Football Manager 2018 *Official* Feedback Thread

[HUNT3R]

Just now, Karnack said:

Probably not. I'm playing in Italy with default settings. Guessing that should be full match details?

The league you're playing in, will be on full detail, yes. By default, the other leagues wouldn't be, even if loaded.

Still, that's good feedback on the DFKs in the full ME, even if it's just Italy. It's been a common complaint, so thanks.  

[diddydaddydoddy]

6 hours ago, Chris21 said:

I still look at every update to see if David De Gea has been given more than 15 for one on ones, been the same for years now, it's hilarious 

For the record I haven't looked at this one yet, someone surprise me and tell me finally this has been changed?

Can I suggest you post this in the right forum (https://community.sigames.com/topic/411489-england-official-manchester-united-data-issues/) to give the Man Utd Researcher an opportunity to reply. You need to point out why you think the data is wrong, what it should be and state reasons/proof as to why - presuming of course you haven't already done this over the last few years.

 

Edited March 3, 2018 by diddydaddydoddy

[RinusFM]

What also baffled me is that the celebrations-scene is still bugged.  Sometimes I think SI Games doesn't care anymore cause they have a monopoly position. I prefer that they smooth out FM18 before they release FM19. Or even I think it's good to get rid of yearly versions and make one game named Football Manager and bring out big and smaller patches + data updates. This also will be awesome for people who love long save games, so they can play it without the fear that a new version of FM will be superior etc and so the long save game will be redundant 

 

It's time for a change. #ChangeSIGames. It's good for us, better for Football Manager and the best for the gameplay! 

Edited March 3, 2018 by RinusFM

[cengizyilmaz1976]

in the German forum forum is the opinion of the ME rather negative.
I think I prefer to stay with the Fm17 and skip the new fm18

[Spurs08]

53 minutes ago, RinusFM said:

What also baffled me is that the celebrations-scene is still bugged.  Sometimes I think SI Games doesn't care anymore cause they have a monopoly position. I prefer that they smooth out FM18 before they release FM19. Or even I think it's good to get rid of yearly versions and make one game named Football Manager and bring out big and smaller patches + data updates. This also will be awesome for people who love long save games, so they can play it without the fear that a new version of FM will be superior etc and so the long save game will be redundant 

 

It's time for a change. #ChangeSIGames. It's good for us, better for Football Manager and the best for the gameplay! 

They're a business. That model only works if people are willing to pay for subscriptions, otherwise you're giving up revenue. 

[Etebaer]

Btw. thx for fixing the ingame Sound!

 

Imho the ME is again better now in regard how it displays the match - seems more acurate, fluid, better animated, less staged, less pre defined...

My Tactic had need 2 very minor changes so far...

I prefer this FM very much over the FM17+FM16!!!

[Federico]

2 ore fa, RinusFM ha scritto:

What also baffled me is that the celebrations-scene is still bugged.  Sometimes I think SI Games doesn't care anymore cause they have a monopoly position. I prefer that they smooth out FM18 before they release FM19. Or even I think it's good to get rid of yearly versions and make one game named Football Manager and bring out big and smaller patches + data updates. This also will be awesome for people who love long save games, so they can play it without the fear that a new version of FM will be superior etc and so the long save game will be redundant 

It's time for a change. #ChangeSIGames. It's good for us, better for Football Manager and the best for the gameplay! 

When I read this post I checked if I was on the right forum or on an FM0something old forum. Really, +1 for originality

I don't understand what's wrong with celebrations. People asked for that for so long, now you have it but still complain. The SI doesn't care bla bla bla. Stop the yearly release make one game only updatable bla bla bla. Read thousands and thousands of times. Boring.

Bring up something new guys! Are you running out of ideas? Anything not including a stupid "#" possibly?

https://community.sigames.com/forum/353-football-manager-feature-requests/

[Federico]

3 ore fa, HUNT3R ha scritto:

Are the matches running on full detail? Because that makes a massive difference.

