly after having this issue already in FM15. So no, in this situation "the biggest things" were not covered. I get that they occasionally they have a big mistake, but to have it twice in one release seems to point to issues in the testing procedure.

So again, what do you want? A video diary outlining a developer's day? A time-sheet? Let me give you something from my own personal experience. I used to work in one of the World's largest Investment Banks. As you can imagine, mega corporate, much red tape, very little wow. You spend most of your day in meetings, planning things, talking about what's going to be done and of course - the piece de resistance - discussing why things went wrong and who to blame when it did. It was dreadful. You know what you don't spend most of your day doing? Actually coding. Now I'm at a smaller company with very few meetings, and - joy of joys - I actually get to do what I've been hired to do, without spending most of my day talking to the business about things they don't know or particularly care about.

It's not about timelines, it's not about a blame game, it's just a matter of communication. 39 days of these problems since release 62 days ago. This isn't a little issue, and at this point if it's this hard to fix they should put out an official statement about it, simply state it's taking longer than they'd like. Such a statement could be stickied on here. It's visible, no worries, we wait for the fix and hope it doesn't break a third time.

Have a think and see where that anology falls into this situation. Having SI come and report to the ungrateful and entitled every day just to say "we're working on it, it isn't ready" is just going to distract them from actually doing what they're supposed to be doing, and are doing.

Ungrateful and entitled?! I, nor anyone else was asking for "daily" anything, just something in this time, which at this point is 22 days. Just a statement, just to make it clear how serious they take the issue. But no, actually wanting what I paid for to be up to the standard is being "ungrateful and entitled".

If a single statement from someone within the company puts their scheduled back... that would be quite horrifying indeed.

How is prioritising the most severe bugs "lazy"?

I never said that. It seems you misread.

More communication will offer some insight into exactly what is going on, what's gone wrong and somewhat mitigate what looks like the worst release of FM15 in terms of testing in years. At this point in times it looks like they're pushing things out with insufficient testing, and simply leaving for long periods of time. As HUNT3R has said, we don't know what it's like on their side, but that's exactly because they don't actually communicate with us about it in any way. Within testing and bug fixing different companies do different things in different ways, and from my experience some use metrics based on "severity" of bugs to decide where effort goes first. The worry from this side is that it can come across as lazy testing and patching, and simply not taking the problem seriously enough.

That's it in context. The point is that companies do have such metrics, but we don't know what they are. That's the issue, there is no way to know from this side without statement from the company exactly how seriously they are taking this. In that way even when the work is being down, if it has been a long time and only silence is given it can and will come across as lazy testing and patching.

[HUNT3R]

That's it in context. The point is that companies do have such metrics, but we don't know what they are. That's the issue, there is no way to know from this side without statement from the company exactly how seriously they are taking this. In that way even when the work is being down, if it has been a long time and only silence is given it can and will come across as lazy testing and patching.

To be frank, you/we don't need to know the details of it. That's SI's business. You know they're working on a fix. You have no idea what's involved or how complicated the issue and fix is. They've told us they're working on a fix and as soon as that's done, judging by past behaviour, they'll release an update. We have no reason to doubt this and they are a lot more open than most other companies.

Can we leave it at that now? They are still working on this issue. It hasn't been forgotten.

[jc1]

TBH I think the ME is pretty good apart from the ease in which 4-2-3-1/4-1-2-2-1 on attack wins games, so I hope SI don't make the mistake of tweaking the ME too much in the final update and screw it up like FM13, only thing really needing fixed is the complaining players interaction.

[themadsheep2001]

To be frank, you/we don't need to know the details of it. That's SI's business. You know they're working on a fix. You have no idea what's involved or how complicated the issue and fix is. They've told us they're working on a fix and as soon as that's done, judging by past behaviour, they'll release an update. We have no reason to doubt this and they are a lot more open than most other companies.

Can we leave it at that now? They are still working on this issue. It hasn't been forgotten.

To add to this, just in case there is any doubt, we are going to leave it here.

[Some Guy!]

To be frank, you/we don't need to know the details of it. That's SI's business. You know they're working on a fix. You have no idea what's involved or how complicated the issue and fix is. They've told us they're working on a fix and as soon as that's done, judging by past behaviour, they'll release an update. We have no reason to doubt this and they are a lot more open than most other companies.

Can we leave it at that now? They are still working on this issue. It hasn't been forgotten.

Their internal workings are their own business, I was just giving examples of things that could give more context to us waiting.

