Football Manager 2018 *Official* Feedback Thread

[Tony Wright 747]

50 minutes ago, kandersson said:

I agree on this. Recently I've loaded an old save from FM12 (which I considered my favourite edition of the FM era) and of course I did realize that UI and ME have progressed considerably in a few areas - near post corners were a nightmare; goal kick+ header from midfield + 1 vs 1 was also quite unrealistic. Though I was impressed with the variety of goals scored - diving headers! lobs! go round keeper! solo efforts! far post curled shot! - that I haven't seen in years. Admittedly it was too easy to score from long killer balls, but in my opinion not really because of the collision/ghosting problem but mostly because AI would often play ultra high defensive line (especially when they were losing). Now they're probably too deep, too often but it seems to me that the 'ghosting' is actually still there.

I would agree that there has been lots of animations and whistles and bells added over the years, but I don't believe the fundamental ME has improved much at all

[Guest El Payaso]

What I like in this version though in terms of the ME is the fact that games generally seem to be more evenly matched and by this every goal seems like an achievement and instead of going for a coffee during an "easy" home game I feel it is a better idea to watch every game with comprehensive highlights. Have seen really few thumpings where one team sums up 30-40 shots while the other doesn't do anything during the game. I feel that this is closer to real life as even with 5-0 wins the stats can be like 12-15 shots for each team but one of them actually creating the quality chances. If course those others too exist but for example in FM 2017 it was super common that Tottenham was thumping other big teams like Chelsea and City at home with ease while IRL these games more usually are ones that are 'boring' and evenly matched. 

[Wavelberry]

I'm not getting the handringing over the ME here. It seems to have issues but so do all of 'em. The fact that playing strikers was a less effective last year, the ghost through defenders in '12, the long balls over the top this time. Each match engine has its idiosyncrasies but most if not all do respond to football logic. It's no worse than any other year.

[screwyiimp]

same game as all the others  different wall paper , still so  predictable .

[Svenc]

4 hours ago, El Payaso said:

If course those others too exist but for example in FM 2017 it was super common that Tottenham was thumping other big teams like Chelsea and City at home with ease while IRL these games more usually are ones that are 'boring' and evenly matched. 

Reminds me of Tottenham FM16with 9 SOT p/match average  (something that, naturally, doesn't transpire anymore currently, even the "dominating" sides can't come close, Barcelona sometimes down to 5... if they would score as many goals with that as they do RL, they would need fantasy conversion rates). Like the direction tho too. The occasionally nonsensical AI selection seems to be connected to some possible reworks made as to how AI operates. Pushing everybody upfield seems often an approximization of a "through cautious to the wind" tactic, typically applied by AI when chasing a game (I'd question its effectiveness though, ditto that Allegri switch, at least long-term when 3 central forwards aren't as effective ). HOw Lazio can apply similar from kick off on occasion is as curious though as that Bayern assistant manager basically "playing for the draw" from kick-off in that domestic league match.

Therefore, I'd file it under possible "bug" if anything. Doesn't make it any less stupid naturally, no less as AI did similar on FM17 already on occasion (much to the player's benefit, a more recent "demonstration" I was still being under influence when writing the above -- it may not even happen that often, but dropped points are dropped points). It's just something that imo should never, ever happen at the top, and in between FM 13 and at least FM 15 from my experience also never really did, hence the response and wonderment. That's basically stuff that if somewhat consistently applied would make you the "Guardiola" of the game world by sticking with nothing but common sense. In fact, if that often happens when AI is "chasing games", sticking to it may make you gain an edge right there, and some of the as such admirable in-match management of AI costing it points, rather than winning them. About FM 12 or even earlier, imo not a contest, structurally. The difference between short and direct passing alone wasn'T near as pronounced, matches don't go 90 minutes full, some interesting defensive shapes back then too.

Edited November 28, 2017 by Svenc

[Miravlix]

On 11/27/2017 at 02:03, warlock said:

Re: the earlier discussion about direct free kicks and the lack of goals, just saw my first one. Start of season 2 and Mata scored a beaut from just outside the area. So they might be rare, but they are possible.

You have to promise the board to play set piece stuff, to get free kick goals regularly.

 

My team has Gylfi with 18 freekicking and other good stats and in 2 seasons he scored ZERO times, start of season 3 I promise to take advantage of set piece stuff and bam, a majority of the seasons goals is free kicks and other set piece situations.

 

Really sucks to be my strikers, since they have lost half their goals, but maybe if I didn't get the free kick goals, I would have lost half the goals anyway.

[jam jameson]

13 ore fa, KUBI ha scritto:

Improvements are only possible if people deliver bug reports, pkms and save games. That's what I'm doing if I spot an issue in my save game. This game can be played very different. I don't care much about ME details as long as the game generates realistic results.

So what, are you suggesting that at the end of the day the game is about calculation (that actually is, i fully agree) so the step forward from subtitles to 2d and then to 3d is useless and should be out of the picture, because what counts is only the final outcome? so back to CM and all happy???

[jc1]

Still seeing far too many passes hitting off the heels of the players who seem to be totally oblivious to the fact a pass is being played to them, then they seem to turn around bewildered when it happens, so unrealistic.

Ethnic players have no definition between their faces and hair so we end up with just black heads and no features, same with blonde and bald players, they also look the same.

[HemHat]

11 minutes ago, jam jameson said:

So what, are you suggesting that at the end of the day the game is about calculation (that actually is, i fully agree) so the step forward from subtitles to 2d and then to 3d is useless and should be out of the picture, because what counts is only the final outcome? so back to CM and all happy???

Basically I think he's saying that the football simulation game can look like a game of cricket as long as the scores look like football scores.

No point SI bothering to improve the ME from this point then as the scores are realistic, just keep adding cosmetic features into the game and job done.

