Jump to content

Football Manager 2016 - 16.2.0 Official feedback thread


Recommended Posts

You're making wild assumptions here. I'm playing a 442 narrow diamond (so not the best formation to defend the wings) and I'm top of the league with a team predicted to be 5th. I'm having no issues with crosses and I'm getting goals from through balls, dribbles and crosses. Formations are a small part of it. How you set up within it, is more important.

That's nice for you, but in return you're making an assumption that everything is ok in the game just because you are fine. A tactic with two full backs on support and two wide midfielder should not really have the majority of goals conceded coming from crosses, or should they?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

That's nice for you, but in return you're making an assumption that everything is ok in the game just because you are fine. A tactic with two full backs on support and two wide midfielder should not really have the majority of goals conceded coming from crosses, or should they?

I haven't made any assumptions. I just said I'm not having issues so it isn't universal. As said, it will depend how you set up within the tactic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That's nice for you, but in return you're making an assumption that everything is ok in the game just because you are fine. A tactic with two full backs on support and two wide midfielder should not really have the majority of goals conceded coming from crosses, or should they?

What % of goals do you expect coming from crosses?

Whats an acceptable %?

A quick look on google gives you this analysis of the 2012 European Championships: http://thesportjournal.org/article/analysis-of-goal-scoring-patterns-in-the-2012-european-football-championship/

The relevant part is in the first summary:

Most goals were scored after a cross (43.7%)

Now thats just one analysis of one real life tournament but it implies that most goals in football come from crosses as opposed to any other way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you guys misunderstood what I was trying to say, and I didn't explain myself well neither. Svenc kinda did that for me but I'd like to try to elaborate.

For a start let's put the issue of CCCs aside, I really don't care about it. Well it's a useful stat that can be pretty interesting, and I'd rather have it calculated well than not if possible, but I'm much more interested in the outcome of plays, not whether it's arbitrarily considered a "clear chance" or not.

Now, my background on this is the crosses issue. There's a **** ton of goals crossed to the far post tapped-in first time, and I can easily present that with a few PKMs. It's also backed up by disproportionate high ratings I've experienced for every full-back on attacking roles. That can all be proved in a fairly straightforward way. Now, it stands to reason that if there's too many goals coming in from this avenue, and the overall number of goals in the match engine seems correct, some other type of goals must be missing. This is the main problem for me. I have a feeling that something's not right, not well balanced, but it's much harder to make an obvious case for it. Is it that players aren't scoring enough from OTHER types of crosses (ie headers)? Is it that there's not enough quality passing through the middle? Is it that marking and general defending is too good through the middle? Are forwards missing too many easy chances down the ground? Or even harder to prove, are forwards missing too many DIFFICULT chances down the ground? (good luck submitting PKMs to demonstrate they're only scoring 10% when they should be scoring 15%). It could even be that every single one of these things are wrong but only by a minor amount, and you only need to marginally improve the odds of all these kinds of goals.

Not only it's hard to prove, but some clever people have found tactical setups that enable them to not depend on crossed goals at all and still win. This further muddles discussion, because it allows people to dismiss concerns as rubbish, but what I said still holds true. Whatever happens on their game can happen, but in my game I'm still experiencing too many far-post cross goals (scored and conceded); and if there's too many goals from one path, some other goals must be missing. Perhaps if these issues were fixed, these clever people would be even more successful?! Or maybe they're just managed to hit all of the other types of goals that are well balanced, and don't rely on the kinds of goals that are missing.

But I've gone on a (massive) tangent, let's go back to the match engine. It's true that the match engine team at SI can't exactly wait for the 3D guys to finish all the animations, for only then to start working. That would be ridiculous. It is indeed the core part that lies underneath everything else. However by definition the ME will have a lot of mathematical variables that only makes sense for 3D, because it's the only way it can simulate something this complex. We know that calculations are done every 1/8th of a second, therefore the ME will have a very precise X and Y position for each player in each 1/8th second; as well as at which height is he jumping, how balanced will he be in this split-second, how much speed does he carry if he's running, which angled direction are his feet pointing at. These are very physical things, that exist at the purely mathematical level of the ME independent of the 3D, because they need it to calculate how easy it is to pull off a pass, to where should a player run, etc; but only make the most sense in the 3D view of things. 2D can represent it but in a limited fashion; and commentary doesn't give you absolutely any of this info at all.