Why is there refusal to give a clear, visible statement? Even something that just simply says:

On the saving time issue:

We have identified this issue and are taking it with the utmost concern. We do not know how long it will take at this time.

You have no idea what's involved or how complicated the issue and fix is.

Exactly, this is exactly the point. Just something official that is clearly and openly visible to confirm fully that they are taking this problem to be of very high priority, and not just "something to be fixed next time". I'm sure they're working on it, but they haven't given such a clear statement.

[Smurf]

That's it in context. The point is that companies do have such metrics, but we don't know what they are. That's the issue, there is no way to know from this side without statement from the company exactly how seriously they are taking this. In that way even when the work is being down, if it has been a long time and only silence is given it can and will come across as lazy testing and patching.

Have you ever heard the expression "no news is good news"?

They take every single last bug reported to them 100% seriously. Every software company does - and every CEO of every company wants their products functioning to the highest standards. That's a given with any business.

The fact they haven't come out and said "Hey we will never get this resolved until FM16" is a resounding reassurance that the problem is being worked on.

There was an issue in FM14 that stopped me playing as when I asked about it I was told it would not change for that version, made the game unplayable for me. You know what it was, the Tactics screen and the auto collapsing of the filter panel. Bloody annoying and tedious for me to pick my team I got fed up with.

If you're fed up with it you're entitled to never play the game again. You're entitled to ask for a fix. You're not entitled to your money back though - the game works properly, just because something doesn't work as expected doesn't mean it's broken, it just works differently to how you perceived it would work.

No news is good news. Keep the hope up and report bugs to the bugs forum.

[Some Guy!]

Have you ever heard the expression "no news is good news"?

They take every single last bug reported to them 100% seriously. Every software company does - and every CEO of every company wants their products functioning to the highest standards. That's a given with any business.

The fact they haven't come out and said "Hey we will never get this resolved until FM16" is a resounding reassurance that the problem is being worked on.

There was an issue in FM14 that stopped me playing as when I asked about it I was told it would not change for that version, made the game unplayable for me. You know what it was, the Tactics screen and the auto collapsing of the filter panel. Bloody annoying and tedious for me to pick my team I got fed up with.

If you're fed up with it you're entitled to never play the game again. You're entitled to ask for a fix. You're not entitled to your money back though - the game works properly, just because something doesn't work as expected doesn't mean it's broken, it just works differently to how you perceived it would work.

No news is good news. Keep the hope up and report bugs to the bugs forum.

Saying they couldn't fix it before the final patch would be a admitting the game isn't up to standard. In this case something that was working was broken, twice.

You're not entitled to your money back though

That's not a debate for the forum.

[HUNT3R]

That's enough now. Thanks.

[HappyStreet]

I cant enjoy or take the game seriously with the current relation of skill between Strikers/Goalkeepers. I used to play striker when i played football and i genuinely believe myself to be a better finisher IRL than my Champions league strikers are in-game. It is actually absurd. I don't know our exact CCC-conversion but it is extremly low. I have found it very easy to create fantastic chances with my high-pressing 433. But what is the point when the goalkeepers are literally super-heroes and the forwards are idiots. Make Clear-Cut-Chances harder to come by but easier to score for a more realistic game.

[forameuss]

I cant enjoy or take the game seriously with the current relation of skill between Strikers/Goalkeepers. I used to play striker when i played football and i genuinely believe myself to be a better finisher IRL than my Champions league strikers are in-game. It is actually absurd. I don't know my CCC-conversion but it is extremly low. I have found it very easy to create fantastic chances with my high-pressing 433. But what is the point when the goalkeepers are literally super-heroes and the forwards are idiots. Make Clear-Cut-Chances harder to come by but easier to score for a more realistic game.

And on the other side, you still get people complaining there are too many goals.

[HappyStreet]

Well the things is, there are a lot of goals. That goes back to my point that too many chances are missed. I guess what i am complaining about the chance conversion, not the actual amount of goals.

[FM1000]

I cant enjoy or take the game seriously with the current relation of skill between Strikers/Goalkeepers. I used to play striker when i played football and i genuinely believe myself to be a better finisher IRL than my Champions league strikers are in-game. It is actually absurd. I don't know our exact CCC-conversion but it is extremly low. I have found it very easy to create fantastic chances with my high-pressing 433. But what is the point when the goalkeepers are literally super-heroes and the forwards are idiots. Make Clear-Cut-Chances harder to come by but easier to score for a more realistic game.

I couldn't agree more. How am i suppose to take this game seriously when Strikers shoot like Defenders? Its absurd. Its all down to bad defending too many easy chances and in order for the games not be too high scoring they nerfed the Strikers conversion rate.