[Matej]

On 27. 11. 2017. at 00:58, Svenc said:

How to code a moron -- A further  look at FM's Artificial Intelligence The Special Ones

Sorry for the headline, that was mainly meant to draw some attention, tabloid style (big respect to the guys coding this).

This couldn't have possibly slipped testing. And it's not entirelly new as to FM 2017. But why do AI managers enage into tactical decisions again that were classed as "bugs" in FM 2012? Case in point, Lazio Rom in Italy. Their manager employs a top heavy 4-2-3-1, already pushing four players boxside by default. Pretty much in every match, 90 minutes, he encourages his central midfielders upfield also. This isn't that isolated stuff, even. Whilst there is something to be said about how centre backs in FM traditionally behave (or have to -- hanging back as else they'd put the forwards "onside"), the issue I have with this is twofold.

1) The obvious one, it massively compresses the space a side can play in. If all players are sitting atop each other, in football or otherwise, they are easily engaged, crowded out, rushed into shots. Additionally, there will be no easy outlets for ball retention (backwards passes) -- and once the attack has transitioned into the final third, no balls from deep will be stretching play whatsoever. This rubs of on moves, and usually shot conversions, and it should. It also leads to added set pieces, as defenders get a foot into every move. This isn't tactical "guru" stuff, this is team sports basics 101. No wonder the actual "guru" stuff may make you outperform fairly decisively.

2) This isn't believable "top class" management, full-stop. Similar to AI playing narrow formations, never advancing but a single wide player, Allegri switching to 4-3-3 narrow encouraging similar to the above, an AI manager fielding two inside forwards cutting into the same space as all the other guys in his top heavy formations, whilst keeping the wide backs back so that there's no player occupying the wide space out either. More importantly it's the exact kind of decision making that may big time contribute to shaky AI performance here.

And that despite the fact that watching through 5 of such Lazio matches, there was a combined total of about 4 successfully counter attacks -- that is moves on the break into all that cans of space successfully leading to a finish. Speaking about which, I urge anybody to take a real critical look at  matches in which "points were dropped by the statistical dominant side".  Don't focus on the few qualitiy that typically is in there, it will and should be missed too. In real football, dominating sides not seldom actually create decent openings from open play -- even if they struggle to score. We also know such thanks to stat sides such as Whoscored. In FM, that never to rarely comes to pass. The majority of attempts, AI vs AI likewise, will be set piece based affairs. Headers under pressure will never be a tap-in sorry. The entire "super keeper" stuff is mainly one of perception thus. If a side (in particular yours) rarely creates much quality, the expectation you put on the typically few in such matches actually decent shots goes through the roof. Will naturally remain a subjective affair until FM has worked out how to communicate to player roughly scoring probabilities -- shot by shot, invidiually. Lazio dropped points in such matches thrice in a row on mine, btw.

It's their tactics. At least in parts.

I don't know where this is headed, personally. I can only imagine that ever since about FM 2013ish, AI managers must operate differently, as such stuff has beomce fairly common place, when it was patched out by FM 2013. I can only assume that AI tactical decision making works differently. There was a talk about a "role rating/CA" sometime ago, which may be conflicting. The alternative to that is that Si deliberately dumb the AI down to pre ca. FM 2013 levels, which may make business sense -- I reckon a good portion of the playerbase of this simply like winning without worrying about all that stuff. Which I refuse to believe. However, some Collyer Brothers design philosophies were and have again been breached.

Despite some damaging and nonsensical feedback (final match reports based on shot attempts), players have more "spoon feeding" in the game than ever before. When ten years ago the credo was "We don't do analysis tools as it would be a cheat for the human player", there's now so much it's arguably harder to do anything massively wrong and getting sides to severely underperform than ever before. I would have hoped this was all made to make the game more accessible long-term, so that there was some headroom for further AI development. A game being accessible doesn't mean to "dumb it down". It simply means it communicates to players what they may put a modicum of thought in, and what to watch out for, after all. It may also mean improved assistants, who can optionally help and take over entirelly.

Additionally, midfield trios bunching looks suspicious, and may be involved in sides struggling to construct decent moves (from open play) using such too, possibly contributing to shaky top team performances. Oft easy to engage and dispossess. As analysing it all is time consuming stuff, that's best left to the guys who do such regularly, which again, I have huge respect for. This is a massively complex undertaking, after all. I'm just not sure what to make of this for the time being. As the balance between player quality / tactics too has arguably some shifted (up until FM 15 at least, AI top sides had no problems dominating their leagues, including the goal rates to expect, simpyl fielding players would open cans of space), this interestingly makes for a game world where in some cases FIfa Manager provides more "realistic" benchmarks, e.g. tables. No wonder naturally, as their simple text highlight simulations mainly take "player strength" into account, and make "better" sides more likely to win no matter what.

 

Quote

Ok, this is prob best post here. Im not so good in english, sorry about that,  but Svenc posts are ussually great and with lots of proofs. In last 4-5 posts he is basically saying that match engine is getting worse and worse in last few years. This is forum and we are here to help the game to be better. And i really wonder why noone responsible for making ME didnt said his opinion about this post. Or where is Leon, tactial guru, maybe we can hear whats his opinion about ME this season. So you are trying to make better ME, or you dont want to make AI better ? TY and please dont delete our posts every time we ask you normal questions. i remember the good times when i could write and talk with Paul Collyer when i had problems with the game. Today we are both maybe old and tired, but at least give us freedom to say if something its not good with the game, you dont have to delete all and pretend that everything is great because FM18 is on top of the steam lists. 

 

[HUNT3R]

29 minutes ago, HemHat said:

Basically I think he's saying that the football simulation game can look like a game of cricket as long as the scores look like football scores.

No point SI bothering to improve the ME from this point then as the scores are realistic, just keep adding cosmetic features into the game and job done.