Let's go back to the ME issues - let's assume the whole, only issue (besides crosses) is that players who try to shoot under pressure aren't accurate enough with their finish (I'm not 100% convinced this is the case, but it could be). The only way I can see the 3D possibly misrepresenting this is that the players are lacking balance but the animations don't show it. But if they NEVER score under pressure, doesn't this mean the ME is wrong to process every single one of these opportunities as too difficult to score because the players lose balance too easily? This isn't a graphical problem, at least not strictly one. Please realize that the current graphical layer has tons of separate animations for tons of different scenarios. It won't represent a header as a volley, there's separate animations for that. It won't represent a control-the-ball-then-shoot move as a first-time shot, there's separate animations for that. It won't represent a player under no pressure when actually a defender is on top of him, because both the ME and the graphics have a precise X and Y position for the player; and I haven't seen any "ghosting" between animations to make up for a wrongly positioned player in ages. The graphical animations layer is all very sophisticated and versatile. So why exactly are we wasting SI's time apologizing for ME issues, by saying they're "misrepresented by the graphics", save for the occasional glaring graphical bug?

Jesus, I wrote too much. :lol:

No one is apologising for anything, with respect, that's a nonsense thing to say. I'll be honest, the minute people start throwing that around, I rapidly lose interest in the rest of what they have to say.

And by and large it will (but certainly not always) be graphical, because the graphics ARE still catching up with the ME. That's not to say that there are not things that can be improved in the ME, and not one person has ever said otherwise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What % of goals do you expect coming from crosses?

Whats an acceptable %?

A quick look on google gives you this analysis of the 2012 European Championships: http://thesportjournal.org/article/analysis-of-goal-scoring-patterns-in-the-2012-european-football-championship/

The relevant part is in the first summary:

Now thats just one analysis of one real life tournament but it implies that most goals in football come from crosses as opposed to any other way.

Yeah I haven't checked my percentages, and I'm sure they probably balance out with real life. But from the good old eye test it doesn't feel at all balanced (not just goals, but crosses which are saved from point blank as well).

For me it's not just a black and white figure on how many goals come from crosses. It's how they come about, how they are defended (or not defended) and the repetitive nature of the type of cross/finish that irks me. The low cross from deep which evades all defenders/'keeper and is tapped in at the far post feels like a cheat goal at the moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah I haven't checked my percentages, and I'm sure they probably balance out with real life. But from the good old eye test it doesn't feel at all balanced (not just goals, but crosses which are saved from point blank as well).

For me it's not just a black and white figure on how many goals come from crosses. It's how they come about, how they are defended (or not defended) and the repetitive nature of the type of cross/finish that irks me. The low cross from deep which evades all defenders/'keeper and is tapped in at the far post feels like a cheat goal at the moment.

This point in bold. Im surprised at how little this is brought up. It's less to do with crosses, and more a general point, but full backs need to defend wider, and engage more aggressively by default. That in turns opens up a bit more central space, and then its up to the user/AI to trade between defending the centre, or trying to engage against crosses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This point in bold. Im surprised at how little this is brought up. It's less to do with crosses, and more a general point, but full backs need to defend wider, and engage more aggressively by default. That in turns opens up a bit more central space, and then its up to the user/AI to trade between defending the centre, or trying to engage against crosses.

I've just played a season with two FB (s) and two wm (a) in which the team shape was as wide as possible and both full backs were set to close down much more and mark tighter to try to preent crosses, infact my entire defensive set up was in order to prevent crosses because I simply did not concede many goals at all through the centre, still the most common area of assists were from the wings. even of the 14 goal assists conceded from inside the penalty area i'd say at least half of those were crosses from the byline inside the box. So that comment simply isn't true.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not that in my opinion, it's that whipped cross all land perfectly at ground level on the six yard box and only strikers know to be there, defenders never are and keepers never intercept

That's because the highlights will generally only show the crosses that end in a goal or a good chance. A cross that is well defended (of which there are numerous if you check the analysis afterwards) is much less likely to be shown. When you're only watching highlights, what you don't see can be just as important when analysing a game as what you do see.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I've just played a season with two FB (s) and two wm (a) in which the team shape was as wide as possible and both full backs were set to close down much more and mark tighter to try to preent crosses, infact my entire defensive set up was in order to prevent crosses because I simply did not concede many goals at all through the centre, still the most common area of assists were from the wings. even of the 14 goal assists conceded from inside the penalty area i'd say at least half of those were crosses from the byline inside the box. So that comment simply isn't true.

