Why FM is decaying?

[AsytiC]

Good day folks,

As the forum is official, I decided to write a critique about the development of the game as I am a gamer since 01/02 years. Also, I will not purchase and play the game again. Since from the change in 14, I gave chance to the game; but it seems, it is not developing; conversely, it is decaying. The issue is not about loosing matches or sthg. I still get good results and achieve things.

The issue is, developers forcing the gamers to think the football in the terms of "developers". I will mention a little bit about this below with two issues under one topic. There are more things can be said; but I believe this is the fundamental reason of why the game is decaying.

Tactical System Change
-Player Roles

I do not know whose idea this was, but it was absolutely ridiculous idea. Basic reason is quite simple: no manager in the world tell his players to play as "deep lying forward" or "wing back" etc. In short, they do not use terms to their players as "role". These are the CONCEPTS, we people use to define a certain PLAYER who tended to play in a particular STYLE or TENDENCY. Managers give INSTRUCTIONS to the players, and, what players DO as a result of these INSTRUCTIONS, in addition to their STYLE or TENDENCY, makes us to use CONCEPTS. CONCEPTS that managers or fans use does not make players to DO things. Whether in-match or in training, managers try to utilize the strengths of their players; as well as, develop their weak points. 

Let me give an example from the game. Assume that you realized your team allowing spaces to the opposition at your right back due to the role you gave to your right back as "full back - attack". You can change it to "support" or "defend" role; yet, it will prevent you to choose particular individual instructions such as "cross from byline", despite you give instructions to "dribble more". This is nonsense. A back can stay in deep and can cross the ball from byline while chance occured. You can change it to the "wing back - support" role; yet, this will create the same problem; as they are tended to play higher on the pitch.

I remember in previous versions we are able to give "hold the ball" instruction to any player; yet we are not able to do it since 14. Especially, DM role is important regarding this instruction; but neither a role has this instruction; nor we can give to a player. For instance, "Move Into Channels - Hug the Touchline - Cut Inside With the Ball" removed from strikers. We were able to give these instructions to the central forwards; and these were allowing us to create or use the space of opposition defence. Now, only SC,AMC and MC positions are allowed to "move into channels" and wingers(depending on the role of course) are allowed to "cut inside" or "run wide". These examples can be increased, but I think I made my point:

The game restricting gamers and moving into a direction that force the gamers to think in the CONCEPTS of the developers; rather than allowing gamers to use their "imagination" taking inspiration from the football. There is no such a thing as "player role" in MANAGEMENT INSTRUCTIONS. As I said, these are just CONCEPTS we use to define tendecies, sytles etc. of a player.

-Tactical System

I really understand this change. The basic idea was making the game more "convenient" while changing the approach of the team to the match. Yet, familiarity factor added. The team must be familiar to the tactic depending on several factors such as creative freedom, shape, width etc. These are reasonable factors, however, the "scale" is open to question. But I will not discuss this. 

My point is regarding the basic argument: "This is more easier". Well, this is absolutely not true. 

Why?

Assume that you change your mentality from "Standart" to "Control". What are the things that changed? Only the "mentality"? Absolutely not. Tempo, width, defensive line, creative freedom... Basically, everything changes... Plus, some "invisible" factors are added such as overlapping backs etc. Who knows what else changes. So, it is simpler to click and change one thing; but in terms of "penetration"; it makes the game unplayable. Because, you must consider a large number of "things" changed just by changing one thing. In addition, you change whole structure of your team just by changing one thing (it can be whether mentality or team shape). However, in real football (and in previous FM games), the "success" comes with simple, small changes in terms of tactic. 

I will not elaborate and write anymore. I believe, I made my points as clear as I can. The game is going into a direction that is completely irrelevant to football; and creating it's own conceptual world which does not take inspiration from real management.

Good bye football manager and thanks for all these good times. 

[iMan]

I wouldn't say decaying. I think it's stagnated a bit.

Lots of nonsense additions like Brexit and Social media and no real fundamental changes. 

 

 

[KUBI]

Just now, iMan said:

I wouldn't say decaying. I think it's stagnated a bit.

Lots of nonsense additions like Brexit and Social media and no real fundamental changes. 

 

 

What kind of fundamental changes you are expecting in a football management simulation?

[forameuss]

Honestly, what "ground-breaking" changes are really possible that are absolute sure-fire hits with the entire user-base?  Anything anyone's put forward has had just as many people picking holes in it, much like it probably is when SI discuss features in-house.  

There's only so much you can do within the confines of football management.  Evolution of the game is probably all you'll get, rather than revolution.

[santy001]

14 minutes ago, KUBI said:

What kind of fundamental changes you are expecting in a football management simulation?

An extra ball on the pitch?

Personally I think we're just waiting on technology within games to advance a bit more for something that feels like it brings FM even closer to the realities of the game. There's no lack of trying in terms of the additional elements that we know are a part of the game being brought in for additional depth, just the biggest thing is getting the game to ever more accurately be able to model human reactions in the game.

[sipsi]

Personally I don't use the social media thing and play many of the leagues but I understand the idea behind and respect that.

