Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
Totalfootballfan

Team Statistics in real life vs Team Statistic in FM

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, MBarbaric said:

If not, they can run this game as is for next 5 years and then they will have to find something else to do. Maybe long awaited "Chairman manager" :D


Even in five years from now and no touch, it would still be the most advanced management games sim on the market , despite its obviously imitations. Even if their would be several rival games springing up, inevitably start-ups anyway. This is talking 30 years of playing experience starting on Commodore 64/Amstrad 128k, and having witnessed pretty much any major attempt at match simulation. There's aspects where purely arcade sims a la Fifa are superior, arguably also in how they model zonal defending some. However their patterns of play are completely removed from football, as they have to be due to the huge compressing of playing time. They're dribble/arcade fests, like matches consisting of nothing but YouTube highlight reels. They'd also make for horrible management game engines thus, no least because they don't even simulate all that much. To me there were some odd decisions made in the past though, for instance the forwards, it's not as if they always were like that -- on FM 2015, they were even "customizable" to the degree initially that they would (unrealistically?) track back as far as your own box, further than any aggressive advanced midfielder. I don't think the game will be the same in 5 years time. Significantly rewrites have been made in the past, Every tech has limitations.

Still this thread is about adressing some of the balance in the current builds. It's not as if top teams ever were that "toned down" as they oft are now, were they? There were versions where you could put up totally schoolboy tactics, the individual players would still guarantee the points. If you forced the likes of Messi into having no options at all, they would "statistically" complete up to 20 dribbles per game, depending on which, as they would naturally try to start some each time that happened before getting dispossed.  For anybody who thinks this is nothing like football at all, which to me is a bit of an exaggeration, I don't think any much tweaking will fix it, ever. It may not even be purely technical limitations. It may relate to how SI view football, too, in parts. There's many aspects of this I prefer over prior releases, and the most puzzling decision for FM 17 (wide midfielders) is nicely adressed. However, the balance, which is also recorded in this thread, and may well relate to AI tactical decisions too, it hurts a bit the believability of the game worlds. All this is pretty repeatably on full sim after all, rather than purely one-offs. There too seems to be a struggle or a fear for kicking AI managers into the next gear, at least at the top, which the stats collected here are a sign of too after all. Some of their decisions seem erroneous.

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Payaso
55 minutes ago, MBarbaric said:

I don't think they are unwilling. Without a doubt, they know how poor the defensive phase in the game is. They know off the ball movement in the offensive phase is horrible, they know players act as individuals (or pairs at best) on the pitch instead of as a coherent team. There are plenty of people in SI that had or still coach and understand the game of football. As there is no significant change in the ME in last 3 years, I think they really have hit the wall with how much they can do with current ME. They try each year to improve one thing just to break the other and I believe they already have new ME being developed. If not, they can run this game as is for next 5 years and then they will have to find something else to do. Maybe long awaited "Chairman manager" :D

Might be so as the engines between FM 2015 to 18 are pretty much the same with all of them having problems to produce anything sensible compared to real football and goalscoring/chances created scenarios along with stats are highly repetitive. I might as well toss FM to the bin or use commentary only until there is a new engine. Sad that I didn't realize this before this year's release. It makes the hope grow when you basically give up the hope on the previous version really early on and it creates an illusion that hey this year it's going to be better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, MrPompey said:

There will also be difference, some due to real life differences and FM differences in how the game compares to real life

2 Questions

1. Were you running the full match engine for all leagues that you collected stats on? or were the matches simulated . This is a key aspect

2. If you saw AI managed Leicester win the league in FM, would you (and I for that matter) put it down to silly ol' FM not replicating real life football

FM AI Manager Limitations

The AI Managed teams have limitations in how the adapt when losing late in a game e.g. they will likely only use the attacking formation thats associated with the AI manager. When FM switches formations it displaces players e.g. playing 4-2-3-1 wide with  say your AML and AMR roles filled by the best players in that position, going 4-2-4 often displaces one of those players and you may end up with 1 or none recognised strikers because FM jumbles the players with different formations, in addition if you switched to 4-2-4 with a sub on the bench i assume you may take off the AMC and put a recognised striker up front or even go to a back 3 putting a DC up front. Its these sort of tweaks which real life manager's do that FM can't do tactically. Additionally the real life manager would have many more attacking formations for such a situation than the single one the AI manager has

 In regards to question 2, this is why it's important to run numerous simulations and focus on various events within the game as opposed to getting too caught up in the outcomes.

 

I've got numerous simulations running (all fully simulated) but I've only gone as far as taking them up to game week 12 so far (in line with real life). For that reason I don't care too much about the fact that Southampton are top of the league in one simulation or that Liverpool are 15th in another. 

What I do care about however are things like the passing rates:

yHlHtMj.png

I've added a bug report related to the above, which gives some insight into the significant difference in passing numbers between the ME simulation and real life.

 

Some of the AI manager limitations you've highlighted aren't particularly insurmountable, such as throwing on more attacking orientated players from the bench when chasing a game.  i'd imagine that those kind of AI manager improvements aren't especially inhibited by the ME itself (as opposed to pressing behaviour of players), though it's perhaps foolish of me to assume as such :) 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@tkg

I think it might be useful if you tried to run numerous tests for a full season and compare it to real life numbers. Not concentrating on individual teams as they change managers/styles but on overall numbers. especially if you could separate pass numbers in each third. I can provide these numbers from real leagues if you need it, but can't do it for the game as I don't have fm18.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On that front, I think the shots / SOT FOR/CONCEDED would be more relevant. Not merely due to possible ME / AI limitations. But on FM and football, they should be fare more indicative of a team's generally performance. The shots conceded you would need to manually collect yourself. Without them thrown into the mix, that is half the picture. The season when Stuttgart where relgated, for a while they had as many shots (also on target) as sides being top of the tables. However, the also conceded a bucket load, all indicative naturally also of their then managers tactical style, which was quite risky. Come the end of the season they scored as if competing for Europe, but conceded as if they were worse than miserably HSV. 2nd Bundesliga, here we come.