And don't get me started on Inside Forwards who refuse to actually try to cut inside or take on a defender and they always i mean always shoot with their weaker foot. I cant remember the last time my Inside forward scored with his preferred foot its always a header or he shoots from a tight angle with his weaker foot and sometimes it goes in. I am very disappointed. I had the same issue last FM with Inside forwards and them using the weaker foot like all the time and a year later a new FM and still the same problem. I think this is down to defenders show onto weaker foot too perfectly but then again i dont code the ME so i dont know why they refuse to fix this.

Also the Libero position still seems broken like last years FM it does not do what it is supposed to do.

[Sunstrikuuu]

And on the other side, you still get people complaining there are too many goals.

So? They're linked by too many shots and too many chances created.

[Sussex Hammer]

I'm going to give FMC another go as the interaction in the full game has finally got on my wick. Every two weeks a reporter asks Sam Allardyce how he feels about me taking over from him, two years into the game. Every two weeks he replies he doesn't talk about other Managers. Talk about repetitive. Plus these blubbing players when they aren't playing or managers you have loaned players off whining you are not playing them when you are. It's all got too much,. I see my counsellor later!!

[forameuss]

So? They're linked by too many shots and too many chances created.

Complaining about superkeepers would generally suggest that there were shots that should have been goals. They're not directly related, but they're hardly distinct.

[Acquafresca]

This game is lottery. I think there is not a better description. You just play, and maybe your players will score, but the chance they will score is not big. But i can tell you: The possibility that the AI will score with 1 shot on goal is bigger than losing the lottery.

[greco]

hopefully we´ll see a patch, straight after the transfer window.

I´m playing in the danish league and the league really loses its competiveness after a few seasons, whereas my mate, who plays his game in the premier league, tells me, that its both challenging and the ai teams produce competetive squads. I dont know if this is a generel trend throughout the midtier leagues, but if it is, it is definetly i need of balancing.

i wouldnt mind if a patch made the game quite a bit harder.

OFF TOPIC: If i edit my rivals training facilities before i start a new game, would facilities be the that way throughout the game? Or would the ai need to maintain the facilities, just like we human players do, in order to keep up with the technological advancements?

[Fanatical Ollie]

The amount of goalkeeping errors is still far far too high. Both for me and against me. All they seem to have done in the last patch is make incidences of wonder saves by the opposition keeper more frequent, but errors still as prevalent as they always were. Also, if goals don't come from a goalkeeping error/rebound, they almost certainly come from a cross or a set piece.

I want an ME that is genuinely random, not totally predictable as this one is.

[Sunstrikuuu]

Complaining about superkeepers would generally suggest that there were shots that should have been goals. They're not directly related, but they're hardly distinct.

I mean, I'm not seeing the disconnect. There are things that drive goals down - goalkeepers making possibly implausible saves, strikers failing to convert clear chances, free kicks rarely being put on target, shots and crosses being blocked more often than one might expect - and things that drive goals up - more CCC being generated than one might expect, corners being generated for free from inaccurate backpasses, goals being scored after frequent goalkeeping errors and spills and most importantly lots and lots of shots. Generally the things that increase goals outweigh the ones that decrease goals just through sheer weight of shooting. That doesn't mean one can't be irritated by the granular factors.

My experience has generally been that keepers are generally fine but make too many weird errors, that defending is more or less ok though backpasses go out for corners far too often, attacking play looks decent though accuracy of shooting generally seems low and overall it's much better than 14. My biggest bugaboo with attacking and defending is definitely speed of decision-making. I'm wholly sick of players lingering on the ball in ridiculous places - like the opponent's penalty area - and taking so long to shoot and cross that blocks happen all the damn time.

[Svenc]

Purely statistically, SOT ratios actually look pretty decent, bearing in mind that these are the top strikers: https://notbottomline.wordpress.com/2013/01/17/who-is-europes-deadliest-finisher/ Maybe the SOT conversion may be a tad lower. Going from there I don't trust FM's attempt at further classifying finishes as it's evident it's always going to be shaky from watching all those cccs that clearly aren't. You can an improve an algorithm as much as you like, it will be no replacement for a human eye. You can see the AI making Balotelli (!!) convert 44% of his SOT, Lewandowski still 35%, Ronaldo 33%, Suarez 43%, Messi 36% (all current saves, full details), whilst at the same time it's Rooney struggling to convert 22 per cent (but then he isn't one of the top scorers in this season in real-life, and obviously those numbers will always vary). The overall SOT per team appears to hover around 40%, which may or may be no coincidence, given that all AI teams operate on the same base logics, if not the same details and styles influenced by the preferences in their manager's profile.