On the other hand I'd gladly pay twice the price every year if SI would just improve the match engine(moves, variety, commentary, atmosphere...)

Have been playing for years and love the game. And I understand the business, technical side of the franchise so I won't complaint.

We could make list of thousand things here. Except the technical ones or some local details, I think they are all known by the developers.

 

[Citizen Sandman]

a circular snake IMO, the instructions you'd give individually are the reason why we label them as such, we label them because they follow the instructions in their style of play. One in the same thing TBH. I do agree, they should be a little less rigid though.

[AEJ]

The problem for me is the hard coded PI, especially for strikers

But I think that is already well known. Every tatics discussion (the GOOD ones) ends on this

So I agree with you about CONCEPTS

The dream is to have every single PI available for every single player. Even nonsensical ones. Total freedom

[AEJ]

The problem for me is the hard coded PI, especially for strikers

But I think that is already well known. Every tatics discussion (the GOOD ones) ends on this

So I agree with you about CONCEPTS

The dream is to have every single PI available for every single player. Even nonsensical ones. Total freedom

[Guest]

I don't think there will  ever be a return to total freedom for player instructions, it was that approach through the sliders that had PaulC chasing his tail addressing exploit instruction sets that were designed & distributed.

The current approach works well but I will concede it does negatively impact those who want to create/download a tactic that is a sure fire succes with any club.

[AEJ]

I am sorry but I dont want a tactic that is a sure fire succes with any club

I just want a not tall striker who can hold the ball, gets further fowardd and does not move into channels/runs with the ball often

[Craigus89]

It would be a ball-ache for a casual player to go through every player and describe exactly what is required of them. All the roles do is provide you with combinations of PI's, and some roles attract the ball more than others, so I don't really understand the argument.

The game is clearly not decaying.

[forameuss]

And a ball-ache for the developers - like Barside said - to allow it and have to support it.  The more structured it is the better for the developers.  It's about finding a balance between rigidity that aids testing and support, and flexibility that aids the developer.  True freedom is absolutely never going to happen.

[westy8chimp]

Decaying is over the top. SI have to cater for new trends (social media, which I hate), new customers, gamers with little football knowledge etc. There's nothing game-stopping at the moment... there are improvements to be made with the tactic creator and I  ignore/block/skip through about 50% of the news items and media nonsense. Some players enjoy the stuff I hate. Such is life.

 

[AEJ]

1 minute ago, forameuss said:

And a ball-ache for the developers - like Barside said - to allow it and have to support it.  The more structured it is the better for the developers.  It's about finding a balance between rigidity that aids testing and support, and flexibility that aids the developer.  True freedom is absolutely never going to happen.

Perfect

[westy8chimp]

8 minutes ago, AEJ said:

a not tall striker

diplomatic

[AEJ]

1 minute ago, westy8chimp said:

diplomatic

target man is attracting too many long balls for me :/

[YKW]

I feel really passionately in agreement with the OP about his overall point. The two main issues being that the TC doesn't really represent how a manager would approach tactical instructions and also that the instructions are grouped together in a way that obscures their real effect and prevents the user from fully understanding what they are instructing their players to do. This makes it a much more confusing experience than it needs to be, which imo also translates into a less fun experience.

The reason that I feel so strongly about this is that this has been a major concern to me for almost 4 years now. For context, the following is what I said on these forums the moment I fully understood the changes due in FM14. This is from October 13th 2013, which is before the game is out and before the demo has even been released:

Quote

Ah, "do not have show instructions with new TC" has made me realise that although I haven't changed a slider in years, I actually ALWAYS use them for reference when creating my tactic. For example showing a players sliders on one pane and then changing his role/duty in a second pane to see what the changes actually relate to. This really solidified my understanding of the game. Am I right in saying that there will be NO way to do this?

What indicators will I have of the differences between roles/duties? Just the 'attributes needed for position' screen? I feel like I could be missing something here.

Surely a manager should know exactly what he is instructing his player to do?? If the differences between the roles (in terms of what they aim to do) are only implied then it seems a bit strange.

There are two fundamental problems with how the game is designed with regards tactics - it's not realistic and it's not easy to understand. OK I appreciate that it is an immensely difficult job to address these two factors in a way that is possible, but in my humble opinion there needs to be a total change of philosophy going forward - real life should dictate what the game is, not the other way around as currently.

[Hairycull]

I look forward to the day that I can put my headset on and have a conversation with my AI wing back and tell him exactly what I want him to do.

[sporadicsmiles]

I do not understand the OP really. You point out that a manager does not go and say "be a wingback". That is obvious, but it is just a convenient way to get a player to do specific things without having to set every single parameter for every single player. We had that, it was the slider system and it was needlessly complicated, fiddly, and rampant for exploitation.

In practise anyway, you get your team (in real life and in the game) to play how you want by training and playing. That is why we have tactical familiarity and the like. 

[Maestro_DK]

Totally agree with you AsytiC! The player roles is the worst thing introduced to FM, the way it is now. Well okay the 100 same standard "news" a day is a close runner up.

 

The tactical set up has always confused me, it seems to me that you tell your team how to play one place then another place you tell the somthing completly different on the next page, and then you mix it up with a new set of instructions on some other tactical screen. 