I'm not entirely sure what your point is at all tbh, I don't think it bares any relation to my post. I'm replying to City's point about the defending by full backs

Watch the full backs, they defend very narrow, and move out wide very late, often too late, leaving space to exploited.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not that in my opinion, it's that whipped cross all land perfectly at ground level on the six yard box and only strikers know to be there, defenders never are and keepers never intercept

How does the cross get in there in the first place. Watch the initial movement of the full backs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not entirely sure what your point is at all tbh, I don't think it bares any relation to my post. I'm replying to City's point about the defending by full backs

Watch the full backs, they defend very narrow, and move out wide very late, often too late, leaving space to exploited.

Ok, so with a set up that already has the team shape set as wide and the full back instructed to mark tighter and close down much more would you suggest to prevent them from being narrow and moving out wide too late?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, so with a set up that already has the team shape set as wide and the full back instructed to mark tighter and close down much more would you suggest to prevent them from being narrow and moving out wide too late?

You realise I'm talking about an area that needs improving right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not entirely sure what your point is at all tbh, I don't think it bares any relation to my post. I'm replying to City's point about the defending by full backs

Watch the full backs, they defend very narrow, and move out wide very late, often too late, leaving space to exploited.

Yeah I think the issue is two-fold - there is still not enough urgency for full backs and wingers to close down the crossing outlet (especially when they tuck in), but I also think there are far too many instances where defenders bunch in and around the six yard box, but don't really make an attempt to try and defend/cut out the cross, especially at the near post. Often they will not even be facing the right way or they will stand still instead of moving towards the ball, which should be an instinctive action.

How often in real life do you see a defender divert a cross into his own net because his instinct is to stick a foot out/go towards the ball (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IMlycOPR4w - great example at 3:57 in this vid)? I would much prefer to see own goals from low crosses across the six yard area then far post tap ins, because at least then I know the defender is aware of the ball and reacting to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah I think the issue is two-fold - there is still not enough urgency for full backs and wingers to close down the crossing outlet (especially when they tuck in), but I also think there are far too many instances where defenders bunch in and around the six yard box, but don't really make an attempt to try and defend/cut out the cross, especially at the near post. Often they will not even be facing the right way or they will stand still instead of moving towards the ball, which should be an instinctive action.

How often in real life do you see a defender divert a cross into his own net because his instinct is to stick a foot out/go towards the ball (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IMlycOPR4w - great example at 3:57 in this vid)? I would much prefer to see own goals from low crosses across the six yard area then far post tap ins, because at least then I know the defender is aware of the ball and reacting to it.

I agree, I think I've seen this once. People should be getting annoyed about unfortunate defenders turning stuff in.

Link to post
Share on other sites
erm... players wanting first team football during the close season

08CC5948CBCFA562FF2BE0941CFAE12FCEB03753

its June... there are no games.

Scott, read all of it. He wants to discuss a lack of football - and he thinks it's because he's not good enough to play. If that is the case, he wants to move and the transfer window is coming up, so it's the right time to ask.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That's because the highlights will generally only show the crosses that end in a goal or a good chance. A cross that is well defended (of which there are numerous if you check the analysis afterwards) is much less likely to be shown. When you're only watching highlights, what you don't see can be just as important when analysing a game as what you do see.

That's near irrelevant, you rarely ever see crosses like that IRL, but in fm with the right tactics I've had my CF score 3-4 exactly that per game for 6 games in a row.

Focusing on the full backs is wrong, irl football often sees fullbacks pushing high, supporting wingers and whipping in crosses, the lack of realism doesn't come from that, it comes from the regularity (regardless of percentages or unshown highlights) of unmarked strikers being completely open on six yard line despite deep crosses and with static keepers

Link to post
Share on other sites
I just found a player in Bayer Leverkusen who thinks my goalkeeper (at Liverpool) is a good player. Is this a bug?