I think comparing purely pass stats you're catching mainly noise / AI/ME quirks plus. At the end of the day, matches on this are about scoring goals and preventing them. If top sides in real football drop significant amounts of points, there is not seldom some finishing woes involved. In-game, that doesn't at all look like it, as far lesser sides get just as many shots going, pretty oftenly. Plus if top sides underperform, they do so via underperforming significantly in the shot rankings too. In real football, take a look at Ronaldo, even his purely shot data in the league is pretty impressive: 1 goal from 60 attempts. It's unlikely to last even without further tuning on Zidane's front, very likely as it's unheard of for his, even considering his adventurous decisions. At least it may not be a bug as such if the AI can get Lewandowski down to 3 goals from 15 matches in this. :D

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've collected the data for 3 simulations so far, all for the premier league. The overall average number of passes is 135% compared to real life (whoscored data).  135% of passing overall isn't too outrageous, but as my chart indicates the increase isn't spread uniformly across all teams. Weaker teams tend to have a much higher pass rate than real life, upwards of 175% for example.

Although it's only 3 simulations and not full seasons i'm seeing quite a tight range between the simulations, suggesting to me that although additional simulations will increase accuracy I likely won't see a dramatic shift from what I've already collected.

For example the average passes pg in the premier league this season (upto match week 11) was 449.7. My 3 simulations came to 581,587,572 (avg of 580)

Studying the specifics of these passes is naturally much more time consuming. My analysis so far seems to suggest that weaker teams or defensive setups are able to pass far too readily in the defensive and middle third. 

Interestingly i'm also finding that these increased pass rates aren't as highly correlated to possession as you would expect. It's entirely possible for a team to have 40% of possession in the ME but attempt in excess of 600 passes per game.

 

Edited by tkg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, tkg said:

Interestingly i'm also finding that these increased pass rates aren't as highly correlated to possession as you would expect. It's entirely possible for a team to have 40% of possession in the ME but attempt in excess of 600 passes per game.

 

Very likely connected to the fact that FM goes by a chess piece clock method of collecting poss. It's the time a team is in possession measured for the percentages, rather than the relative number/amount of passes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Svenc said:

On that front, I think the shots / SOT FOR/CONCEDED would be more relevant. Not merely due to possible ME / AI limitations. But on FM and football, they should be fare more indicative of a team's generally performance. The shots conceded you would need to manually collect yourself. Without them thrown into the mix, that is half the picture. The season when Stuttgart where relgated, for a while they had as many shots (also on target) as sides being top of the tables. However, the also conceded a bucket load, all indicative naturally also of their then managers tactical style, which was quite risky. Come the end of the season they scored as if competing for Europe, but conceded as if they were worse than miserably HSV. 2nd Bundesliga, here we come.

I think comparing purely pass stats you're catching mainly noise / AI/ME quirks plus. At the end of the day, matches on this are about scoring goals and preventing them. If top sides in real football drop significant amounts of points, there is not seldom some finishing woes involved. In-game, that doesn't at all look like it, as far lesser sides get just as many shots going, pretty oftenly. In real football, take a look at Ronaldo, even his purely shot data in the league is pretty impressive: 1 goal from 60 attempts. It's unlikely to last even without further tuning on Zidane's front, very likely as it's unheard of for his, even considering his adventurous decisions. At least it may not be a bug as such if the AI can get Lewandowski down to 3 goals from 15 matches in this. :D

i agree that shots/goals are likely a key metric, but my reason for looking at passing was because of it's role in style  and strategy. When we talk about playing like a certain team or style it's rarely in regards to shot counts.  Whereas passing length, direction, urgency and position gives a greater feel for how a team actually plays and it's individual characteristics.

If all the team in the ME are passing in the same manner, then the result (imo) is that we see less difference is styles of play. West Brom and Barcelona become one and the same, stylistically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Svenc said:

Very likely connected to the fact that FM goes by a chess piece clock method of collecting poss. It's the time a team is in possession measured for the percentages, rather than the relative number/amount of passes.

Yeah, very true.

Though what this indicates is that defensive/weaker teams are attempting a roughly equal number of passes with less time on the ball.  Normally i'd expect less time with the ball to result in less passes.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tkg said:

yHlHtMj.png

 

 

there are some huge differences between those stats. look at Stoke for example. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha yeah, Stoke and Burnley are passing machines compared to their real life counterparts :D 

The main points of interest for me were:

  • That there are more passes overall in the ME - Every team except Man City enjoyed a higher pass count
  • That the drop in pass count beteween the top 6 and the rest of the pack isn't as noticable in the ME.
  • That the overall variance of pass rates is much lower/tighter in the ME.

I've noticed a few people mentioning that the current ME feels a bit arcade like and that teams that are usually dominant don't feel quite as superior as expected. I think these pass rates may be a contributing factor. Though they are probably more of a symptom than a direct cause.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Payaso

And all these passes with defenders hardly touching the ball. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, tkg said:

i agree that shots/goals are likely a key metric, but my reason for looking at passing was because of it's role in style  and strategy.

 

Oh yeah, definitely a thing, also important to make the game world more believable. This is nothing new naturally as of FM, AI struggling with that. It can be a struggle for the human "brain" to put it all in the UI (though arguably it shouldn't be too straight forward, as putting up some sensible, coherent system takes some thought on a manager's part, after all). I personally think the key would be dialing it a few back as to where Champ Man started for the AI either way -- the bits here about "picking playing styles" (European Champions was the Prototype to Champ Man). I like that "cooking analogy" brought up by @MBarbaric in particular. As has been demonstrated, this has limited to do with the mentalities picked as such (well, to an extent). But possession styles for instance are achievable on more aggressive mentalities too, whith the AI traditionally dialing menalities up and down AFAIK

a) based on their traits edited ( a more aggressive manager may switch to something more aggressive more readily)
b) The opposition (unlikely that Burnley would go all out at Chelsea)
c) The scoreline. Naturally, it would be illogical and counter productive if the AI would go "contain" when chasing leads 10 minutes from time.