[cns180784]

44 minutes ago, YKW said:

I feel really passionately in agreement with the OP about his overall point. The two main issues being that the TC doesn't really represent how a manager would approach tactical instructions and also that the instructions are grouped together in a way that obscures their real effect and prevents the user from fully understanding what they are instructing their players to do. This makes it a much more confusing experience than it needs to be, which imo also translates into a less fun experience.

The reason that I feel so strongly about this is that this has been a major concern to me for almost 4 years now. For context, the following is what I said on these forums the moment I fully understood the changes due in FM14. This is from October 13th 2013, which is before the game is out and before the demo has even been released:

There are two fundamental problems with how the game is designed with regards tactics - it's not realistic and it's not easy to understand. OK I appreciate that it is an immensely difficult job to address these two factors in a way that is possible, but in my humble opinion there needs to be a total change of philosophy going forward - real life should dictate what the game is, not the other way around as currently.

You're saying the game isnt realistic and you're saying the game is with sliders (like how it used to be) for TI's and PI's? so do you think that in real life in the changing room before a match, the manager will go through instructions for all of his players, showing them a piece of paper with different instructions and sliders for each? thats laughable. When the previous versions had the sliders for example the slider for passing if you had the slider all the way to the left it would say "short" then as it progressed to the right it would change to mixed, direct and long at the other end. Why is there a need for a slider?

FM now has no sliders and just instructions like "pass it shorter" "dribble less" which better replicates what a manager would tell his players in real life with regards to instructions. Not showing them something like a bar chart on a piece of paper...lol.

I should also point out the guy who started this thread complained about the lack of precise instructions he can give to his full backs and that they're limited due to the roles/duties. Thats actually wrong as for full backs as well as "defend" "support" and "attack" theres' also "automatic" and with this theres' no PI's set so you have total freedom with whatever instructions there are available to give.

I agree however with for example not being able to give certain instructions to players like telling a winger to move into channels, i totally get that and i do think SI need to work on giving the player more freedom for player instructions. The only way to get your players to do specific things is have them learn new traits. For example you want a holding mid to hold up the ball so he could learn the "stops play" trait. Problem then is if at times you dont want him to hold the ball up...tough its his trait and he'll do it so yea SI need to address this. I have struggled with player roles/duties for strikers mainly for example i'd like a forward to come deep, hold it up and play simple possession passes but the DLF- Support role includes "more risky passes" which isnt what i want. The only role i can give a forward to do this is a defensive forward but then with that he'll do a lot of closing down which you might not want especially if he has poor stamina. The TM- Support role would be ideal for the PI's he has...but then the rest of the team will just hoof the ball up to him potentially ignoring your instructions to pass it shorter for a slower patient build up play.

[OCD]

With regards to the sliders, we technically still have them. I don't believe for one second that SI have fundamentally changed the way instructions work. They've simply changed the user interface due to complaints they had that sliders were too complicated.

Say for example width, to set the "slider" to it's minimum you would need to select contain and then narrow, and to set the "slider" to it's maximum you would select overload and very wide. However if you wanted to have the width slider to it's max but not the higher tempo and everything that goes along with the "overload" mentality, you would reduce tempo, passing distance etc

It's the same principle for everything, whether it be tempo, passing distance etc

Every single tactic option we have now "stacks", whether we use a combination of team instructions and player instructions underneath the hood the traditional "sliders" are being adjusted.

Anyway all of that aside, I actually agree that I would like a bit more freedom in tactics, but as things stand I tend to resort to the more generic player roles and use play instructions to get a player playing as I like.

What I want more than anything though is more freedom and options in different transitions, for example some managers are known to play a style that gives players more creative freedom in the final third, but are very structured and disciplined in the first two thirds, we can't do anything like that. Yes we have a generic "Be more expressive" but it's not the same. At the very least surely we could have a player instruction of "Be expressive".

As things stand though creative freedom is adjusted by team shape e.g very fluid affords players more creative freedom, and also the "be more expressive" team instruction, but that tends to have an effect on every single player. Why can't we adjust it for certain players?

 

[AsytiC]

Hi again. 

I think some people still missing my main point. I try to explain again by simplifying it.

1) I never ever claimed that "cursor" system is the best and it shouldn't be changed. My argument is simple: the new system is not better than the old one.They simply force gamers to be limited in certain things. Nothing left for our "creativity" to make the game smoother. Some folk touch upon certain things such as allowing certain players to have more freedom; or, telling certain players to do certain things which is not allowed by his role etc. This is the thing that I call "gamers' creativity" and this is completely restricted. 

2) I stated that the main idea was making the gameplay simpler; and I also told that all these changes didn't make the game "simpler", but much more complicated. I appreaciate SI's effort; yet, I think I have right to tell what my experiences are as I am a gamer for 18 years. It is much easier to make changes in-match with "one click"; however, much harder to estimate the possible effects of a simple change as it changes numerous things that is impossible to follow.

Anyways, I believe I supported SI sufficiently. The game is not entertaining anymore within this layout. 

Nice weekend to everyone.