 

44 minutes ago, jam jameson said:

So what, are you suggesting that at the end of the day the game is about calculation (that actually is, i fully agree) so the step forward from subtitles to 2d and then to 3d is useless and should be out of the picture, because what counts is only the final outcome? so back to CM and all happy???

KUBI said HE doesn't care about ME details as long as the results are realistic. He didn't mention that it's how it should be or that this is how SI sees it - just simply his own personal preference. There's really no need to blow things completely out of proportion.

[HUNT3R]

7 minutes ago, Matej said:

Ok, this is prob best post here. Im not so good in english, sorry about that,  but Svenc posts are ussually great and with lots of proofs. In last 4-5 posts he is basically saying that match engine is getting worse and worse in last few years. This is forum and we are here to help the game to be better. And i really wonder why noone responsible for making ME didnt said his opinion about this post. Or where is Leon, tactial guru, maybe we can hear whats his opinion about ME this season. So you are trying to make better ME, or you dont want to make AI better ? TY and please dont delete our posts every time we ask you normal questions. i remember the good times when i could write and talk with Paul Collyer when i had problems with the game. Today we are both maybe old and tired, but at least give us freedom to say if something its not good with the game, you dont have to delete all and pretend that everything is great because FM18 is on top of the steam lists. 

1 - Svenc wasn't saying that.

2 - No posts are getting deleted because it's negative. Constructive feedback, positive or negative is welcome.

[forameuss]

12 minutes ago, Matej said:

Ok, this is prob best post here. Im not so good in english, sorry about that,  but Svenc posts are ussually great and with lots of proofs. In last 4-5 posts he is basically saying that match engine is getting worse and worse in last few years. This is forum and we are here to help the game to be better. And i really wonder why noone responsible for making ME didnt said his opinion about this post. Or where is Leon, tactial guru, maybe we can hear whats his opinion about ME this season. So you are trying to make better ME, or you dont want to make AI better ? TY and please dont delete our posts every time we ask you normal questions. i remember the good times when i could write and talk with Paul Collyer when i had problems with the game. Today we are both maybe old and tired, but at least give us freedom to say if something its not good with the game, you dont have to delete all and pretend that everything is great because FM18 is on top of the steam lists. 

And to add to what HUNT3R said, it's this kind of attitude that keeps the developers off this forum.  No-one's going to delete your posts if you don't give them a reason to, and suggesting that they're sticking their fingers in their ears and ignoring issues just because the game is selling well isn't going to go down too well with them.

They used to talk a lot in here, now they don't.  It's pretty clear why they're perfectly right to do that.

[HemHat]

7 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

 

KUBI said HE doesn't care about ME details as long as the results are realistic. He didn't mention that it's how it should be or that this is how SI sees it - just simply his own personal preference. There's really no need to blow things completely out of proportion.

I know he said it from his personal opinion, and I never said that he said it was SI's point of view, as I'm sure it's not.

I was just exaggerating what he DID say (and adding a few bits) in order to make the point that what he said was ridiculous. 

[Matej]

17 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

1 - Svenc wasn't saying that.

2 - No posts are getting deleted because it's negative. Constructive feedback, positive or negative is welcome.

Ok - just part of his post and problems with ME - "I don't know where this is headed, personally. I can only imagine that ever since about FM 2013ish, AI managers must operate differently, as such stuff has beomce fairly common place, when it was patched out by FM 2013. I can only assume that AI tactical decision making works differently. There was a talk about a "role rating/CA" sometime ago, which may be conflicting. The alternative to that is that Si deliberately dumb the AI down to pre ca. FM 2013 levels, which may make business sense -- I reckon a good portion of the playerbase of this simply like winning without worrying about all that stuff. 

Anyway, he said his problem with ME, on very nice and normal way. Why we cant get some longer respond on maybe best post of 20 something pages ? What went wrong ? 

Edited November 28, 2017 by Matej

[KUBI]

The point is that you can watch the whole match if you want or just extended or key highlights. I'm usually watching extended highlights and that means I don't care about ME details, like how one defender is shifting or not in one particular situation. I'm more interested in long term saves in which other things are more important than ME details. There are people who analyse every match and point out every flaw in the ME and that's ok. There are two core parts in the game, the ME and the AI. I'm more interested in improving the AI, but I'm also happy when others doing the same for the ME.

 

 

[HUNT3R]

9 minutes ago, Matej said:

Ok - just part of his post and problems with ME - "I don't know where this is headed, personally. I can only imagine that ever since about FM 2013ish, AI managers must operate differently, as such stuff has beomce fairly common place, when it was patched out by FM 2013. I can only assume that AI tactical decision making works differently. There was a talk about a "role rating/CA" sometime ago, which may be conflicting. The alternative to that is that Si deliberately dumb the AI down to pre ca. FM 2013 levels, which may make business sense -- I reckon a good portion of the playerbase of this simply like winning without worrying about all that stuff. 

Anyway, he said his problem with ME, on very nice and normal way. Why we cant get some longer respond on maybe best post of 20 something pages ? What went wrong ? 

Svenc is highlighting possible issues with AI managers, not necessarily the ME, but again as we keep saying - should be reported in the bugs forum to get looked at. AI managers, since FM12, I'd guess, are more able to "think" and create their own tactics rather than just blindly taking a pre-made tactic like before. This is great, but there will be issues along the way and Svenc may or may not have found one.

[forameuss]

Just now, KUBI said:

The point is that you can watch the whole match if you want or just extended or key highlights. I'm usually watching extended highlights and that means I don't care about ME details, like how one defender is shifting or not in one particular situation. I'm more interested in long term saves in which other things are more important than ME details. There are people who analyse every match and point out every flaw in the ME and that's ok. There are two core parts in the game, the ME and the AI. I'm more interested in improving the AI, but I'm also happy when others doing the same for the ME.