I hope it doesn't, speaking of statistics. It means, teorically, that all the figures collected are redundant if not played on full detail. Penalties, goal scored, cards and so on... basically every related thread raised in the bugs forum is not completely reliable, probably.

[tiotom92]

 

My views on the new update.

Firstly, (as I've admittedly pointed out earlier in the thread), what have SI done to the teamtalk screen? Why does it now look like this?

Secondly, in regards to the match engine, I'm pretty convinced that there have been changes - the way my team are playing just feels different somehow. Although I'm liking what I'm seeing, in my third game after the update both an opposition player and my goalkeeper decided to smash the ball into their own net for no reason (which I haven't seen happened once in over 4 seasons, let alone twice in one game). Notice how the first own goal even flashes GOAL FOR JUVENTUS, despite the fact that it was a Juventus player who smashed the ball into his own net.

Thirdly, why haven't SI fixed some of the biggest bugs that were in the beta by the final patch?! For example, everything on the left hand side of this screen is still unclickable because I have widgets behind them during highlights, which is really annoying as I like to click on opposition players during matches to see what they're like. This has been reported multiple times and whilst I'm no expert this should surely be an easy fix.

Also my manager still looks different every time I open the game, newgens still constantly change skin colour, the 3D match engine still runs badly on low settings despite having a good Nvidia graphics card, and AI managers still continue to play their first 11 regardless of the fact that their condition is around 85% or lower and / or are suffering from knocks.

I've played FM since before it was even called FM, yet I have never played a version of the game that is as incomplete as this one is by the final patch. What have the team even been doing all this time? Working on the next game I'm guessing (and of course getting the game to show match times on the competition screen).

One positive is that getting the team captain to resolve issues has been nerfed, which was well needed, but other than that, very disappointing. I hope SI review how they've been operating lately, because their reputation is at stake here.

Edited March 4, 2018 by tiotom92

[Federico]

8 minuti fa, tiotom92 ha scritto:

[...] the 3D match engine still runs badly on low settings despite having a good Nvidia graphics card [...]

Maybe I can help you with this. Open the nVidia control panel, go to "manage 3D settings" --> Program Settings --> choose FM18 from the drop down menu and on the panel below, once you find the V-Sync setting, set it on "fast".

[RinusFM]

59 minutes ago, Federico said:

When I read this post I checked if I was on the right forum or on an FM0something old forum. Really, +1 for originality

I don't understand what's wrong with celebrations. People asked for that for so long, now you have it but still complain. The SI doesn't care bla bla bla. Stop the yearly release make one game only updatable bla bla bla. Read thousands and thousands of times. Boring.

Bring up something new guys! Are you running out of ideas? Anything not including a stupid "#" possibly?

https://community.sigames.com/forum/353-football-manager-feature-requests/

Talking bout the competition/cup win celebration. My players always clip, etc on the buildup-standthingy. I don't know how to code but I imagine it's easily fixable somewhere. 

Edited March 4, 2018 by RinusFM

[alian62]

5 hours ago, Federico said:

Maybe I can help you with this. Open the nVidia control panel, go to "manage 3D settings" --> Program Settings --> choose FM18 from the drop down menu and on the panel below, once you find the V-Sync setting, set it on "fast".

Roll back your Nvidia drivers to 388.0 . Worked for me

[shirajzl]

5 hours ago, Federico said:

Maybe I can help you with this. Open the nVidia control panel, go to "manage 3D settings" --> Program Settings --> choose FM18 from the drop down menu and on the panel below, once you find the V-Sync setting, set it on "fast".

How would you do that with a Radeon card, if you know per chance? The ME runs horribly, the framerate is all over the place, even on low/medium settings.