In previous iterations it was proven that AI tactics contrary to claims would be under performing, so one might expect a good human AI manager getting better numbers. And the odd popular download tactics shared on various sides lowering these numbers significantly. Such as apparently popular ones that push everyone forward, crunching space to operate in and forcing the finish against parking bus teams who inevitable will do so upon facing the human team filled with all those world clarse players who should convert more no matter what, SI!!!1 ;-) In any case, if your top strikers are significantly lower, your input isn't as sound as that of the AI. (Personally I'm afraid to look and just play.)

A sensible bet though is that if there's an issue, it's rarely ever only tactics or rarely ever only game, but mostly a combination of input (AI and human) and engine alike. :-)

[Scotty Walds]

This game is lottery. I think there is not a better description. You just play, and maybe your players will score, but the chance they will score is not big. But i can tell you: The possibility that the AI will score with 1 shot on goal is bigger than losing the lottery.

It isn't a lottery, it is a game of skill and understanding. If you understanding the tactics you install into your squad, and what happens when you make changes, you will have a better chance that someone who puts out any eleven players with a standard tactic.

[Sunstrikuuu]

I'm going to add a link to my other thread here, because I'd really quite like an official or semi-official comment. http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/417122-Transfer-logic

[RTHerringbone]

I'm going to add a link to my other thread here, because I'd really quite like an official or semi-official comment. http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/417122-Transfer-logic

There was an official comment in there one minute ago

[Sunstrikuuu]

And I've uploaded a save per instructions. Now I guess I just need to turn my attention to smashing Juventus into tiny little pieces the next time we play.

[effielo]

Still no new patch after a few weeks?

This is such a disappointment, was expecting atlease rerolled back to 15.1.4, which that ME is clearly superior to this, in that patch, i could actually make a waste time defensive tactics without high pressing high defensive line to work exactly like i wanted. In this new patch, if you played defensive(counter) tactics without safe pass, you are pretty much doomed, due to incredible RNG finishing, and grant opponent tons of CCC to make things happen .

And yes if you played a high pressing high defensive line and go full ******** on attacking, you are going to create like 5~10++ ccc and tons of half chances per match, and depends on your luck, those matches can vary from 0-2 to 5-2, pretty much very high scoring and is way too RNG for my liking. And my strikers, wingers are average about 1.5~2 tackles+ a match...i am not sure if this is normal. I know a lot of people are complaining about wingers for not tracking back, but you should ignore them and tell them if they want their wingers track back, they should play them as wide midfielder ..

Honestly though, i just want a patch is closed to 15.1.4 quality with a little improvement on defending... this patch just make things worse.

[effielo]

Yes still no new patch after almost 1 month. SI should listen him customers and release 15.2.2 please.

Not saying they should rush to release a new patch, but should atlease release a hotfix to fix the saving time problem

[forameuss]

Not saying they should rush to release a new patch, but should atlease release a hotfix to fix the saving time problem

But they - in all likelihood - haven't fixed it yet. I think personally if they have, they would have released it as a hotfix. That's not certain of course, they could still be holding on to it for the next main patch release, but I doubt it. If it's not ready, it won't be released. It's not as simple as saying "they should release a hotfix". There's a lot more to it than that.

[Sunstrikuuu]

It sounds like they've not figured out why it's broken again. I suspect that if they had the problem fixed they'd hotfix it.

[mcb1996]

Not saying they should rush to release a new patch, but should atlease release a hotfix to fix the saving time problem

Saving time problem is nothing. There are too many match engine bugs. Especially with goalkeepers

[RTHerringbone]

This thread is great entertainment at times.

It's like a little cauldron of bubbling angst sits there, then one person pipes up and a mini domino effect sparks a series of rants.

Please remember to keep things civil and constructive.

[Sunstrikuuu]

Any ideas why a bunch of 19 year olds would be listed as too old to play U-21 features?

Edit: could be because the next match is against Leverkusen U19, I guess? But none of those players featured in my last domestic U21s either.

[Confused]

I see there's still no fix for the fact that attacking tactics are ridiculously overpowered, leading to a billion created chances per game and having the average game contain 6 goals.

Yea, I could choose a different tactic. But where's the realism in that? I picked the tactic I saw fit for the team, unfortunately it seems a little "too fit".

So, should I set up a more defensive tactic to get poorer results for my team on purpose or do I wait until a patch that balances it?