[Marabak]

I've always seen player roles as a handy shortcut to give a player in a certain position a bunch of instructions at the same time to get a certain type of role for them to perform. The problem is the fact that some of the instructions are hardcoded into that position, and some roles has other knock on effects that you can't do anything about (e.g. ball attraction for TM or playmakers which affect the rest of the team and not just that player, but isn't obvious when selected). One solution would be to greatly increase the number of roles available to cover every possible foreseeable combination, but this would be too much and a simpler solution would be to enable a manager to set a bunch of instructions at the same time (i.e. set a role) and then tweak it by being able to add or remove what ever PI they liked.

[YKW]

41 minutes ago, cns180784 said:

You're saying the game isnt realistic and you're saying the game is with sliders (like how it used to be) for TI's and PI's? so do you think that in real life in the changing room before a match, the manager will go through instructions for all of his players, showing them a piece of paper with different instructions and sliders for each? thats laughable. When the previous versions had the sliders for example the slider for passing if you had the slider all the way to the left it would say "short" then as it progressed to the right it would change to mixed, direct and long at the other end. Why is there a need for a slider?

FM now has no sliders and just instructions like "pass it shorter" "dribble less" which better replicates what a manager would tell his players in real life with regards to instructions. Not showing them something like a bar chart on a piece of paper...lol..

Haha I may have made a big mistake in not clarifying my opinion of sliders. You are totally correct here in terms of realism and the sliders. I definitely agree and I don't think sliders are realistic in themselves, I don't think there's a need for them to return. I only inadvertently mentioned them in the quote to show that in my opinion many of the issues that people have with creating tactics are actually a logical result of a system set up in the way it is: 1. because it is based on terminology that isn't common to football management, and 2. because it's too difficult to understand your own instructions due to the large number of things affected by one tactical change.

These two things mean that traversing the gap between "what's in my head" and "What happens on the pitch" is a needlessly monumental task. Your experiences in your last paragraph are kind of in line with this, and I also hate the way choosing a role changes the tactics even more, like you say with players hoofing long balls up to a target man, or in a case that's annoyed me, lobbing long balls up ahead of an Advanced Forward.

 

[Scrench]

Main issue is that a regular user have to go trough a dozen articles written by other players to understand what each instruction do.

[cns180784]

1 hour ago, Marabak said:

I've always seen player roles as a handy shortcut to give a player in a certain position a bunch of instructions at the same time to get a certain type of role for them to perform. The problem is the fact that some of the instructions are hardcoded into that position, and some roles has other knock on effects that you can't do anything about (e.g. ball attraction for TM or playmakers which affect the rest of the team and not just that player, but isn't obvious when selected). One solution would be to greatly increase the number of roles available to cover every possible foreseeable combination, but this would be too much and a simpler solution would be to enable a manager to set a bunch of instructions at the same time (i.e. set a role) and then tweak it by being able to add or remove what ever PI they liked.

This i agree with and should be the way forward with FM18.

[SKELETOR]

I agree the game is 'decaying'. Too much focus on touch and handheld and no notable new features in the game since the sidebar introduction and tactical boxes instead of sliders implemented 3 years back or more. Aesthetic features are novelties and for someone like myself who watches classic 2d match engine improvements mean very little. People say well what could you do, 2 balls on the pitch etc. There is a thread with hundreds of ideas on this very forum, start there SI. Online is the one key area I would suggest is the future but since the failed attempt at FML, SI seem to have completely neglected online. When you consider games like Call of Duty, where the majority of players bypass campaign to go straight into multiplayer, why would SI deem it not important and give us 'new shouts'. Are sales declining and they can't implement new features? is it the other versions hogging staff/programmer time? why is the game not moving into online play or any new areas of note for serious gamers? or worst and most probable, is the game heading towards noobs/casual gamers on tablets and phones and ditching the fanbase like myself?

on a side-note, I haven't been able to get into the last 2 games though I have tried extensively, how about you release a plug in and play tactic into the forums SI...so I can at least enjoy the game while I wait for you to make some actual improvements. 

[zigaliro]

2 hours ago, Scrench said:

Main issue is that a regular user have to go trough a dozen articles written by other players to understand what each instruction do.

This! Every instruction should be explained very detailed IN game i think.

[pikeal]

Agreed - there should be more in-game tuition. I see where they are going with the new ass man suggestions before a match...but asking me to constantly remove "retain possession" before the match and then 5 mins in asking me to click the "retain possession" button is a bit silly

[Svenc]

In terms of instructions it were probably useful if SI would invite people into the beta testing process that struggle with instructions and look the part to provide useful.

No idea how diverse that pool of players called up really is -- but from this forums it is usually the more well-versed that get to participate in the processes, I reckon. This is probably natural to an extent, as somebody who has gone through the process of "getting to grips" with all is less likely to pardon the French, rant (or aimlessly complain about everything and nothing specific, even with better intentions). Yes, FM has its own vocabularly that is... somewhat detached from real football, even post sliders. And yes... I reckon to SI themselves it isn't apparent anymore where additionally feedback would be needed, and where not. Even if it is a fine line walking between spoon feeding everything and giving feedback, depending on the area of the game.