[Rashidi]

18 minutes ago, shirajzl said:

How would you do that with a Radeon card, if you know per chance? The ME runs horribly, the framerate is all over the place, even on low/medium settings.

https://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/DH-023.aspx

Should be able to do it with Radeon cards too, provided you meet the specs

[shirajzl]

8 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

https://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/DH-023.aspx

Should be able to do it with Radeon cards too, provided you meet the specs

Pardon my ignorance, but how will capture and streaming functionality help in this matter? It's an extension of the normal Radeon settings software, but I don't see anywhere how it's supposed to enhance performance of a game.

[HUNT3R]

6 hours ago, Federico said:

I hope it doesn't, speaking of statistics. It means, teorically, that all the figures collected are redundant if not played on full detail. Penalties, goal scored, cards and so on... basically every related thread raised in the bugs forum is not completely reliable, probably.

It makes a difference because full detail means matches are played out in the ME (and you're able to re-watch them), rather than the quick sim ME (where you can't watch a match back), so it important.

[Rashidi]

57 minutes ago, shirajzl said:

Pardon my ignorance, but how will capture and streaming functionality help in this matter? It's an extension of the normal Radeon settings software, but I don't see anywhere how it's supposed to enhance performance of a game.

My bad thought you wanted to know how to screen capture with a radeon card

[Dagenham_Dave]

I reckon FM19 is set up to be a stellar game in the series. I certainly hope so anyway. 

Only because, sad to say, this version is the most unpolished for some time. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with it, it's still a great game, but there's just too many little niggles to make it a top entry in the series. Biggest two bugbears for me are the awful stadiums and terrible regen faces. Match engine is fine, but even that I don't feel is as fluid as last years (particularly after the final update). The UI has been generally poor this year, and this is noticeable when you stick on some of the more recent entries. It's also the first year since it was introduced on FM13 that I haven't been able to get into a save on FM Classic. 

Overall I feel it's been a bit of a disappointment this year, but it's all relative I suppose. I've clocked up over 700 hours so far, which is about 7 times the amount of hours I've put into Skyrim, one of my favourite games of all time. It's a funny old game. 

[Dagenham_Dave]

7 hours ago, tiotom92 said:

 

Notice how the first own goal even flashes GOAL FOR JUVENTUS, despite the fact that it was a Juventus player who smashed the ball into his own net.

 

I can't believe they never fixed that. This is another example of what I was saying above, too many little errors have crept in this year compared to other years. Sloppy. 

[Preveza]

Whats with every single fan in the stands wearing the exact same colour shirt. Seriously SI. Very disappointed.

[penza]

10 hours ago, cengizyilmaz1976 said:

in the German forum forum is the opinion of the ME rather negative.
I think I prefer to stay with the Fm17 and skip the new fm18

italian and french too

[Etebaer]

I rather like the Stadiums, maybe it is depending on what nation/league you play and what expectations you have - they only need some more polish imho...crowdbehavior etc.

I dont expect 1:1 models of the originals...

[Tony Wright 747]

21 minutes ago, Preveza said:

Whats with every single fan in the stands wearing the exact same colour shirt. Seriously SI. Very disappointed.

This has been raised numerous times Preveza, but it never gets answered

[Showerman]

rise of the super keepers since this update ?

[diddydaddydoddy]

2 hours ago, Preveza said:

Whats with every single fan in the stands wearing the exact same colour shirt. Seriously SI. Very disappointed.

There was a 90% off sale in the club shop

[Mons]

On 3/2/2018 at 15:11, prot651 said:

Sorry your on a wick . That is sad . The Feature Request isn't a feature request its a reinstatement that was taken out . If you don't like this game to be criticised then go away and hide in a corner . Its not up to you to decide what someone should complain about so if it gets on your wick then don't read it . Your response has no constructive value than just to shut someone down who feels the game is going nowhere . Just like a moderator you defend the game instead of looking deeper into the millions we pay to have little effort . As stated the game has not grown at all . Same ol Same ol . 

Without VALID and LOGICAL criticism, this game (and almost everything else) will be stuck in a rut. There is much to criticise SI for, but nothing you have said was provable or true. If you genuinely want your arguments to be taken seriously, you had best learn how to articulate an argument based on proof and logic, and be able to reply civilly and in a coherent manner when somebody inevitably disagrees with you.