Is one of them on loan at the other club? or possibly both the same nationality with paths crossing when they play for their country?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted this last night but it just hit me all over again how good it is - the zoomed out pans of your stadium are incredible, especially when playing at a ~15k seater where you can see it all fully.

Fantastic addition (but would be cool if you could just click a button on the facilities page to be taken to a looping pan of that view)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is one of them on loan at the other club? or possibly both the same nationality with paths crossing when they play for their country?

Different clubs, different nationalities, but I didn't express my interest in signing him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Scott, read all of it. He wants to discuss a lack of football - and he thinks it's because he's not good enough to play. If that is the case, he wants to move and the transfer window is coming up, so it's the right time to ask.

yes but the offerings are still the exact same as if it were in the season.

i cant offer him first team football in a month because there are no games

Link to post
Share on other sites
yes but the offerings are still the exact same as if it were in the season.

i cant offer him first team football in a month because there are no games

The promise that's created from this meeting will last a lot longer than a month.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have returned! =p

Anyway, so I can finally have a bit of a go on FM, joy. But, obviously, I haven't had too much time to get going on it so take with a pinch of salt.

I've been reading Mr. Wilson's Inverting the Pyramid in my downtime, great book, very nicely explains the death of the 3-5-2, but it isn't going to stop me having a little attempt at making one.

So anyway I set it up, and I agree with @Svenc about the 'smash and grab' of attacking mentalities, was it like this in FM15? Am I mis-remembering? They do bolt, like a horse out of the door at times. I initially went with Wing backs on attack and found them so far gone, they were dating the corner flags and chatting merrily to the opposing fullback, trying to pick their pockets at the same time. Hoo-boy, slow down champ, football is like making love, you don't just run to the end of it, you gotta mesmerise them into bed and stuff. Support duty wing backs were so much more in line with that, but I did kinda wish the WB/A would be dialled back a notch or so.

Weirdly though, I don't see why that happened - That is to say, the player instructions are similar, so I guess it is down to mentality.

The other things I noticed;

Cover defenders don't really seem to drop back as much as I remember, I ran an X-C-X sort of back three and for most the part they stayed in line, sometimes with the C defender pushing on. Admittedly, only one or two games on this so far.

Midfield triangles bunch together at times, I ran a DM-CM-CM, with a D/S/S mentality. It is much more pronounced how close they sit together, I mean they are almost holding hands at times, and that led to some very interesting exploitations of 'width' in the middle, effectively 2 man midfields were having fun dissecting them, because of how bunched they were. It also made them vulnerable to the over-the-top crossfield pass. I remember a flat 3 being more versatile in terms of covering width in 15, but even a DM-CM-CM in 15 didn't to my memory bunch as close together as these guys do. Is this a feature of the new fluidity?

Deep lying forwards frustrate me to no end, in the short time I've had a go, I've often found the Deep Lying Forward snuggling with his more advanced strike partner, and failing therefore to 'link' the midfield and attack. Dropping deeper seems to happen at odd times. Down to the player's decision making? It is weird seeing them in line so often, so much so, I find a massive gap between the midfield - which drops off a good few yards behind the halfway line, to almost just outside the penalty box, in contrast to the strikers, who will both usually be pushing along the opposition defensive line - even on the more cautious mentalities.

Basically, when I look at what happens in the midfield and attack it is very weird, for me! A sign, perhaps, that I need to improve on those areas maybe? We'll see.

But less of the negatives;

On the plus side, I like the new staff panels, a needed improvement, along with the staff attributes being highlighted. Though, I still maintain that communication is still rather... unnecessarily aggravating, getting told to essentially '**** off' because I tried to say to a staff member that I value his expertise, seems a bit harsh, though I've always wanted to see if I could tell my own boss to **** off without getting a disciplinary. :D

Also, I like the unemployment and interview process. It is an area I've never actually experienced much, but is fun to deal with.