It's like that Maths professor back at college who was that into his numbers and algorithms that he had the habit of checking whether we were able to catch up with his on the most obvious topics --- he couldn't tell much anymore what was bloody obvious and what wasn't as to him spending years on his numbers everything was taken for granted. That one post above though arguing the game were being "dumbed down" for the casual folk and and but a paragraph later demanding SI to provide a plug&play tactics (let alone a match engine that were intentionally programmed for such an approach to be viable and fail proof 100% with any possible combination of teams) is pretty special though, no offense.

Also the aforementioined assistant advice is bound to confuse if you take it at face value. This is based on match stats. As such your assistant is best to be understood as the guy who points out curious numbers -- whether they impact you is up to you to decide. The aforementioned "retain possession" advice kicks in as soon as the pass completion etc. falls below a thresh hold. What if you don't want to play a possession game? You can be top of the tables with a seasonal pass completion rate of 65% (a bit like Leicester last season). Your assistant would certainly encourage you to retain the ball all season. The problem isn't that it is in... but rather that it encourages to be understood as something that it's never been (and likely never be, as programming an intelligent assistant must be a full-time job taking years itself).

[OCD]

2 hours ago, pikeal said:

Agreed - there should be more in-game tuition. I see where they are going with the new ass man suggestions before a match...but asking me to constantly remove "retain possession" before the match and then 5 mins in asking me to click the "retain possession" button is a bit silly

Yeah the assistant manager's suggestions always make me laugh, one minute he's suggesting to play a more direct game, and then 5 minutes later tells me to play a short passing game.

I pretty much disable as many notifications as possible from any members of staff, and the only notifications in match that I receive are injuries etc.

 

[Powermonger]

Having played FM on and off since CM 01/02 days, I'll chip in and say I quite liked the changes of FM moving towards roles and duties, it makes far more sense then the confusion that was sliders before. Making one change with a slider required adjustments to other sliders, it was a nightmare and counter-intuitive plus unrealistic. To me roles and duties allow me as a manager to quickly tell a player how I want him to play without having to dial in the precise settings, it is then up to the player how he executes them.

Sure improvements cans be made but I don't think we want FM to go back to an overcomplicated system.

Have you posted up any suggestions in the Feature Request subforum to help SI improve the game?

[Rashidi]

I can just picture managers going to the pitch with a tablet, telling the players I want you to play one notch higher..

 

"Joe I want you to be on Mentality 5, Stephen you're on mentality 4. Now Joe you are on Normal and and Stephen you're on defensive." 

 

Joe and Stephen walk off.

Stephen:."How in the world are you Normal? I mean you're just one notch higher than me",

Joe: "Dude at least he didn't give you 18 for creative freedom, I don't know what to do now" 

 

The two strikers walk off dumbfounded.

 

 

[LCFCEaves31]

12 hours ago, Scrench said:

Main issue is that a regular user have to go trough a dozen articles written by other players to understand what each instruction do.

Agree. While you will eventually find what you're looking for on forums with people's help, it should be explained better in game. 

[Mr U Rosler]

I don't see why we cant have a 'blank' role for each position for those who wish to create their own behaviours as well as predetermined roles for those who don't.

We even had 'slider' and 'role' based tactics available simultaneously for a while.

I don't accept the argument that this will lead to exploits, after 15+ years development of the match engine this cannot be the case.

I'm afraid to say my gut feeling is the game is slowly but surely 'dumming down' to attract and retain new users and casual gamers.

A perfectly sensible business decision which will eventually alienate the small percentage of hard core users like us.

[Preveza]

18 hours ago, forameuss said:

And a ball-ache for the developers - like Barside said - to allow it and have to support it.  The more structured it is the better for the developers.  It's about finding a balance between rigidity that aids testing and support, and flexibility that aids the developer.  True freedom is absolutely never going to happen.

Wouldn't go that far as to say never. Games have come so far in the last decade

[Govnar1]

10 hours ago, Svenc said:

...Yes, FM has its own vocabularly that is... somewhat detached from real football, even post sliders...

Somewhat detached! It would be simpler if it was written in Klingon language and alphabet, then at least it would be obvious that I don't know what it means. And how do you learn FM vocabulary? By testing? It would take years to isolate particular effect from complex interactions and pure randomness. And that is ignoring the first obstacle: did I set it wrong or are they ignoring my instructions?

Same goes for in game statistics, they are much less useful when you don't know exactly what they represent. They are just obfuscating things even further. Great example of misleading stats in FM are clear cut chance and half chance.

Then we come to inevitable and understandable limitations like inability to coach players what to do in particular, often repeated situations, that makes many elements and thus whole tactics and even philosophies used in real life football unrepplicable in FM. This is made worse by long standing ME issues like really high number of interceptions.  

Finally many FM players, at least in my experience, have absolutely unrealistic expectations of success. And neither game nor this forum is helping them understand this or feel that what they have achieved would actually be considered very good in real life. It's not your tactics, you are not underachieving and ME is not rigged; prior to current season Mourinho was ahead of all Premier league managers with win percentage of 66% in two stints at Chelsea (2004-2007 and 2013-2015). Yes, that's the Special One helped by Abramovic's billions.

This inevitably leads to frustration, anxiety and loss of confidence.