 

Oh, and it's nice to see you don't even realize the irony in posting "Its not up to you to decide what someone should complain about"

[Federico]

5 ore fa, shirajzl ha scritto:

How would you do that with a Radeon card, if you know per chance? The ME runs horribly, the framerate is all over the place, even on low/medium settings.

Ahhh I'm sorry but I have no idea

[Titou]

Fluo shoes are still not back, this is unacceptable

[Svenc]

3 hours ago, Showerman said:

rise of the super keepers since this update ?

1) The patch didn't make any changes to the ME. 2) Never once existed, this. There's players that get fantastic conversion rates. There's players that get worse ones. On the current builds they can't be that super, including the defenses/AI tactical decisions, as there's a huge amount of players that get their teams to convert up to every 4th overall attempt they get from everywhere.  [To put that into context: One on ones are/should be converted long-term ca. every 3rd attempt].

Edited March 4, 2018 by Svenc

[akkm]

Just to give that one on one context @Svenc...re your example before of pedro on .35xg...tho technically he's briefly one on one with the keeper but from a bad angle...that's actually not a chance Id consider a one on one chance...so it depends on how you classify one on ones...personally i consider them player being slotted through centrally enough with plenty of time and space vs keeper...if I saw that pedro chance you showed before in FM i actually wouldn't remotely class it as a one on one chance.

Most Xg calcs don't factor in proximity of defenders either...yes they weight it for a through ball but proximity of defenders and classification of what a one on one chance is may impact perceptions Vs Xg stats. I expect if you look at more central one on ones with certain aspects of consideration like time on ball to finish, distance from defenders and space to run in to would impact Xg of these chances...currently it seems the calculations of Xg for one on ones don't distinguish angle of approach/proximity of defenders or take into account quality of player in that situation...the xg calcs are more from generic examples...and are all pooled into one.

 Xg finishing rates show that better forwards consistently outperform Xg rates so one may expect that applies for one on ones as well.

 

So all that in context could mean that players will convert more than 1 in 3 and if you narrow down classification of one on ones (to more central chances with further level of granularity to introduce proximity of defenders) could also impact positively (from a forwards point of view) an expected 1 in 3 conversion rate

[MBarbaric]

@akkm

as far as I know, not all xG's are the same nor they have the same methodology of determining the outcome. However, most of them do include the position on the pitch where the player took the shot from (depending on who makes the calculation, the pitch is divided in up to 34 zones so central/wide is very much accounted for), the foot (stronger/weaker)... Don't know about the pressure being applied although I'd guess that is also accounted for, at least to an extent. That being said, xG isn't the perfect measurement, but it is as good as it gets at the moment. It is mind boggling why FM doesn't include this in stats as all the data is already in the ME and could be far more accurate than anything collected in real.

[Svenc]

1 hour ago, akkm said:

Xg finishing rates show that better forwards consistently outperform Xg rates so one may expect that applies for one on ones as well.

Wrong thread, akkm? Yes, that's part of the point of such models. To try to determine who finishes better than the average and who doesn't. Who's in the "minus" zone and "plus" zone, so to speak.You will mostly find that this isn't about scoring on altogether different levels though, but gaining a few crucial extra percentages. At least on competitive levels. You likely adressed this because of my 1 in 3 one on ones remark. I put this in to merely highlight that you can approach converting 1 in 4 overall attempts -- and what that means --- just roughly.

Quote

It is mind boggling why FM doesn't include this in stats as all the data is already in the ME and could be far more accurate than anything collected in real.

@MBarbaric I have a suspicious that is part of the reason why something like that doesn't go in. E.g. it may give a bit too much away. In football, for managers such models are an additionally tool. It's just an added tool, as football isn't numbers... the game is numbers through and through though. Additionally, there seem misconceptions too what such metrics do, see above. However, much of the game's feedback   doesn't make sense with the stats the game has. Most prominently the match reports... if a side had more attempts it was destined to score loads. If it does not, it would be wasteful or unlucky. That was the game's "logics" ten years ago and it still is now....