One suggestion is to have subscriptions not auto-subscribe to every league and job posting when you do achieve a manager's position, or at the very least ask the player if they still want to be informed a bit more clearly. Because the amount of news that gets peppered at you if you leave it on is staggering if you have more than one nation loaded!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know how regularly a DoF restarts efforts to offload players during transfer windows? When it has the status of failed, how long till he starts again?

I quite often just bump the price up and down one to get him to start over, but I'm wasting my time if he would start every few days anyway - although I don't get the impression that is the case

Link to post
Share on other sites
Does anyone know how regularly a DoF restarts efforts to offload players during transfer windows? When it has the status of failed, how long till he starts again?

I quite often just bump the price up and down one to get him to start over, but I'm wasting my time if he would start every few days anyway - although I don't get the impression that is the case

In the past they would only make one attempt, best way you can find out is to play through & see what he does without any additional intervention from yourself.

What are the tactical reasons for a player who can play in the majority of striker roles being useless as a CF?

I'm not all that well up on the differences so would appreciated being educated on what it is about a Complete Forward that makes it so exclusive a role

More of a Tactics or Good Player forum question, that said I do not think you'll get a consensus opinion as the role is open to subjective assessment because a CF can be judged on much more than just goals scored.
Link to post
Share on other sites
What are the tactical reasons for a player who can play in the majority of striker roles being useless as a CF?

I'm not all that well up on the differences so would appreciated being educated on what it is about a Complete Forward that makes it so exclusive a role

The problem with the ratings are the number of skills needed by a CF.

In terms of attributes he needs to have the creativity of a DLF, the aerial ability of a target man, and the speed/clinical finishing of a poacher. He is basically expected to do everything up front so will always be rated lower as a role than any of the other which specialise more.

As Barside has said above the best way to see if a player is useful in that role is just to play him & see how he does.

Link to post
Share on other sites
When you change penalty takers it should not swap 1 with 5 (for e.g) it should put 1 into 4th. Clear?

Not really, if I'm swapping position #5 with position #1 then I'd expect the former #1 to now be in position #5.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Not really, if I'm swapping position #5 with position #1 then I'd expect the former #1 to now be in position #5.
Yeah I'd say 1st to 5th or alternatively to 2nd with everyone shifting shift down, not to 4th
I mean when you drop the takers tab it should slot into where you drop it, not swap with the person you drop it on/near

Personally I agree with CK here.

It would work far better if the list moved up/down and let you slot players into where you drop them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone know what to do in the event of a major collapse of form in FMC? I was second with 10 games to go. One home defeat all season and suddenly I have had a run of only one win in 7 and home defeats to Sunderland and Bournemouth who are in the bottom three and have hardly won all season! Ok nerves, confidence, experience and how the opposition plays can all have an effect at this stage of the season but in FMC there is absolutely no help whatsoever in finding out what has gone wrong and why. I can't even give the team a rollicking because of no team talks (my choice to play FMC admittedly) but how do I find out why my forwards cannot now hit a cows a** with a banjo anymore or why my once impenetrable back four now concedes with regularity? It really seems that when the game wants to give you a bruising there is nothing that you can do because there is no way of telling what has gone wrong!

Link to post
Share on other sites
What are the tactical reasons for a player who can play in the majority of striker roles being useless as a CF?

I'm not all that well up on the differences so would appreciated being educated on what it is about a Complete Forward that makes it so exclusive a role

Do you mean the actual rating for the role? Or what happens during a game? If it's the first one then it has a CA rating attached to it and that is why it sees him rated lower as a CF compared to the others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sick and tired of games where teams with 1 shot on goal all game win or draw against an opponent that totally dominates the games.

It's not about me only. Happens in many other AI games.

IMO, the ME tries to replicate real life upsets, but;

In 99% cases, bigger teams lose against small teams because the bigger teams plays bad overall (they don't create enough/ sterile domination / defence errors, etc.).

But no, Football Manager ME, somehow translates that Big vs. Small team must be a Barcelona - Chelsea 2012 CL semifinal.But not before multiplying Barcelona shots from that game by 2x. This is totally ridiculous.