The above graphcis are fantastic, but they naturally identify symptoms, similar to the shot stats I posted. What SI usually look for is match reports. I'd assume that a few tactical mods would have made suggestions throughout the years, but seeing some of the picks, I dunno if they ever get through. Fr' instance, this is a City match I just opened. Basically their first ever attack. Whilst there is a case to be made about how a midfield trio positions, and how FM models "width" (my big post on the last page about players easily isolated thus): It is clear that the role selection here is all wrong if that would be to ever be a "Guardiola" system meant to prioritize retention some. It's something geared towards getting in behind the lines / the ball forward quickly. The attacking three runs ahead completely, nobody actually stays deeper to support play at all. Which seems the traditional modus operandi of AI though. This isn't primarily about the mentality, it's the aggressive roles they pick, like when they play Leicester at home and "attack" from the off. Duly the move breaks down quickly. Would never happen with less aggressive role combos, which also influencese "Less aggressive AI". The reason they can oft retain easier is because they typically have players on less aggressive roles -- and are typically using a less top heavy formation to begin with.

rbQdj4f.jpg

 

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, tkg said:

I've noticed a few people mentioning that the current ME feels a bit arcade like and that teams that are usually dominant don't feel quite as superior as expected. I think these pass rates may be a contributing factor. Though they are probably more of a symptom than a direct cause.

 

poor pressing and general defensive behaviour, for example players running back to 'default defensive position' when the ball is lost, instead of trying to win the ball back high up the pitch.  strikers droping deep to colect clearences is still too effective, central defenders should chase them and mark tighter, especially when playing against lone striker formations. ball control and first touch is too good many times. 

result of the above is that smaller teams playing with more defensive tacics which are less risky and hence more posession orineted can dominate posession especially against very agressive teams playing fast attacking football. irl 'we will hide the ball' (defensive menatilties in fm) simply doesn't work. smaller teams relly on good defending, hard working and running. fast transition and exploting the space behind the defensive line attacking team leaves them. in fm terms this could be translated maybe, that it's the smaller team that plays with more attacking mentality not the bigger one.  with more direct football I think those Stoke and Burnley passing stats would look much closer to real life even on current ME.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mitja said:

 result of the above is that smaller teams playing with more defensive tacics which are less risky and hence more posession orineted

None of the defensive mentalities are possession oriented as such (kind of connected to the above statements that you can create possession based play on more aggressive mentalities too). In fact, they are traditionally tuned to make defenders clear their lines when under pressure , which is different, and as the in-game description says (though you can tune that heavily, naturally). Key word being "pressure", as you brought up some traditional weakness as of such (pressing/closing down). Some of it is connected to AI too -- oft, even if it could do something to put more pressure on the ball carrier, it wouldn't do, but "stick to its program / routine". That said, overall the engagement seems to be better, which is one part of the reason why the big boys don't dominate that hugely by default anymore, or seems so. In the midfield anyway.

Assessing it all takes some time though, and must be talked about in behind the scenees likely anyway already. Even the matches I fired up or the interesting pkm from the last page, that's random matches in the bigger scheme of things. It highlights though that it's not as simple as saying the mentalities are at fault here, in particular not if players can be isolated so easily and drop the ball twice in the space of 40 seconds, depending on tactics/formations too. Narrow defensive AI for example drops the ball very easily too, as it oft has both wide backs staying back that don't even support the midfield... there's nothing encouraging "possession" here, but rather the opposite. They drop it easily as they have no players out wide advancing and the opposition then marks/engages them easily, at least in advanced areas of the pitch. This screen highlights the problem with the forwards too though, as one of two forwards arguably should put at least that deep midfielder (8) here under pressure still. He will be able to recycle easily. Up until FM 2013/2014ish, the more deeper forward always used to track some deeper by default AFAIR.

AI tactic decisions are typically highly dynamic, which is why they can go like this in the one match, and then play different in another. Add to this their reaction to scorelines... arguably it's that dynamicism though that prevents them from creating "coherent" systematic play, even for managers that are reknown for such systems (Guardiola). There must be certain kind of things arguably hard-coded to never happen (i.e. "possession system: never the entire front line on attack duty or similar encouragements, never a lone forward isolated from build-up play). What must complicate this further is the PPMs... in particular those relating to movement (dribbles often fits here too... after all, a dribbling is mostly a forward run with the ball) -- if the entire front-line has such PPMs, maybe even half the squad (research imo hands these out far too readily ) then that's whats going to happen on the occasion. Arguably the duty thing should be streamlined too, as its oft a mix. Generally, attack duties are encouraged to push ahead, defend duties encouraged to hold their position. However, there are exceptions. If an attack duty playmaker would always surge ahead of play, he couldn't make play anymore. Can AI make that distinction here? Can it cook? (copyright MBarbaric :D ) Technically it can, but some of the stuff witnessed suggests it's not a five star cook, but more of an imbiss chef (fish&chips, kebap, bratwurst, take our pick). And on the odd occasion it seems to serve up spoilt curry chicken, though.

 

tldr; This isn't primarily/solely a mentality problem, no less as defensive mentalities aren't encouraged possession play as such, same as more aggressive mentalities aren't inherently about direct play. Which highlights naturally things that can be some challenging for the human manager already to cope with, and higlights problems with the entire UI. I've never been a fan of certain things myself.

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the current moment I managed to repeat about 5 times the 1st season in German Bundesliga and I can say with complete certainty that this how the league table looks like at the end of the 1st season in average:

 bl1.png

 

 

As you can see at the screenshot above Bayern Munich finished the 3rd place and got only 62 points, scored only 64 goals and got G.D. +26.

I’m sure that it’s a well-known fact any person even for those who are far from being a football expect that the last 5 years Bayern Munich has been dominating greatly Bundesliga.

The problem isn’t that Bayern Munich didn’t won the league because sometimes it wins the league in the 1st season, the problem is that even when it wins the league the stats that it has at end of the season are completely unrealistic and in general the stats of all teams in the league are completely unrealistic.

 

 

 

 

Here’s how in real life the stats of Bayern Munich looks like after a great season for it.

Check the stats and compare it with the FM simulation:

 bl2.png

 

 

Here’s how in real life the stats of Bayern Munich looks like after an average season for it.

Check the stats and compare it with the FM simulation:

bl3.png 

 

 

 

 

 

As you can see when Bayern Munich’s having a great season it gets about 90 points, scores about 100 goals and its G.D. is about +80.

And when Bayern Munich’s having an average season it still gets about 82 points, scores about 90 goals and its G.D. is about +67.