This for me, and it's a very valid point.  I see people like SvenC pointing out in forensic detail which players are in the wrong positions and how the ME is wrong, and it is good that there are people that can do that constructively (Lord knows there's plenty who can't manage the latter) so that SI can take those examples and make improvements on them.  But I'm of the same mind as KUBI, I don't look at the ME and think "aye, it's good, but the center back is 2 inches too far to the left".  Hyperbole, of course, but you get the point.  For me, from a purely personal perspective, I enjoy watching the ME far more than I have in previous versions.  I don't particularly care about the intricacies, and I don't really notice any anyway.

[Svenc]

26 minutes ago, KUBI said:

The point is that you can watch the whole match if you want or just extended or key highlights. I'm usually watching extended highlights and that means I don't care about ME details, like how one defender is shifting or not in one particular situation. I'm more interested in long term saves in which other things are more important than ME details. There are people who analyse every match and point out every flaw in the ME and that's ok. There are two core parts in the game, the ME and the AI. I'm more interested in improving the AI, but I'm also happy when others doing the same for the ME.

I'm much the same, actually. The thing that gets me mostly looking at details these days is if things on the macro level seem odd though, see also the statistics thread. We know that AI is are still severely limited, so can't really much approach possession based systems (even though human players perfectly can). We know that human players can make the top side scoring goals, but the stats already show that the attacking domination of top sides on this barely ever come about. As that's partly ME, partly AI, you then tend to go looking a few. Believability of the game world is a concern, from season 1.

Initially early FM 2015 for instance there were sides that had hockey scorelines every week. As a mod, you may remember that players raged about this too (most likely the type who rarely ever look at a single move from an overhead cam view, which personally I find worrying.). Giving advanced players an attack duty back then meant those players didn't track back on defending. So you had AI, in particular off certain formations, that were completely overrun in the defensive phase, conceding from every other shot(similar to human players, who stuffed their set-ups with attack duties anyway, you never see the opposite, Kevin Keegans in disguise ). If the attack was still intercepted, it was a bonafide counter attack naturally, as all those players just sticked at the halfway line. The typically user reaction to this was simply "too many goals, "broken ME", "keepers are rubbish", when it was something else completely.

I shouldn't have implied that as some "conspiracy" to "dumb the AI down". AFAIK various SI staff had always the notion that the game as such isn't aimed to be made deliberately hugely harder as such. That's never happened. But either have they always said they wouldn't "dumb things down". If that were the case, scouting would be as simple as it was pre ca FM 2014 (absolute attributes revealed at a glance). There would be no "team dynamics" when on these iterations putting Messi into the reserves and shipping Iniesta for free to Real saw no reaction from anybody whatsoever -- even if you applied to the Camp Nou as a Sunday League gaffer. There may be some conflicts apparently, but it's hard to gauge. Actually reports take time, and maybe some of this is done on purpose (even a top heavy 4-2-3-1 with every single player pushed boxside). I'm no tactical guru, but I have yet to see any situation where such is of benefit or such happening in footie.

On prior releases that could make the win rate of top teams sometimes go down if fired through (AI switches during matches) from 70% to 50% all itself, as it would win glorious set piece after set piece all throughout, and never stretch play in particular naturally against opposition sitting deep -- against which you won't get quickly behind their lines anyhow and against which every other attack would stall in front of their box (see also that PSG AI - Ajaccio human player FM 17 match linked to in my prior post). Anybody who likewise sees a "super keeper" in there simply because they had a load of shots in crowded spaces encouraged by questionably AI tactics needs to have his goggles checked imo.

Edited November 28, 2017 by Svenc

[Viking]

Another thing I don't get with FM are those pundit quotes. My struggling Derby lose 1-2 away against leauge leaders Aston Villa, and the pundit is surprised? Why? Are my board and my players also judging me like this? No wonder they hate me.

[Sticx]

A few things with the ME are really turning me off from the game and making me consider giving it up completely as the fun factor has virtually dissapeared for me this year. 

The game strongly favors direct long ball play. It was like this last year also and I'm wondering if it's a case of the devs who work on the game favor this style of football or just simply a ME limitation. How many times I've seen a defender play an inch perfect long ball right over the top of my defense to a mediocre striker who makes a world class first touch right into a one on one vs my keeper is so very frustrating. It makes me want to never play this game again. 

The amount of turnovers leading into a scoring chance against me happens way to often. Especially off of a simple thing like a throw in in the opponents final third. The throw goes right to the AI who then turn it into a counter attack. My team also make really puzzling decisions leading to turnovers. Other passing options exist, but a pass is played right to the AI. My team also don't know how to protect the ball. They will simply dribble slowly and let the defender walk right up to them and tackle it away. 

Aggressive slide tackles are all over the place. Perfectly timed slide tackles mind you. The amount of back and forth change of possession is really bad to watch.

The final few minutes of every match I am winning the AI goes into berserk mode and constantly wins the ball off turnovers and get scoring chance after chance. My team forgets how to protect the ball even more at this point and gifts the ball back repeatedly.

My team can't press. I select a higher line and more closing down and the opposition still has all kinds of time on the ball. Why? 

Shooting is atrocious this year. So many shots inside the box that go no where near the goal. Except for the AI of course, who regularly score on their first shot on goal against me.

The amount of equalizers or game winners in the final ten minutes of the match makes me want to pull my hair out. Not every team in the game has to be coached my Sir Alex. Incredibly frustrating. 

Overall, I am very dissapointed in the game this year. So much so that I have basically lost interest already and have no desire at this point to keep playing. I'm also considering making this year my last purchase of the franchise. 

Edited November 28, 2017 by Sticx

[Svenc]

11 minutes ago, Sticx said:

Except for the AI of course, who regularly score on their first shot on goal against me.