Look at Arsenal, for example, they are (or were) the stereotype of dominating and still losing;

IRL games :

WBA - Arsenal 2-1 Norwich - Arsenal 1-1

4 shots WBA 7 shots Norwich

1 shot on goal WBA 2 shots on goal Norwich

11 shots Arsenal 11 shots Arsenal

3 shots on goal 2 shots on goal

How would this look on FM 2016

WBA - Arsenal 2-1 Norwich - Arsenal 1-1

2 shots WBA 1 shots Norwich

1 shot on goal WBA 1 shots on goal Norwich

22 shots Arsenal 27 shots Arsenal

9 shots on goal 10 shots on goal

I have checked all big teams upsets this season. They are nowhere near the stats FM offers when a surprise results happens.

I even saw lots of ones-on-ones from my players that are not even considered CCC's. For example a low cross into 6yard penalty area, my player shoots straight to the keeper (of course, it's my tactics), and that's not even a CCC. I swear, sometimes i feel this games has a script somewhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With regards to the excellent wing-backs and crossing. This is something I definitely noticed when playing a 4-3-3, with an AP(S) on the right wing, and a WB(A) at right-back. Of course the playmaker tucked in, and this allowed a load of space for my WB(A) to exploit. This lead to so many balls seeking him out, because he always had a crap load of space to exploit due to players being pulled out of position by the AP(S) on the RW. This did lead to me scoring the majority of my goals through crosses from the WB(A) to either the DLF(S) or IF(A) on the other wing. The down-side was I was so one-dimensional that if you shut my WB down, I probably did not score.

When I encountered the reverse problem - the AI team using this tactic on me - then the best way to shut it down was to shut down the space that the WB(A) was exploiting. He would then get less balls passed his way, have less space to run into, and have less time and space to cross.

Now, this is exactly the behaviour I expect to see from the combination of roles I described above, it is the essence of why you play an attacking full-back behind a player who is cutting inside - tactics 101. Thus, I do not think that it is the behaviour of the WB that is at fault in terms of causing issues people are describing. Instead, it is the sheer quantity of the ball that the WB gets. Almost all attacks would be funnelled through him due to the space he found himself in, and this would lead to a huge number of crosses per match - upwards of 40 on average in the roughly 10 games I played like this. This, for me, is why there are so many assists from crossing and WBs; the quantity of crosses makes it far more likely one or two will be perfect. And hence, if there is any problem in the match engine, it is the distribution of the ball (which I guess should go to players in space) or that users have not properly set up a tactic that will allow them to fully exploit multiple areas of the pitch to avoid such one dimensional play.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With this current ME I'm feeling the same sense of impotence I felt when playing 14- IE I'll lose a game but with no real idea why/how it has happened. In 15 and to begin with in 16 I could see why I was losing, be it tactics, one player I couldn't handle or one of my players performing badly and being taken apart- now losses seem to have no rhyme or reason to them.

For instance I've just played a game against a West Ham side who have one win in their last eighteen games (and that was 8 games ago), while I'm unbeaten in 7. We're 4th, they're 17th. Coming into this game it should be one team, confident and in good form, one team not. Yet 30 minutes in I'm 2-0 with West Ham playing scintillating attacking football with my team utterly unable to muster a shot on target let alone a goal and being dominated in possession. I'm not saying I should be winning this game automatically but generally I'd expect the game to be much more balanced at least, or see something in the match engine that reflects the respective levels of form/confidence of the team.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, this is exactly the behaviour I expect to see from the combination of roles I described above, it is the essence of why you play an attacking full-back behind a player who is cutting inside - tactics 101. Thus, I do not think that it is the behaviour of the WB that is at fault in terms of causing issues people are describing. Instead, it is the sheer quantity of the ball that the WB gets. Almost all attacks would be funnelled through him due to the space he found himself in, and this would lead to a huge number of crosses per match - upwards of 40 on average in the roughly 10 games I played like this. This, for me, is why there are so many assists from crossing and WBs; the quantity of crosses makes it far more likely one or two will be perfect. And hence, if there is any problem in the match engine, it is the distribution of the ball (which I guess should go to players in space) or that users have not properly set up a tactic that will allow them to fully exploit multiple areas of the pitch to avoid such one dimensional play.

you are correct it is desired behaviour in that setup (attacking fb + supporting, tucking in wide player), however i don't agree it is the distribution of the ball that is responsible for this. at least not only that.