In FM18 Bayern Munich gets about 62-68 points, scores about 65 goals and gets G.D. about +26 in the 1st season and as it can be seen at my screen from the game even Hoffenheim got better stats than Bayern Munich at the end of the 1st.

In general in FM18 any team that win German Bundesliga in the first season usually gets no more than 68-70 points and scores no more than 65-70 goals.

 

 

I don’t know about you guys but for me seeing such big difference in the key stats creates completely unrealistic impression and if you check my first post at this thread then you’ll see that similar situation is observed in all major leagues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/29/2017 at 00:12, Karimza said:

I remember that in one of my saves Bayern Munich got only 59 points at the end of the season :)

I played with Valencia in LaLiga and saw that Messi scored only 11 goals in the league at the end of the season. I'd say that's ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Payaso
7 minutes ago, Malibden said:

I played with Valencia in LaLiga and saw that Messi scored only 11 goals in the league at the end of the season. I'd say that's ridiculous.

Heh, on my save he has already 8 in 7 La Liga games so I think that this varies a lot. Ronaldo though seems to only score from penalty spot and Real Madrid in general seem to be quite weak compared to real life. Maybe because Zidane has 13 for tactical knowledge. Atlético on the other hand seem to be really strong this year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, first possession based tactic is too weak even for absolutely top team. It happens too often that the top team who dominate possession and shots will tend to lose while the opponent who play direct counter and defensive tactic wins by 1-0 with few shots on target. Yes this happened in real life but it happened way too frequent in FM even for teams like Barcelona.

And then traditional 4 defenders tactics with wingers like 4231 (Bayern, Juventus, PSG), 4123 DM Wide (Barcelona) are too weak. Even 442 is too weak.
3 defenders tactic is overpower, teams like Chelsea and Watford consistently do well in all of my save games every year. Defensively too solid while attacking is equally good.
3 strikers tactic is overpower too. So any 3 DC tactic like 532, 523, 5212 and etc and 3 strikers tactics like 433 all easily overachieve. AI manager for top teams never employ these 3 DC or 3 strikers tactics and therefore their performance is so mediocre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Payaso

How are the goals spread in general in your saves? I'm not long enough on mine but in my experience it seems that almost every team (excluding the biggest strugglers) seem to have clinical CF and really many teams seem to have one that scores more than goal a game. Meanwhile for example Pedro León (MR) has zero so far in seven games while in real life last season he got 10 in La Liga. Also high scoring MCs (AMLRCs do score) seem to be non existent. So in my experience goals are spread to STs that might score even too much, especially those who aren't world class or even leading players in their league, AMLRCs can score realistic amounts while players lower at the pitch don't seem to score enough. Would be interesting to see how much for example Coutinho, Dele Alli, Modric and Rakitic for example score as they are players that could and should reach that 7-10 goal mark during a season in the league. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Payaso
On 1.12.2017 at 09:18, El Payaso said:

How are the goals spread in general in your saves? I'm not long enough on mine but in my experience it seems that almost every team (excluding the biggest strugglers) seem to have clinical CF and really many teams seem to have one that scores more than goal a game. Meanwhile for example Pedro León (MR) has zero so far in seven games while in real life last season he got 10 in La Liga. Also high scoring MCs (AMLRCs do score) seem to be non existent. So in my experience goals are spread to STs that might score even too much, especially those who aren't world class or even leading players in their league, AMLRCs can score realistic amounts while players lower at the pitch don't seem to score enough. Would be interesting to see how much for example Coutinho, Dele Alli, Modric and Rakitic for example score as they are players that could and should reach that 7-10 goal mark during a season in the league. 

Would like to repeat this question.

For example on my save currently after 10 games in leagues Salah has one goal in Premier league, Fabregás 0+0, Coutinho 1+1, Alli 2+0 and so on. There doesn't seem to be variation and every team that is scoring decent amounts goals seem to be scoring and assisting through CFs. Strikers are dominating both goals and assists and usually in the games are the ones who are creating most chances. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Payaso

SI's unwillingness to have a challenging AI must play a role here. I tested playing with Barcelona for one game with a tactic that I created in 20 seconds and the playing in general was dominant against Real Madrid even with super low familiarity. Of course it lacked some parts of Barcelona DNA but it was really easy to make them perform. 

Well it's always going to be like this as long as they want to keep the difficulty level as an arcade. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, El Payaso said:

SI's unwillingness to have a challenging AI must play a role here. I tested playing with Barcelona for one game with a tactic that I created in 20 seconds and the playing in general was dominant against Real Madrid even with super low familiarity. Of course it lacked some parts of Barcelona DNA but it was really easy to make them perform. 

Well it's always going to be like this as long as they want to keep the difficulty level as an arcade. 

If you had been reading anything from Neil recently you'd know it's not an unwillingness. Really shouldn't be stating something incorrect as fact. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Totalfootballfan said:

Man City in Real Life vs Man City in FM18

 

 

Right now in real life Man City is setting records in English Premier League…

Does that come as a big surprise for everyone? :)

I’m completely sure that any football fan even that is being far from a football expert expected something like that from Man City in this season… Why? Because it’s under control of Pep Guardiola that has unlimited amount of money to spend and he is going to re-create his invisible Barcelona.

Almost all betting agencies predicted Man City to finish the 1st place this season.

 

Here are Man City’s stats after 19 matches played in the league this season in real life:

Matches Played: 19

Points: 55

Goal Scored: 60

Conceded: 12

Goal Difference: +48

Average Possession: 65.9%

MC_RL_Table.png

MC_RL_Stats.png

 

 

 

Now let’s see how Man City under AI management performs in FM18 during the 1st season after 19 matches in the league and compare it with the real life performance.

In order to do that I picked the weakest team in the league Huddersfield, set the Assistant to handle the tactic, training and everything else in order not to make any impact on the results and then went On Holiday until 19 matches played in the league.

I repeated the testing 5 times in order to have such data sample that can be consider enough decent to be taken into consideration.