[shirajzl]

Whenever this discussion pops up, we invariably come to two conclusions:

1) Complete tactical freedom, like sliders of the past or potential role customization lead to heavy exploits. The fact the ME has been developed for so long doesn't mean the exploits would be stopped.

2) Lack of proper in-game documentation and explanation of game mechanics. This is where FM is absolutely atrocious, especially if you compare it to other complex, multi-layered video games. However, SI have stated on several occasions that complete transparency of game mechanics (which is normal in many other video games) would be spoon-feeding, which is what they want to avoid.

When a regular, average user starts to tackle the tactics, struggles and then goes on to watch, i.e. Rashidi's videos, the first question that pops to mind is "How the f*ck was I supposed to know this?". The information on advanced concepts is simply not there (in the game), when it should be.

 

[Wells]

Lack of proper in-game documentation and explanation of game mechanics.

That sums it up for me.

[Sussex Hammer]

1 hour ago, Mr U Rosler said:

I don't see why we cant have a 'blank' role for each position for those who wish to create their own behaviours as well as predetermined roles for those who don't.

 

This definitely.  I have struggled in the last three incarnations to find any lone striker role that will score goals in a 4141 system.  Depending on the role you either need a top dribbler, someone who holds the ball up well or passes well or ideally all three and that's just for starters.  Four of the eight striker roles have hard coded "dribble more", three have "hold up ball" so the only roles you can choose without more dribbling or hub are poacher or defensive forward.  Yet poacher only is available on an attack duty and both a defensive forward and a poacher have hard coded "less risky passes" plus I have my doubts that either role is 100% suitable for a  lone striker anyway. 

If I look for a player with 15 for dribbling, 15 for passing and 15 for finishing which just about covers the basics of what you need for most hard coded striker roles adding my filters on regarding possible targets I have four players as options and only one is an out and out striker.

There really need to be a basic striker role that you can customise without having dribbling etc as hard coded options. 

[Cougar2010]

41 minutes ago, Govnar1 said:

Finally many FM players, at least in my experience, have absolutely unrealistic expectations of success. And neither game nor this forum is helping them understand this or feel that what they have achieved would actually be considered very good in real life. It's not your tactics, you are not underachieving and ME is not rigged; prior to current season Mourinho was ahead of all Premier league managers with win percentage of 66% in two stints at Chelsea (2004-2007 and 2013-2015). Yes, that's the Special One helped by Abramovic's billions.

This inevitably leads to frustration, anxiety and loss of confidence.

Its not just unrealistic expectations when it comes to results its unrealistic expectations when it comes to instructions.

Maybe its the type of gamer that FM attracts but many seem to want to micro manage to the ength degree and aren't happy unless they can position a player on the exact blade of grass they want him for every second of the 90 minutes.  Football and more relevantly management simply doesn't work that way.  You aren't supposed to have that level of control because managers don't have that level of control IRL.  Instructions should be fuzzy/hazy rather than absolute its just that some users struggle with that.

This links to what someone posted early about not understanding what instructions did.  Personally I think SI have been improving that area over the last couple of years and a lot seem fairly straight forward - Examples include pass shorter, tackle harder, exploit flanks, higher tempo etc all seem fairly easy to understand IMO.  Yes there are others that still need work, mentality, duties & structure spring to mind but again you should never expect absolute control over the players.

 

[Svenc]

 

3 hours ago, Govnar1 said:

Same goes for in game statistics, they are much less useful when you don't know exactly what they represent. They are just obfuscating things even further. Great example of misleading stats in FM are clear cut chance and half chance.

Yes, and it's also reported in the bugs forums, as always for not being reliable. In parts players are misleading themselves here naturally too. Whilst the definition on FM is bound to differ somewhat, it still helps to at least do some research on real life data, which goes for everything. For instance, hat big chances are missed regularly in football, all the time. There was EPL starters last season that missed 80% of theirs. One on ones... ditto. The same goes for other stuff, such as overall shot conversions, and more. It would naturally help if there was further rather basic stats introduced. If your assistant were able to point out that despite 30+ shots, and 12 on target, none of them were actually worked off actually play and you still don't react some, that is your fault. As such stats aren't in the game, even the post-match report would confirm you that everything was Golden and your side just unfortunate to not score (or score more).
 

Quote

This is made worse by long standing ME issues like really high number of interceptions.  

That though in big parts simply a stats issue. FM counts pretty much every incident where the ball ends up with the other team an interception (picked up lose balls, passes reaching the opposition). Stat outlets only count instances where defenders step up to to intercept a move. About the "unrealistic expectations", who's fault is that though. Historically, yes the game too, there is still exploits going everywhere that give the impression that 1) all the data research going into it as well as everything wouldn't matter much, as depending on a simple pick of tactics alone, you could pick a subpar team and win win win 2) due to those oft looking illogically that the game were not aimed to reward basic football or team sports logics. This can be fun, which is why it's viable. What such players expect of the game is something completely different to others, though. Even if they had good to great results and vastly outperformed AI taking over the same teams, let alone the real teams they still may not be happy even if their own contribution during it all would be not very much. Feedback of such players shouldn't be valued that highly at least when it comes down to topics such as accessibility, options, feedback and difficulty.