while the attacking side (attacking fb + supporting, tucking in wide player) is working as intended, the side that defends is nowhere near to sensible approach you'd expect to see in real. defenders get dragged away and mark wrong attackers more than that should be the case. i accept it can be chaotic and should happen when you are overloaded or facing counter attack. but when defending team is in good position (covering space behind the ball and disciplined) those attacking fullbacks shouldn't be in so much space and certainly not with so much time.

so while distribution of ball is a problem here, it is more so because ME is lacking in good defensive positioning that gives opportunity to distributor of the ball to pick up a player with time and space. it is more of consequence rather than reason in my opinion. main reason for this is poor defensive positioning of players on the pitch and really poor teamwork from defense that doesn't slide the defensive line towards the flank where is the ball thus restricting the space and time for players with the ball. not to mention they are completely clueless how to defend the overlaps properly.

[video=youtube_share;AtIAhX5xhLs]

Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone know what to do in the event of a major collapse of form in FMC? I was second with 10 games to go. One home defeat all season and suddenly I have had a run of only one win in 7 and home defeats to Sunderland and Bournemouth who are in the bottom three and have hardly won all season! Ok nerves, confidence, experience and how the opposition plays can all have an effect at this stage of the season but in FMC there is absolutely no help whatsoever in finding out what has gone wrong and why. I can't even give the team a rollicking because of no team talks (my choice to play FMC admittedly) but how do I find out why my forwards cannot now hit a cows a** with a banjo anymore or why my once impenetrable back four now concedes with regularity? It really seems that when the game wants to give you a bruising there is nothing that you can do because there is no way of telling what has gone wrong!

In FMC (presuming you're on FM16), you have the exact same analysis tools as you do in the main game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm looking for some clarification and advice on FM Touch versus the full version. I've skipped the last edition of FM as I've found it hard to enjoy the saves I've had in FM13 and 14. The media and player handling just isn't for me: I'm having a hard time understanding reactions and how to respond to them. It's become a chore to me. Also, while I enjoy setting up tactics, I don't enjoy meticulous tinkering throughout the season and during a match. So the development of Touch should suit me well. I do, however, enjoy managing the backroom staff and controlling the U18's, which are features absent from Touch.

So my question is: is it possible for me to start a save on the full version, leaving player and media handling to the assistant, and going 'light' on the tactics side? Or would my teams struggle as I'm not devoting enough time to tactics and people management?

Link to post
Share on other sites
In FMC (presuming you're on FM16), you have the exact same analysis tools as you do in the main game.

Yep FM16, I'll always call it FMC as I still play on a PC!!! Yep looked at all the analysis and cannot make rhyme or reason for the major dip in form. The only thing I have noticed is that when at our best we defend high and are snappy in the tackle. Since the downturn in form my players look like they are meandering about, slow off the mark, laborious in closing down and yet what can you do about it? I can't use a team talk so all the analysis in the world doesn't really help as to why and as to reverse the trend.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yep FM16, I'll always call it FMC as I still play on a PC!!! Yep looked at all the analysis and cannot make rhyme or reason for the major dip in form. The only thing I have noticed is that when at our best we defend high and are snappy in the tackle. Since the downturn in form my players look like they are meandering about, slow off the mark, laborious in closing down and yet what can you do about it? I can't use a team talk so all the analysis in the world doesn't really help as to why and as to reverse the trend.

If its always during the final stages of the season the obvious first port of call would be the hidden attributes of the players. In particular pressure & big matches, if too many of your squad have average/low levels in these areas they are going to crumble at that stage of the season.

More focus on your squad building I would say.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If its always during the final stages of the season the obvious first port of call would be the hidden attributes of the players. In particular pressure & big matches, if too many of your squad have average/low levels in these areas they are going to crumble at that stage of the season.

More focus on your squad building I would say.

Well 4 defeats in the first 19 games then 8 in the last 19 with 6 of those in the last 11 certainly suggest that especially including 5 home defeats in the last 11 after only losing 1 at home all season before that. However looking at most of my starting 11 they have "enjoys or relishes big matches" and most are "consistent performers"!!!

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...