Game Saves for each test I uploaded on FTP:

EPL Test Season ( 1 ).fm

EPL Test Season ( 2 ).fm

EPL Test Season ( 3 ).fm

EPL Test Season ( 4 ).fm

EPL Test Season ( 5 ).fm

 

 

 

 

 

Test - 1   

Matches Played: 19

Points: 35

Goal Scored: 35

Conceded: 23

Goal Difference: +12

Average Possession: 52%

MC_S1_T.png

MC_S1_P.png

 

 

 

 

 

 

Test - 2

Matches Played: 19

Points: 32

Goal Scored: 38

Conceded: 26

Goal Difference: +12

Average Possession: 52%

MC_S2_T.png

MC_S2_P.png

 

 

 

 

 

 

Test - 3

Matches Played: 19

Points: 34

Goal Scored: 32

Conceded: 28

Goal Difference: +4

Average Possession: 53%

MC_S3_T.png

MC_S3_P.png

 

 

 

 

Test - 4

Matches Played: 19

Points: 34

Goal Scored: 33

Conceded: 16

Goal Difference: +17

Average Possession: 53%

MC_S4_T.png

MC_S4_P.png

 

 

Test - 5

Matches Played: 19

Points: 37

Goals Scored: 35

Conceded: 16

Goal Difference: +19

Average Possession: 53%

MC_S5_T.png

MC_S5_P.png

 

 

 

 

As you can see in FM18 Man City produces the results and play that are far away from what we see in in real:

[ Real Life ] Goals Difference +48 vs [ FM 18 ] Goal Difference +13

[ Real Life ] Goal Scored 60 vs [ FM 18 ] Goal Difference 34

[ Real Life ] Possession 65,9 %  vs  [ FM 18 ] Possession 53 %

 

I don’t know how about you guys but for me such difference is too much.

I would not mind if Southampton or West Brom show results and play in FM18 that were complete different from what we see in real life but I think the best team in the world such Man City deserve close attention and they should produce play and result that are very close with what we see in real life.  

That's not how it works though. You cannot "bend" things to work for one side at the neglect of the rest of teams and the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While @Totalfootballfan put time and work into the test, it isn't really telling anything substantial. First, Man City has a tremendous season so far breaking several records in English football. Therefore, it can't really be compared to anything. Anything but Guardiola's previous record. Plus, five seasons test is too small sample. 

That being said, nobody with clear mind and football knowledge should need to test the game to see that, despite all the above, @Totalfootballfan is essentially right. The game does not represent the game of football any better than FIFA or PES. Anyone playing the game expecting a realistic representation of a game of football should really wait for something else. FM has no capacity to represent what Guardiola does. There are simply no means in the ME to properly convey football concepts like rotations of players, overloads, positional play... Play from the back, for example, involves a combination of positioning of the players on the pitch, rotation of players dropping deep and movement of central midfielders and wingers that open passing lane higher up the pitch. It is a fundamental part of all top teams and it simply doesn't exist in the game. Correct me if I am wrong, but as far as I know, play from the back in the ME only means shorter passing for your back line. 

These two videos show the offensive and defensive phase of two teams, keep in mind it is just the way these two teams play, and there are gazzillion more. look at them and think how many things you can replicate in the ME.

Defensive organization

 

Offensive organization

 

Not many right? The bottom line is, FM is just a game. Don't expect it to play out as a real football match and try to see it for what it is. a game, play it within constraints of that game and enjoy it as it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minuti fa, MBarbaric ha scritto:

The bottom line is, FM is just a game. Don't expect it to play out as a real football match and try to see it for what it is. a game, play it within constraints of that game and enjoy it as it is.

But for the best (and ONLY) football management simulation around, that has been boasting "realism" as one of its killer features, it's still hugely disappointing.

 

Not only the tactical setup is hampered by unclear and even counterintuitive "FM lingo" that doesn't match real football's labels and conventions, but the whole game experience is basically a lottery that bears no semblance to a realistic scenario.

On one hand, you can grab unexpected wins against Top Clubs with a midtable side, without needing a textbook tactic. Then the following week you'll get counterattacked to death by a relegation-candidate fielding a 4-2-3-1 Wide or one of it's variation.
All that can still be chalked up to the annoying "it's your tactic!" explaination, but that doesn't work when it's AI v AI yielding unrealistic results and games.

Whether SI are unwilling or unable (due to financial, structural or technical constraints) to address and fix that, it still is a HUGE issue, much worse than any of the many ME's quirks. We can work around the latter, but when Cristiano Ronaldo or Messi CONSISTENTLY score as little as Defoe or Llorente, despite being the best players in the database and part of the best teams, something is deeply wrong.

FM's longevity is already limited by AI's flaws in developing and signing young players, but if not even the current world-class players can make the AI's competitive for the first few seasons, what's even the point in having 300 roles, duties, instructions etc?

The best part of the challenge of "let's take my favourite club to CL glory" career that most FM'ers want to play should be being able to dethrone the domestic giants and, later on, the European Top Dogs. But if, as already shown here, the alleged Top Sides are performing marginally better than the rest of the pack, it won't really take long, or much skill, to topple them.

 

It's hard to pinpoint what the original sin comes from, but it's a fact that if Barça, Real, Bayern or even Celtic can't really kick the rest of the league's ass in the same emphatic way they do in real life, anything else is kinda moot.
Possession %, passes completion, SoG conversion rate and other stats may numerically be realistic, but the way the game gets there probably isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 ore fa, RBKalle ha scritto:

But for the best (and ONLY) football management simulation around, that has been boasting "realism" as one of its killer features, it's still hugely disappointing.

completely agree about that, it isn't even debatable. as far as "realism" goes, it is just marketing talk and I am not sure if it is SI claiming it or simply people who play it. it is a game not a part of coaching course. I'd like to see a comprehensive poll among coaches who play the game and what they think about tactics in the game. Can't imagine any coach on whatever level that is worth his salt, who could claim that FM tactics (TC and how the match is represented in the ME) are anything near the real thing. 

I love the game and it was a fundamental part of my life and a way for me to get into the football industry. I owe it a lot. I've played it from 90s and still play FM16, but "realism" part doesn't apply to the tactics. It is a very good game, but it is a game of its own. within its own "football" laws, tactics and interpretation of football. not football itself. However disappointing it might be to see examples of ManCity performing so differently to their real counterparts, expecting it to resemble the real game is a bit of a missed point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Payaso
9 hours ago, themadsheep2001 said:

If you had been reading anything from Neil recently you'd know it's not an unwillingness. Really shouldn't be stating something incorrect as fact. 