Sigh.  I'd expect some of the late 4-3-3 narrow Allegri kind switches by AI when they are behind can/could be a tad effective at this point (I'd specifically watched them in prior releases already, plus all ME/AI busting tactics are naturally of that type this year. It's also the only type of formation left that still tends to keep half an army up the pitch, ready to latch onto the break, due to how central forwards are coded on defending.)

[andu1]

3 central forwards formations are OP in this ME. i don;t know if it's the same for AI but for a human player, 5-2-3 4-3-3 or 3-4-3 is the way to go right now. it doesn't make any sense but there you go.

[Etebaer]

I like to play a midfiled with CML-CM-CMR and in FM13 that worked pretty well form the spacing etc but when i switched to FM16/17/18 it works like crap bcs they crowd together so close as if the playfield is a phone booth and i hate it very much albeit it still works somewhat - i still hate it.

The worse when you like to play with CDL-CD-CDR when i goes close to the own box they suddenly crowd together as if they were a row of 2 and it makes no sense to play with 3 CDs at all bcs on top of that they dont cover the flanks as needed for that crowding together in the box and instead expose the space which totally anihilates the advantage of a 3-5-2 being able to feild very offensive Wing Backs that still have adequate coverage defensively - i very hate it.

[Guest El Payaso]

With the ME I don't concentrate on detail as it will never be like real football as most of  the matches would be really boring especially with just highlights. 

I basically only concentrate on balance between defense and attack, stats compared to something that makes sense and how goals are scored and chances created and if they make sense. Especially in FM 2017 slow tempo short handed attacks were far too effective but this has luckily been changed quite a bit in my experience. Basically what the ME now in my experience needs is teams being more effective in preventing passing and winning the ball back and by that creating logical breaks where teams usually also score in real life. And because of that I concentrate in small details like defenders positioning as by that this is more likely to be improved. 

[treble_yell_:-)]

A lot of this discussion is pointless , no ?

 

We know there's a ground up rewrite of the ME happening as the current one is coming to the end of its life. We see the same problems come up ( that were fixed previously) because the constant tinkering inevitably has knock on effects and fixing one thing can see previously fixed engine quirks reappear.

They can continue to tinker but what we have is probably as good as it gets until we see the actual new ME.

 

 

[Colorado]

Sorry this is probably old news on here but having only purchased the game a couple of days ago, I'm so frustrated with the new 2D view. The data analyst view just didn't feel right to me.

The game seems to feature heavily on being 3D now which sounds great but truth is the stadium designs just look dreadful. Either commit properly to 3D graphics and do it right or just leave a  suitable 2D option.

I know the graphics aren't central to the game but if it can't be done properly, just leave it. 

Honestly wouldn't have bought the game if I knew it was this poor. I was quite happy with FM17.

[Tony Wright 747]

1 hour ago, Colorado said:

Sorry this is probably old news on here but having only purchased the game a couple of days ago, I'm so frustrated with the new 2D view. The data analyst view just didn't feel right to me.

The game seems to feature heavily on being 3D now which sounds great but truth is the stadium designs just look dreadful. Either commit properly to 3D graphics and do it right or just leave a  suitable 2D option.

I know the graphics aren't central to the game but if it can't be done properly, just leave it. 

Honestly wouldn't have bought the game if I knew it was this poor. I was quite happy with FM17.

I agree with you on stadium designs, but I guess SI are perfectly happy with them or they wouldn't have been passed for inclusion

[jc1]

6 hours ago, andu1 said:

3 central forwards formations are OP in this ME. i don;t know if it's the same for AI but for a human player, 5-2-3 4-3-3 or 3-4-3 is the way to go right now. it doesn't make any sense but there you go.

I've been playing around with a few formation and hit 4-2-1-3 by accident and the 3 forwards seem to overpower the AI teams, very similar to FM12 when 4-1-2-3/4-3-3 dominated. Some of my mates have been playing 4-2-4 formation and doing the same.

[Karnack]

11 hours ago, treble_yell_:-) said:

A lot of this discussion is pointless , no ?

 

We know there's a ground up rewrite of the ME happening as the current one is coming to the end of its life. We see the same problems come up ( that were fixed previously) because the constant tinkering inevitably has knock on effects and fixing one thing can see previously fixed engine quirks reappear.

They can continue to tinker but what we have is probably as good as it gets until we see the actual new ME.

 

 

Genuine question, where can I read about this? I have totally missed this.

[Tiger666]

8 hours ago, Tony Wright 747 said:

I agree with you on stadium designs, but I guess SI are perfectly happy with them or they wouldn't have been passed for inclusion

What does it matter if SI are happy with them if the customers aren't?

[forameuss]

35 minutes ago, Tiger666 said:

What does it matter if SI are happy with them if the customers aren't?

Because despite what the cringey saying says, the customer is not always right.  No matter what they do, at least one customer is going to disagree with it.  If they did everything customers wanted, the game would be a tangled nest of nonsense.

You can't really say "the customers aren't" either, as that suggests there's a widespread complaint about the feature.  There's definitely displeasure at it, absolutely, but it's hardly even that much of a majority on this board alone, let alone of everyone playing the game.  SI will have their roadmap and their plans for the product, and the only things that would make them deviate massively from that would be their own decision, or an enormous fan backlash.  

As a fairly relevant example, I'd say the user interface has been pilloried far more than stadium designs, and that ain't changing, so why would this?

Edited November 29, 2017 by forameuss

[jam jameson]

I think I've spotted another issue that would affect very much any long term save. I've got ONLY English Leagues playable, down to level 10, database large with addeda UK-resident players. At the beginning of the game (june 2017) I've got 34.000 players, then I holidayed the save to check if the file runs properly, and noticed that in October 2019 the players are 60.000...of course this make the game super-slow...how come it is possible? re-gen flooding? what's the issue?