At the end of the day this is a footie sim, so if somebody expects to go into here and can't get his 38-0-0 record anymore with his crap side and no effort of his own put in, or his world class forward to get an alien 70% of his shots on target, or his team down to taking but like a complete fanatasy 15% of their overall attempts from outside the box, well the game is aimed at football fans. There is feedback lacking and FM language (mentality..). But...if there wouldn't be people struggling a tad, that would also be a terrible sign. The problem was if they would be struggling for the wrong reasons, which is, having a grasp on the basics and translating that into the game. However, simply noting down "I know football" is no evidence of that, which is why SI may consider to invite a broader range of players to play test. Else this runs the risk of becoming inbred, and people who are accustomed to "FM vocabulary" are those that give the the feedback, which runs the risk of building barriers between the "scene" and FM's general audience. Whilst some balance needs to be struck between making things accessible and offering complexity (the roles talked about), the people to really go to for that is the actually football contacts too.

[YKW]

This is a thread that I was following a while ago, which was a really interesting attempt at translating real life concepts into FM.

This is the main link from that thread which gives a tactical analysis of the Leverkusen team from real life.

http://theinsidechannel.com/guide-roger-schmidts-tactics-bayer-leverkusen/

If you read through that I think what's most striking is that a) it makes sense and is interesting, and b) there is not really much overlap in terms of the concepts being assessed and the terminology used. For example the following quotes

Quote

Gegenpressing basically consists of two distinct parts:

• Most of the team moves slightly to cut off passing lanes so that the player on the ball cannot make a pass.
• 2-3 of the players closest to the ball converge on it simultaneously in order to force the turnover.

Combine that with the following details about this pressing style from this link (read the whole thing, it's great) http://spielverlagerung.com/2014/10/07/counter-or-gegenpressing/

Quote

Gegenpressing means to press the opposition right after losing possession, i.e. to press as an organized unit the moment you transition to defense.

Many teams also have problems deciding when to stop pressing, i.e. when do you stop pressing if you can’t win the ball back? Therefore, there is a commonly used theory – the five second rule.

If the team hasn’t recovered the ball within five seconds and there is no chance of immediately winning it, they should fall back into their defensive formation.

It is recommended that the strategic basics of Gegenpressing be coached in order to develop a flexible, situation-specific length of time for counterpressing.

Now when I consider the options available to me in FM, the first thing that strikes me is things like the bolded are mostly excluded from the game's language. Secondly, implementing the counter press as outlined in the above links would need me to make tactical choices in basically every area - formation, mentality, fluidity, team instructions, roles and duties and PIs and OIs. It's all linked. So not only is it hard to identify why a player doesn't cut off a passing lane for example, anything I do to fix that will have knock on effects on other things, so now my counter press might not be working for some new reason. Thirdly, if making a counter press happen needs settings in all of the available areas to work as close to real life as possible, then surely it's the only strategy I can try and implement without also changing the settings that give me my counter press?

What I also find interesting about this is that some people who read the above links will now start counting to five when watching teams press after losing the ball. When was the last time you thought "ah this team are playing very fluid today," or "clearly this team are closing down much more as opposed to just 'more.'"

I'm not very knowledgeable when it comes to phases of play and transitions etc but wouldn't it make more sense if the game clearly explained what these are and perhaps even gave us tactical options within each of these stages?

For example gegenpressing or the counter press is clearly a defensive transitioning strategy, which begins at the point you lose possession and ends (in the above example) after 5 seconds. After this, the defensive stage becomes active. It seems silly that so many tactical options and possible interpretations govern these 5 seconds.

I feel I would be having more fun if I could just choose that my defensive transition strategy is a counter press, or some other strategy that was explained in the game and which I could easily witness in real life. Then the challenges would be things like 1. the suitability of a counter press in terms of my opponents, their tactics and player abilities, 2. the suitability of my players to the strategy (highlight attributes for -> Counter Press), 3. The familiarity of my players to this specific strategy, 4. The suitability of me, my coaching team and our available facilities in teaching the players the style as quickly as possible, and dealing with or preventing any injuries or fitness problems that may come with this style. 5. The happiness of the fans in terms of their expectations, and the happiness/input of the board etc.

The best bit is that no part of the difficulty is accidentally changing or choosing something that you didn't mean to and had no idea was even involved.

[Govnar1]

Either my English is terrible or I am unable to express my self clearly in writing as I haven't yet succeeded to convey a message on this forum. Maybe I'm the one speaking Klingon language . 

[Kcinnay]

For me, one of the biggest flaws in FM is the dogma that the formation is the defensive set-up, which isn't in accordance with the implemented player roles and the stratas where those player roles are located (the in-game logics) nor with the way people refer to real life football formations (football logics).