Pretty dang bad job with the AI then. Years of waiting and no progress as the newest FM probably is the easiest in years. I've been trying to ask about the aims withing the AI and by that the difficulty level and haven't got an answer for that. Not stating anything as a fact but if the difficulty level has been like this for years and never challenging players like me you would think that they have got it where they want it to be. Although on previous versions the first season generally used to go in quite realistic way with human players usually only slightly overachieving before winning the league on season two. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AI manager don't know how to use this players best position. For example they will play with CR7 as a MR and with Messi as a AML or AMR but without his real role and instructions. Just open a thread about this. 

AI managers being so weak is the main reason this game turn to be too easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the older versions of fm, which weren't so scared about preventing exploits, had a lot more realism in the tactics than these newer versions which are clearly all about exploit prevention. I believe that SI is able to create an engine which does a good job emulating real life, but a lot of the closing down which happens irl would open up tons of space which could be exploited which is undesirable for SI. That's why you don't see as many through ball goals as crosses in the newer versions, because the defenders prefer to hold their shape deep against forwards instead of closing down. The problem with the older versions though was the lack of collision avoidance which would mean forwards would easily slip away from their marker after being closed down, which usually opened up tons of space.

I think if SI combined the defensive and offensive actions of the previous versions with it's current collision avoidance system, they would make quite a realistic match engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cap'nRad said:

I think the older versions of fm, which weren't so scared about preventing exploits, had a lot more realism in the tactics than these newer versions which are clearly all about exploit prevention. I believe that SI is able to create an engine which does a good job emulating real life, but a lot of the closing down which happens irl would open up tons of space which could be exploited which is undesirable for SI. That's why you don't see as many through ball goals as crosses in the newer versions, because the defenders prefer to hold their shape deep against forwards instead of closing down. The problem with the older versions though was the lack of collision avoidance which would mean forwards would easily slip away from their marker after being closed down, which usually opened up tons of space.

I think if SI combined the defensive and offensive actions of the previous versions with it's current collision avoidance system, they would make quite a realistic match engine.

Actually the post FM11/12 match engines have had much less focus on preventing exploits due to dropping the slider & eventually the arrow based interface.

The difficult for PaulC & his team is the from a coding & technology point of view they are probably finding it tricky to develop a match engine that is commercially viable within their cost & time constraints due to FM being a niche game (1m units a year is good but not hugely profitable) & having a sizeable proportion of the consumer base playing the game on outdated or low end machines. If they could sell 1m copies a year with minimum spec's that matched XB One X/PS4 Pro spec's I have no doubt the end result would be a huge leap forward from what we have today, while that's not possible there will always be compromises.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Barside said:

Actually the post FM11/12 match engines have had much less focus on preventing exploits due to dropping the slider & eventually the arrow based interface.

Dropping of sliders was part of it I think, as the less control users had, the less exploits arose. I think the lack of closing down by CD's now especially is a bit overkill, and there are a few other things I could point out which to me are clearly there to prevent too many goals.

20 minutes ago, Barside said:

The difficult for PaulC & his team is the from a coding & technology point of view they are probably finding it tricky to develop a match engine that is commercially viable within their cost & time constraints due to FM being a niche game (1m units a year is good but not hugely profitable) & having a sizeable proportion of the consumer base playing the game on outdated or low end machines. If they could sell 1m copies a year with minimum spec's that matched XB One X/PS4 Pro spec's I have no doubt the end result would be a huge leap forward from what we have today, while that's not possible there will always be compromises.

I see. I've always thought that fm's engine was just a few steps away from being a good real life simulation (although imo it's gotten progressively worse over the years), which makes me think maybe the recent focus on graphics isn't the best way to go. Isn't it better to focus computer resources on the match engine over graphics seeing as a lot of the userbase play on low end machines anyway so won't care/ be able to play the more advanced graphical games?

 

Edited by Cap'nRad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/11/2017 at 22:00, Cap'nRad said:

It does use a way of playing that is, in this modern day, considered somewhat ancient. A few components of which are:

1) The ball rarely goes back to the defence in the buildup, especially on higher mentalities. This is due to lack of passing lane pressure and strikers defending.

2) Still an over reliance on crosses from wide positions.

3) Lack of curved runs means offsides are numerous and movement is only in a more static, forward only direction.

4) More defensive mentalities can hold onto the ball regardless of stats, also due to lack of passing lane pressure/ any kind of coordinated press.

5) Lack of passing lanes means that 1st and even 2nd block can be breached with ease.

6) General directness of play and abundance of random hoofing.

7) Preference of dribbling over passing for a lot of roles.

etc. 

As for player choices, just look at that 5v2 counter video posted a few weeks ago. Shows why bigger sides don't dominate as they should, the buildup, decision making, and ability to regain possession is so poor at times. It's clearly a m.e issue.

Although the ai could also stand to be improved.

The challenge isn't the match engine, the real balance is making the AI play like the best players. I believe that can be done too, the real question is : do you really want that to happen? 

These kind of discussions happen every year, they have happened since the days of CM. We'd get people going on about needing to make the AI tighter or harder to beat, and I still remember one iteration of the game, where i was really the only one in private beta going that that was the best m.e. ever.I was also the only one who didn't have issues winning. The games were really hard, but I was having fun. Then the beta testers started to say it was too hard, the game was made easier and it is to date one of the easiest versions i've ever played.

FM18 -  I just holidayed 4 versions of a different tactic with Liverpool, and they WON all 4 holiday tests using 4 different versions of the same tactic.  What the AI is not doing is using every tool possible in the game to win. We can make these kind of tactical systems for the AI, there is absolutely no issue doing that, we'll just end  up with a version where only 2 out of a million players overachieve.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Cap'nRad said:

I see. I've always thought that fm's engine was just a few steps away from being a good real life simulation (although imo it's gotten progressively worse over the years), which makes me think maybe the recent focus on graphics isn't the best way to go. Isn't it better to focus computer resources on the match engine over graphics seeing as a lot of the userbase play on low end machines anyway so won't care/ be able to play the more advanced graphical games?

 

Switching track to a code structure that leans more on the GPU will only be a benefit as that gives SI access to more computational resources that a better tuned to producing a realistic 3D simulation. while freeing up CPU resources that can be used to enhance the AI Tactical/Squad Selector code.