[forameuss]

7 minutes ago, jam jameson said:

I think I've spotted another issue that would affect very much any long term save. I've got ONLY English Leagues playable, down to level 10, database large with addeda UK-resident players. At the beginning of the game (june 2017) I've got 34.000 players, then I holidayed the save to check if the file runs properly, and noticed that in October 2019 the players are 60.000...of course this make the game super-slow...how come it is possible? re-gen flooding? what's the issue?

Given you've loaded down to level 10, that's a huge amount more clubs than in the base game, and I assume no players are initially added in the database to those new teams.  Not sure if at game-start it counts a token number of players for these clubs or whether it jumps once you actually start.  You're probably also presumably getting a youth intake for each of these clubs, although I would've thought the numbers would balance out to cover this.

Maybe worth raising so the devs can have a look at it.  I haven't noticed any considerable slowdown in this regard, but then I've only got Italy down to Serie D loaded, so not adding quite as many sides as you'll have.

[jam jameson]

6 minuti fa, forameuss ha scritto:

Given you've loaded down to level 10, that's a huge amount more clubs than in the base game, and I assume no players are initially added in the database to those new teams.  Not sure if at game-start it counts a token number of players for these clubs or whether it jumps once you actually start.  You're probably also presumably getting a youth intake for each of these clubs, although I would've thought the numbers would balance out to cover this.

Maybe worth raising so the devs can have a look at it.  I haven't noticed any considerable slowdown in this regard, but then I've only got Italy down to Serie D loaded, so not adding quite as many sides as you'll have.

Good tip to check the number of players at the beginning, anyway in previous FM Always played down to that level and never incurred such kind of issues

[pizzachips]

might be me.. but ive noticed when a player is loaned or released on a free that the player is no longer visible in your transfer overview history.. i used to enjoy reviewing previous sesasons with a full cartography of ins and outs but this yr their gone.

[jam jameson]

11 minuti fa, forameuss ha scritto:

Given you've loaded down to level 10, that's a huge amount more clubs than in the base game, and I assume no players are initially added in the database to those new teams.  Not sure if at game-start it counts a token number of players for these clubs or whether it jumps once you actually start.  You're probably also presumably getting a youth intake for each of these clubs, although I would've thought the numbers would balance out to cover this.

Maybe worth raising so the devs can have a look at it.  I haven't noticed any considerable slowdown in this regard, but then I've only got Italy down to Serie D loaded, so not adding quite as many sides as you'll have.

I've checked and you're right, the issue arises as soon as the start of the game. The first save has got already 58.000 players, quite the double than the lot calculated in the initial setup, is that a bug or it's the system operating to add players to lower League clubs that haven't got real ones???

[forameuss]

2 minutes ago, jam jameson said:

I've checked and you're right, the issue arises as soon as the start of the game. The first save has got already 58.000 players, quite the double than the lot calculated in the initial setup, is that a bug or it's the system operating to add players to lower League clubs that haven't got real ones???

I'd imagine the latter.  Would make sense.  The count at the start of the game will purely be a count of the players it's going to add from the base database, so the clubs with no players will count as zero at that point.  Once the game starts, players get added, count goes up.  Presumably anyway.

[ceta96]

12 saat önce, Colorado said:

Sorry this is probably old news on here but having only purchased the game a couple of days ago, I'm so frustrated with the new 2D view. The data analyst view just didn't feel right to me.

The game seems to feature heavily on being 3D now which sounds great but truth is the stadium designs just look dreadful. Either commit properly to 3D graphics and do it right or just leave a  suitable 2D option.

I know the graphics aren't central to the game but if it can't be done properly, just leave it. 

Honestly wouldn't have bought the game if I knew it was this poor. I was quite happy with FM17.

I swear ı just purchased the game to add my collection. It is on the shelf with the label. It is first time ı have not played the game since new versions release date. Im just stuck in dreadful stadium design.

[Tony Wright 747]

2 hours ago, Tiger666 said:

What does it matter if SI are happy with them if the customers aren't?

The thing you have to decide is whether the stadium designs annoy you enough not to buy the game.  For me they are one of a number of issues that have influenced my decision not to buy this year

[Svenc]

2 hours ago, forameuss said:

Because despite what the cringey saying says, the customer is not always right.  No matter what they do, at least one customer is going to disagree with it.  If they did everything customers wanted, the game would be a tangled nest of nonsense.

Design by committee, basically. Arguably, outside of technical / balancing stuff, a large amount of feedback in general should be taken with a huge grain of salt. And I include my own feedback in that just as well. The reason of which should be obvious. A simulation game such as FM basically is measured on two traditionally axis. x axis = playabaility / balancing. y axis = realism. Sensi Soccer is a perfectly fun and playable game to this day (xxx), but it would score pretty lowly on the realism front. CM/FM has struck for a different position here since.

What complicates things further is that the simulated object is fairly subjective, and even TV pundits spout tons of nonsense every goddamn week (it's arguably their job to do so though -- they're selling an ever increasingly expensive luxury product to make it compete with other prime time TV entertainment, not necessarily to teach or tell the truth.) As such, misconceptions are rife for the taken, they translate to everything. I think these forums even used to have a guy who argued that men fought back the dinosaurs as part of an inventive way of justifying his "30 reloads every match", but that's a bit different naturally. Add to this that the simulated object can be perceived as inherently unjust in reality (over weeks, sometimes months), and that precisely all that "f*ck" happening in football is probably harder to simulate than anything else (some games deliberately tone down on all of this, which would be shocking as per FM, see the perception is reality bit at the bottom), and there you go. [I'd argue one key here is "teaching" players how to use the in-game feedback -- there must be loads who haven't even found each team's general shot conversion data in-game, or how to use it]. Plus, providing match analysis tools only goes so far -- you could write a manual for them all itself.