In game, there are some roles that are exclusively destined for the AM strata, like the enganche, the raumdeuter, the inside forward... Popular roles when you play the very popular 4-2-3-1 formation. But when people tend to struggle with their 4-2-3-1, the first advice they are given here, is: "Remember that your formation is your defensive formation. Try a 4-4-1-1 and mimic the AML/AMR roles by tweaking the wide midfielder role." There's almost literally no real life team that defends in a 4-2-3-1 formation with 3 AM's, but still, there are plenty of teams that are referred to as a team playing a 4-2-3-1. José Mourinho's Man Utd is such a team. They defend as a 4-4-1-1, but they are referred to as a 4-2-3-1. Simeone's Atlético often defends as a 4-4-2-0, but are referred to as a 4-4-2. In game, to mimic the positioning of Griezmann or Gameiro, you need to play them as an AM, which mimics their defensive behaviour, but makes them play too low when in possession. It's just plain wrong and contradictory. It's in fashion to make strikers defend very deeply, but there's simply no way to make them zonally do that in FM. I've been forced to play strikerless for that reason, but my most advanced players aren't positioned high enough in possession, and, even more annoying, in game, my strikers are referred to as (attacking) midfielders. If the game wants to use the logic of team screen = defensive formation, then they should make it able to use striker roles in the AM strata (and treat them as strikers in match commentary and post match analysis), to use AM roles in the M strata, and so on.

Just in that way, a simple game like PES feels much more natural, where you can set-up your basic kick-off formation, your defensive formation and your offensive formation, where the basic formation is the formation shown in the pre-match. You can be a team referred to as playing a 4-2-3-1 but actually defending like a 4-2DM-2-1-1.

I liked the earlier FM's more in those aspects, where the formations with the arrows allowed you to create a hybrid. The screen showed the basic formation. If you wanted to push someone up in possession, you needed to give him an arrow forward. If you wanted someone track back when out of possession, you gave him an arrow backwards. Just like on a real tactical board. You played a 4-2-3-1 (for example), you defended like a 4-4-1-1, attacked like a 2-4-1-3. Simple.

 

[Overmars]

I agree with Kcinnay above. What I would love to see is more options with player positioning and formations.

I actually really like the player role system of assigning instructions to players. It makes that process very convenient.

[MBarbaric]

to be anything like real life this game needs to introduce on the ball/off the ball phases. as @Kcinnay rightly spots, team defend and attack with different shapes and roles. currently in game we have a hybrid system that doesn't really convey how things work in real.

I.E. if you put CM in defensive duty within 442, when your team is defending he will be slightly behind the rest of the line (if other players are on support duty). This creates a lot of prblems for defending team as the other CM will have more space to cover often moving into the CMd's zone. This will essentially put one player on top of the other in the middle of the pitch. This, naturally creates huge space in center of the field. completely nullifying the role of CMd and whole defensive unit.

Defending as a whole is a huge problem within the game and this basic positioning of players in relation to the ball-goal-oppostion-teammate is off compared to real in many instances. More advanced concepts as defending from front, gegen pressing or pressing in general, can not work at all until this basic positioning within the defensive unit is resolved. Mantra about "selected formation is your defensive formation" is really not valid as nobody in whole world defends in 4231.

To be more precise, plenty of teams might, but they will do it when they play high pressing game where the team is high up the pitch and tries to win the ball in opposition half. Then, 4-2-3-1 (or any combination with lot of players in advanced positions) might work as those players in attacking third will partly man mark in order to cut passing lanes and partly chase the opposition on the ball.

However, once the pressing is evaded, every team will drop into basic defensive shape where wingers get deeper in line with central midfielders.  This of course, won't be true for specific situations when the team needs a goal late in game, but normally, nobody leaves 3 players in attack while defending. Whatever the defensive shape is, you wil seldom see more than one player at the time going about without defensive instructions. Even in lower levels of football.

[Svenc]

5 hours ago, Govnar1 said:

Either my English is terrible or I am unable to express my self clearly in writing as I haven't yet succeeded to convey a message on this forum. Maybe I'm the one speaking Klingon language . 

If you were more specific what you meant as being "Klingon" in the game? Is it a specific set of team instructions, a role, the mentalities, is it how everything is being linked. I'm sure you have a viable point, you had some in terms of stats as well. Incredibly fantastically good ones, actually! Namely, that the stats are nowhere defined in the game, not one of them. If they aren't defined, players are expected to work backwards from watching, which is madness. An exclusively stats focus can always be problematic. But that doesn't excuse that in-game stats aren't defined anywhere, in particular the subjective ones. I still don't know what a "mistake" is --and whether it would be useful to know.

Now some may argue that some stats may be totally obvious but: Take the shots... that is fluid to change slightly depending on the release also. At least there was a time when SI never counted attempts immediately blocked +1. The subjective chance stats are the totally worst stats in the game by far for far too many reasons to discuss them all. However, you were pointed out to differences before. The huge number of interceptions counted, which you attribute to huge ME issue; they are largely there because SI count a completely different thing, or several things. However, such is nowhere stated in the game, which is bad.

None of that would help somebody who isn't familiar with footie data. With a player base of hundreds of thousands it is fair to assume that for a significant amount of them FM is the only exposure to data going slightly beyond TV audience levels. The perennial screenshots and rants posted putting emphasis on shot counts and possession are arguably proof enough this is the case. Not that it is their fault. It's not a requirement to play the game. But neither does it hurt, and in the cases where things are comparable (most of them are), can help.