What they did for FM18 was a bold move as it pushed a lot of players out of the minimum spec range but it was a move that had ot be made & will only be a benefit to the series

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minuti fa, Rashidi ha scritto:

The challenge isn't the match engine, the real balance is making the AI play like the best players. I believe that can be done too, the real question is : do you really want that to happen? 

Yes, a thousand times yes! :D

With AI struggling to keep, develop or sign hot prospects (and I assume still falling for the "high PPA, low CA and mentality" fallacy), the gameworld becomes too easy to dominate already a couple of seasons in (heck, in my Sampdoria throwaway career I signed Batshuayi and Gnabry for about 10M each already in the second season!), at least having the original Top Stars used to their most dangerous by AI teams is pretty much the only challenge left...

I actually WANT to get steamrolled by Barça, City, Bayern (or domestically even by Juventus or Napoli in Serie A or, dunno, Celtic in SPL) as a midtable act if I don't play a tactical sound game. And even then, it may not be enough to avoid a thrashing.
Instead my odds are comparatively better at Camp Nou as an underdog than they are at Benito Villamarin as a slight favourite because... I don't know...

And if I lose 4-0 to a Top Club, I expect it to be a matter of sheer superiority and offensive prowess, not of counterattacks or of sloppy goals.

4 ore fa, MBarbaric ha scritto:

as far as "realism" goes, it is just marketing talk and I am not sure if it is SI claiming it or simply people who play it.

SI may have not stated that directly, but it's the unwitten tag for the whole series.

The db is amazing, it has been praised for its accuracy in spotting and assessing future talent... The tactical side of the game still LOOKS very in-depth, to the point of even being intimidating to newbies. Only to have the pitfalls we've been debating here and in other threads.

It's a damn shame and it's frustrating both as a customer and, like all of us here, as a long-time fan.

Not to mention it's off-putting to watch a Vanarama side playing decent passing-oriented game, while Barça and City can't seem to be able to do the same and, at times, rely on hoof-and-run football that would have been great in the Irish league in FM1988

 

Edited by RBKalle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Payaso

@Rashidi what was the game version of the beta back then? This basically confirms my view that the AI is at this state on purpose and it's no wonder then why it is not improving at all. 

It's a real bummer for me to have to save and reload to get somewhat realistic results for the big AI teams so that I won't win the league with RL bottom of the table Las Palmas. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rashidi said:

FM18 -  I just holidayed 4 versions of a different tactic with Liverpool, and they WON all 4 holiday tests using 4 different versions of the same tactic.  What the AI is not doing is using every tool possible in the game to win. We can make these kind of tactical systems for the AI, there is absolutely no issue doing that, we'll just end  up with a version where only 2 out of a million players overachieve.

 

As long as Miles is one of the two so that he is happy & gives the go ahead I'm happy with this scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The trouble with the "two people out of a million overachieve" game is I imagine that the number of people that would much prefer this is outnumbered by the participants in a single Dafuge's challenge thread...

Let's be honest, if you want AI turned up to the max, this is less about not being able to beat Bayern, and more being about most players not being able to win that often as Bayern, because the AI can easily "learn" the overpowered tactical settings through intensive testing and see variables humans don't even with an editor.

Trouble is, they won't beat you in a convincing way. There's a trade off between "what is going to be most difficult for the formation and players you have selected to beat given the FM match engine" and "what would Wenger do". Took real managers even longer than FM AI managers to figure that approaching Leicester's deep defence like the relegation candidates they were originally expected to be in 2015 wasn't a smart approach, and they couldn't take the longstanding FMer approach of insisting that pacy strikers needed to be nerfed to stop them scoring too much either...

A lot of the stuff the AI sucks at is less to do with tactics and more to do with it collectively failing to snap up good players at bargain prices (an awkward tradeoff with "the AI's squads are far too big" and "why are all these ex-Premiership stars playing in Belgium/Qatar/Romania" and "why is there never any untapped talent when I scout Brazil" of course) anyway. But I definitely don't want tactical setups bent to force the best managers into overachieving with AI Guardiola spamming crosses or playing ultra narrow or whatever the overpowered formation du jour is either 

-

There's an irony about this thread being fundamentally a complaint about the team that limped into third place in the league last season not having enough possession in FM (the only team in the league without too much!) and not achieving unprecedented over-performance. Show me a person complaining about FM that wouldn't have loudly complained an FM AI was "unrealistic" if it had given City 70% ball possession per game and dropped points in only one game before Xmas if they'd played an August alpha version and I'll show you a liar. :D

Edited by enigmatic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 ora fa, enigmatic ha scritto:

There's an irony about this thread being fundamentally a complaint about the team that limped into third place in the league last season not having enough possession in FM (the only team in the league without too much!) and not achieving unprecedented over-performance. Show me a person complaining about FM that wouldn't have loudly complained an FM AI was "unrealistic" if it had given City 70% ball possession per game and dropped points in only one game before Xmas if they'd played an August alpha version and I'll show you a liar. :D

Again, it's a matter of "what do you want/expect from FM".

If it's fulfilling a supporter's fantasy to lead your local side (or your fallen giant) to Champions League glory within a few seasons (3 to 15, depending on where you start), then yeah I agree most fans would have cried foul had they been trailing City by 10+ points on Xmas day, or had they fallen to a Messi hat-trick in 20 minutes.

On the other hand, if the goal is an actual CHALLENGE, which goes above and beyond "overachieve in your 1st season, win the league in the 2nd (or win back-to-back promotions from League One to EPL), then European glory is a couple of lucky games away", then I think nobody would have complained.

Then again, it'd still require a series of fixes for the ME and the tactical setup, as discussed in other threads. But as a core concept, a more competitive gameworld at least in the opening seasons, before AI's poor squad building and our inherent advantage as humans kick in, would be a great addition and a breath of fresh air.

P.S. City's run is maybe excessive in itself, but it's much more plausible than them sitting in 6th with 25 points and playing hoofball from the flanks.

Edited by RBKalle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/24/2017 at 19:02, Rashidi said:

The challenge isn't the match engine, the real balance is making the AI play like the best players. I believe that can be done too, the real question is : do you really want that to happen? 