Of course there's the never ending argument how much a sim vs game FM should at all be. But for all the core stuff they should rather look at their football contacts first and foremost. Is the manager to player communication realistic? Are things that happen in-game transpire off the pitch reasonable (some internet bloke who reads the Daily Mail and watching lots of MOTD sure won't know it, me not either!)? How about the training modules, the media, the tactical modules, everything? And does the finishing look somewhat believable, Antoine? Do the keeper fumbles appear reasonably cringe, David James? Is the general portrayal mangement in the mid- to lower tiers of football somewhat believable, folk at AFC Wimbledon? And what do you think of our in-game music, Robbie Williams?  I'd rather have them listen to those, and also their STATS Prozone guys than anybody else. Same as utilizing actually studies that exist (which are the basis of metrics used in football, and have proven to be useful) -- from my end there's never been a huge generally issue here, except if your benchmark is Fifa / some random Youtube compilation. Everybody's opinion is naturally viable. Too bad it's often just ranting though (it's precisely that of which which has driven the devs away before).

Edited November 29, 2017 by Svenc

[Maleven]

As was the case in FM14, and initially in FM15, the glaring inadequacies of the match engine are completely ruining the game for me, this despite the fact that, as in the past, my results are good.

Before talking about how the match engine actually functions, a couple of queries and criticisms from an aesthetic point of view: where has the main stand view gone, and is it not possible to reverse the behind goal and behind corner views anymore so you get to see from the other end of the stadium? Another one: where has the radar gone? This was very important to me tactically and to see what was going on around the halfway line at set pieces, and it's disappeared.

As for the match engine itself, Christ. I really don't even know where to begin with things that are glaringly wrong with it, but it brings back some harrowing memories of the FM14 match engine in which world-class attacking players performed as though they'd been overdosed on morphine, generally being slow, weak, easy to dispossess and dreadful in their anticipation. Goals in the box from second balls never seem to happen because of an abject lack of anticipation from attackers, elite goalscorers (players like Mauro Icardi and Mohamed Salah) will regularly miss three clear-cut chances in succession, no tactical instruction or combination of them seems to dissuade either set of players from looking to play inane low percentage in-to-out passes to wide forwards which are almost always gratefully intercepted by full-backs (my full-backs do this all the time while my centre forward and midfielders are similarly generous to the opposition full-backs in their witless attempts to play balls to the wide forwards that just aren't on); players will often look to play these passes off the ground for no reason, which makes them even easier to anticipate and cut out. This in large part seems to explain why my defenders' and midfielders' combined pass completion percentage can be well in excess of 80% while my attacking pass completion perecentage is often below 70%, regardless of the instructions I try. The volume of offsides at both ends (against the opposition more so than my team) is colossal, and makes it far too easy to play a high line (something I've benefitted from greatly but would gladly exchange for a better match engine), elite players often pass the ball wide and backwards when in prime positions to shoot in the centre of the box, players for whom 'shoots from distance' is a preferred move as well as a strength (high long shots attribute score) rarely even attempt long-range shots, let alone score them, direct free kicks are never scored, full-backs, even those who are good at crossing, mostly seem to produced slice daisy-cutters which bobble harmlessly out for goal kicks, and the volume of inane, attack-killing passes played backwards or behind players (inside forwards in the final third will often play a backwards diagonal to the full-back on the opposite side, who then has to run backwards to retrieve the ball, or just watch it go out of play), is both mystifying and infuriating.

 

Sorry guys, but it's just dreadful. Please sort it out, because it's completely ruining a game which is a significant improvement in many other areas (dynamics, sports science and injury prevention, scouting etc.)

Edited November 29, 2017 by Maleven

[jam jameson]

21 minuti fa, Maleven ha scritto:

As was the case in FM14, and initially in FM15, the glaring inadequacies of the match engine are completely ruining the game for me, this despite the fact that, as in the past, my results are good.

Before talking about how the match engine actually functions, a couple of queries and criticisms from an aesthetic point of view: where has the main stand view gone, and is it not possible to reverse the behind goal and behind corner views anymore so you get to see from the other end of the stadium? Another one: where has the radar gone? This was very important to me tactically and to see what was going on around the halfway line at set pieces, and it's disappeared.

As for the match engine itself, Christ. I really don't even know where to begin with things that are glaringly wrong with it, but it brings back some harrowing memories of the FM14 match engine in which world-class attacking players performed as though they'd been overdosed on morphine, generally being slow, weak, easy to dispossess and dreadful in their anticipation. Goals in the box from second balls never seem to happen because of an abject lack of anticipation from attackers, elite goalscorers (players like Mauro Icardi and Mohamed Salah) will regularly miss three clear-cut chances in succession, no tactical instruction or combination of them seems to dissuade either set of players from looking to play inane low percentage in-to-out passes to wide forwards which are almost always gratefully intercepted by full-backs (my full-backs do this all the time while my centre forward and midfielders are similarly generous to the opposition full-backs in their witless attempts to play balls to the wide forwards that just aren't on); players will often look to play these passes off the ground for no reason, which makes them even easier to anticipate and cut out. This in large part seems to explain why my defenders' and midfielders' combined pass completion percentage can be well in excess of 80% while my attacking pass completion perecentage often below 70%, regardless of the instructions I try. The volume of offsides at both ends (against the opposition more so than my team) is colossal, and makes it far too easy to play a high line (something I've benefitted from greatly but would gladly exchange for a better match engine) elite players often pass the ball wide and backwards when in prime positions to shoot in the centre of the box, players for whom 'shoots from distance' is a preferred move as well as a strength (high long shots attribute score) rarely even attempt long-range shots, let alone score them, direct free kicks are never scored, full-backs, even those who are good at crossing mostly seem to produced slice daisy-cutters which bobble harmlessly out for goal kicks, and  the volume of inane, attack-killing passes played backwards or behind players (inside forwards in the final third black a backwards diagonal to the full-back on the opposite side, who then has to run backwards to retrieve the ball), is both mystifying and infuriating.

 

Sorry guys, but it's just dreadful. Please sort it out, because it's completely ruining a game which is a significant improvement in many other areas (dynamics, sports science and injury prevention, scouting etc.)

Dreadful to say the least. Stadia are awful, cameras are awful, ME is awful, goals are again and again the same type of goals (set pieces or long balls behind the defence are 80% of the goals). I've read in this thread that somebody doesn't attach much importance to the visual quality of the ME, since it's just an approximation of the calculation behind, and it is ok to the extent the results are fair. I can see the point but if you 'sell' to users the 3d with a ME to enjoy the game even as an actual football match and not only a matter of calculation, you have to provide something good, and this ME is not the case at all

[kandersson]

After consistent playing time, I have to say that the amount of goals and chances generated from the same unstoppable patterns on throw ins and indirect free kicks (pass, pass, shoot) is almost unbearable and makes me want to remove highlights, or stop playing. I probably score more than I concede, HL are a throw in and set pieces festival though.

[Tony Wright 747]

53 minutes ago, jam jameson said:

Dreadful to say the least. Stadia are awful, cameras are awful, ME is awful, goals are again and again the same type of goals (set pieces or long balls behind the defence are 80% of the goals). I've read in this thread that somebody doesn't attach much importance to the visual quality of the ME, since it's just an approximation of the calculation behind, and it is ok to the extent the results are fair. I can see the point but if you 'sell' to users the 3d with a ME to enjoy the game even as an actual football match and not only a matter of calculation, you have to provide something good, and this ME is not the case at all

Whilst dissapointing might be a better word than awful, I wouldn't disagree with your comments, however from SI's point of view, robust sales would somewhat dilute the argument.

[themadsheep2001]

2 hours ago, Svenc said:

Design by committee, basically. Arguably, outside of technical / balancing stuff, a large amount of feedback in general should be taken with a huge grain of salt. And I include my own feedback in that just as well. The reason of which should be obvious. A simulation game such as FM basically is measured on two traditionally axis. x axis = playabaility / balancing. y axis = realism. Sensi Soccer is a perfectly fun and playable game to this day (xxx), but it would score pretty lowly on the realism front. CM/FM has struck for a different position here since.

What complicates things further is that the simulated object is fairly subjective, and even TV pundits spout tons of nonsense every goddamn week (it's arguably their job to do so though -- they're selling an ever increasingly expensive luxury product to make it compete with other prime time TV entertainment, not necessarily to teach or tell the truth.) As such, misconceptions are rife for the taken, they translate to everything. I think these forums even used to have a guy who argued that men fought back the dinosaurs as part of an inventive way of justifying his "30 reloads every match", but that's a bit different naturally. Add to this that the simulated object can be perceived as inherently unjust in reality (over weeks, sometimes months), and that precisely all that "f*ck" happening in football is probably harder to simulate than anything else (some games deliberately tone down on all of this, which would be shocking as per FM, see the perception is reality bit at the bottom), and there you go. [I'd argue one key here is "teaching" players how to use the in-game feedback -- there must be loads who haven't even found each team's general shot conversion data in-game, or how to use it]. Plus, providing match analysis tools only goes so far -- you could write a manual for them all itself.

Of course there's the never ending argument how much a sim vs game FM should at all be. But for all the core stuff they should rather look at their football contacts first and foremost. Is the manager to player communication realistic? Are things that happen in-game transpire off the pitch reasonable (some internet bloke who reads the Daily Mail and watching lots of MOTD sure won't know it, me not either!)? How about the training modules, the media, the tactical modules, everything? And does the finishing look somewhat believable, Antoine? Do the keeper fumbles appear reasonably cringe, David James? Is the general portrayal mangement in the mid- to lower tiers of football somewhat believable, folk at AFC Wimbledon? And what do you think of our in-game music, Robbie Williams?  I'd rather have them listen to those, and also their STATS Prozone guys than anybody else. Same as utilizing actually studies that exist (which are the basis of metrics used in football, and have proven to be useful) -- from my end there's never been a huge generally issue here, except if your benchmark is Fifa / some random Youtube compilation. Everybody's opinion is naturally viable. Too bad it's often just ranting though (it's precisely that of which which has driven the devs away before).

Absolutely spot on as usual. 

One of the areas they can definitely improve is making sure the definitions of the stats we use match up to those of say, OPTA. Like it or not, these are great figures people are exposed to, so if there is a disparity because your definitions are different, it throws people. Crossing stats for example. 

[jam jameson]

2 ore fa, Tony Wright 747 ha scritto:

Whilst dissapointing might be a better word than awful, I wouldn't disagree with your comments, however from SI's point of view, robust sales would somewhat dilute the argument.

...Maybe you're right, my fault the word choice, being a not-English speaker forgive me...

[jam jameson]

3 ore fa, kandersson ha scritto:

After consistent playing time, I have to say that the amount of goals and chances generated from the same unstoppable patterns on throw ins and indirect free kicks (pass, pass, shoot) is almost unbearable and makes me want to remove highlights, or stop playing. I probably score more than I concede, HL are a throw in and set pieces festival though.

The problem that is making me crazy is that nobody at SI tells anything about such issues being investigated, maybe they do not consider it an issue at all, while it's so plainly blatant that the set pieces are flawed and impossible to manage, that I wonder how on earth it would be possible to deny it...maybe they don't actually play the game...

[Tony Wright 747]

4 minutes ago, jam jameson said:

...Maybe you're right, my fault the word choice, being a not-English speaker forgive me...

No problem, and I think there are a lot of people out there whos would agree with your concerns

[jam jameson]

In questo momento, Tony Wright 747 ha scritto:

No problem, and I think there are a lot of people out there whos would agree with your concerns

At the moment I've decided that FM18 has some pros but too many cons, therefore I've given up on it and gone back to FM17