These kind of discussions happen every year, they have happened since the days of CM. We'd get people going on about needing to make the AI tighter or harder to beat, and I still remember one iteration of the game, where i was really the only one in private beta going that that was the best m.e. ever.I was also the only one who didn't have issues winning. The games were really hard, but I was having fun. Then the beta testers started to say it was too hard, the game was made easier and it is to date one of the easiest versions i've ever played.

FM18 -  I just holidayed 4 versions of a different tactic with Liverpool, and they WON all 4 holiday tests using 4 different versions of the same tactic.  What the AI is not doing is using every tool possible in the game to win. We can make these kind of tactical systems for the AI, there is absolutely no issue doing that, we'll just end  up with a version where only 2 out of a million players overachieve.

 

This sums up the problem perfectly. People seem to forget that FM forums (and this one in particular) are just a drop in the ocean of FM player base, a vast majority of whom never frequent such sites. Most people are not bothered with discussions like this, they just want to play and quickly fulfill their football fantasies. If SI made this game harder to appease a few thousand (pulling numbers out of my a*s) players wanting to change, they'd alienate millions of others who are fine with the game in regards to difficulty and realism.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That opens up the door for the introduction of AI difficulty levels where the user can limit the ability of the AI, would probably only need 3 settings to appease all groups & there is plenty of knowledge out there on how to implement AI difficult levels without compromising the game engine & end user experience, heck SI would just need to pick up the phone & speak to CA for assistance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shirajzl said:

This sums up the problem perfectly. People seem to forget that FM forums (and this one in particular) are just a drop in the ocean of FM player base, a vast majority of whom never frequent such sites. Most people are not bothered with discussions like this, they just want to play and quickly fulfill their football fantasies. If SI made this game harder to appease a few thousand (pulling numbers out of my a*s) players wanting to change, they'd alienate millions of others who are fine with the game in regards to difficulty and realism.  

I believe a statistician would think that the sample you get from the forum is representative of everyone, just like in the real world a smaller sample can predict what everyone's opinion is.

 

Why would you even think that forum users is weirdos with insane opinions and not the same as everyone else with divergent opinions the same as everyone else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minuti fa, Miravlix ha scritto:

I believe a statistician would think that the sample you get from the forum is representative of everyone, just like in the real world a smaller sample can predict what everyone's opinion is.

 

Why would you even think that forum users is weirdos with insane opinions and not the same as everyone else with divergent opinions the same as everyone else?

 

Because if all you want from FM is fulfilling your football fantasy, usually involving your favourite club winning the quintuple ASAP, you don't have time or inclination to notice how City or Barça are doing, as long as you're thrashing them despite your side playing Macheda and Bendtner up-front in a vaguely unbalanced 4-4-2.

People don't subscribe to a message board if they don't have a specific interest in the game... Unless they need/want to rant about something.

But those of us who engage in lengthy and rather in-depth discussions about FM do so because we care a lot about the game and are looking to get the best out of it and of our playing experience. Therefore we pay attention to details, have been doing so for years and also have high expectations about it.

Also, don't forget the language barrier. Plenty of FM'ers don't know enough English to post in here, so they're part of, local, communities we don't know much about... For all we know, the Italian or the Turkish community may be asking the same questions, or may be 100% content with the game.
 

So I do think this board isn't a big or varied enough statistical sample. We mostly are long-time, dedicated and "picky" players with a good grasp of football (and FM's) dynamics and, last but not least, of the English language.

Edited by RBKalle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, RBKalle said:

 

Because if all you want from FM is fulfilling your football fantasy, usually involving your favourite club winning the quintuple ASAP, you don't have time or inclination to notice how City or Barça are doing, as long as you're thrashing them despite your side playing Macheda and Bendtner up-front in a vaguely unbalanced 4-4-2.

People don't subscribe to a message board if they don't have a specific interest in the game... Unless they need/want to rant about something.

But those of us who engage in lengthy and rather in-depth discussions about FM do so because we care a lot about the game and are looking to get the best out of it and of our playing experience. Therefore we pay attention to details, have been doing so for years and also have high expectations about it.

Also, don't forget the language barrier. Plenty of FM'ers don't know enough English to post in here, so they're part of, local, communities we don't know much about... For all we know, the Italian or the Turkish community may be asking the same questions, or may be 100% content with the game.
 

So I do think this board isn't a big or varied enough statistical sample. We mostly are long-time, dedicated and "picky" players with a good grasp of football (and FM's) dynamics and, last but not least, of the English language.

 

Just because we are more dedicated doesn't make our opinion different from everyone, just like in the real world you can be a Billionaire and believe in communism. It's a really weird opinion that you somehow think being a forum users make us unable to have the same spread of opinion as anyone else.

 

Being a forum user DOES NOT and WILL NEVER dictate what opinion you have. You might as well claim that a car taking a left turn in some street in the USA result in someone dying in Europa, I'm sure that is most likely true, but it's a nonsense correlation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Miravlix said:

I believe a statistician would think that the sample you get from the forum is representative of everyone, just like in the real world a smaller sample can predict what everyone's opinion is.

No, because the profile of people visiting forums and discussing things at length differs from an average gamer. RBKalle explained it well in previous post.

 

16 minutes ago, Miravlix said:

Why would you even think that forum users is weirdos with insane opinions and not the same as everyone else with divergent opinions the same as everyone else?

I don't think we're weirdos or anything, I didn't mean it in a derogatory way. It's just that specific Internet communities have different outlooks compared to others. There's no right or wrong there.

The discrepancy we're talking about is clearly palpable when you get into a conversation with colleagues, acquaintances etc. who play video games, but never engage in forums/social media/community side of things. Different perspective, different goals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/25/2017 at 04:01, El Payaso said:

@Rashidi what was the game version of the beta back then? This basically confirms my view that the AI is at this state on purpose and it's no wonder then why it is not improving at all. 

It's a real bummer for me to have to save and reload to get somewhat realistic results for the big AI teams so that I won't win the league with RL bottom of the table Las Palmas. 

That was a long long time ago. The match engine changed a lot since then. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Miravlix said:

Why would you even think that forum users is weirdos with insane opinions and not the same as everyone else with divergent opinions the same as everyone else?

Yeah but not everyone has a need to come to the forums to play a game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...