Edited March 4, 2018 by Svenc

[szp]

Yeah, great. I created a separate thread where, amogst others, I've asked why SI doesn't respond to "Feedback thread" questions, and I've been told to use... "Feedback thread" to ask 

I'll give it a try, so once again:

Quote

Hi,

I'm long time fan of CM/FM series. I bought all the versions since CM3 and I always thought that this forum is a good platform to contact the people from SI Games. But since FM 17 I've noticed that SI is simply ignoring some of the requests, suggestions and questions from the users. What is happening after 18.3.0 patch, looks like totally disrespecting the people who bought the game. I don't believe that SI team is so busy, that they can't find few minutes to answer the questions in "official feedback thread". A lot of users were asking about changes in ME - if there are any or not. Is it so hard to answer "yes" or "no"? Some mods gave us an answer that the only changes are mentioned in changelist. So I have the next question: there's a big "Bugs" section, there's a "Feedback Thread" etc. My question is: what for? There were so many complaints about the ME - shooting, overpowered crosses, overpowered multiple-strikers formations, clear-cut chances conversion, free kicks, crazy amount of offsides. All these issues were raised not by 2 or 3 frustrated users but by a lot of people. All these problems are pretty important for the game experience. Sometimes you even gave responses that you're "investigating this issue" etc. After all these discussions, I think that I'm not the only one who was waiting for some improvements in ME after 18.3.0 patch. And you practically changed nothing. I think it would be nice to write why you've made such decision. Like: sorry, we couldn't take your reports and complaints into consideration, because it's hard to make any changes in ME/we started working on new ME for FM19/we think that you're wrong and current ME is good enough... Anything. There are a lot of people who are hugely disappointed from the lack of improvements, they made it clear in various threads on this forum and it's four days since the update and you keep being silent. It is not how the users were used to be treated in previous years. Of course it is your game, you decide how you're developing it, how much do you care about the users suggestions etc. But what problem do you have with making things clear?

I don't know if you respond, but I'd really appreciate if you do. 

Cheers.  

 

Edited March 4, 2018 by szp

[MBarbaric]

 

@szp there is a quite clear response from @Nic Madden in "too many long shots thread on bugs forum". From the response, I gather that it reflects upon other issues as well.

here's the gist of it:

"As stated in this thread previously, we are very happy with the overall balance of the ME. The stats of: goals per game, shots per match, shots on target, shots off target, shots taken from inside the area, shots taken from outside the area, shots converted from these positions, goals scored by players of specific positions etc... are very well balanced and close to real life stats." 

appears there are no sufficient evidence the stats are off 

 

Edited March 4, 2018 by MBarbaric

[Chris21]

19 hours ago, diddydaddydoddy said:

Can I suggest you post this in the right forum (https://community.sigames.com/topic/411489-england-official-manchester-united-data-issues/) to give the Man Utd Researcher an opportunity to reply. You need to point out why you think the data is wrong, what it should be and state reasons/proof as to why - presuming of course you haven't already done this over the last few years.

 

If I have state to a researcher why I think David De Gea deserves more than 15 for one on ones then my God  Just watch football and you'll see why. He's had 15 for one on ones for years now and has become probably the best goalkeeper in the world. If this needs to pointed out then I think a new researcher is probably needed for Manchester United. No disrespect to whoever he or she may be, but come on now. That's the equivalent of giving Messi 15 for finishing. 

It's not the end of the world btw, just continually baffles me especially when much goalkeepers are given more.

[diddydaddydoddy]

15 minutes ago, Chris21 said:

If I have state to a researcher why I think David De Gea deserves more than 15 for one on ones then my God  Just watch football and you'll see why. He's had 15 for one on ones for years now and has become probably the best goalkeeper in the world. If this needs to pointed out then I think a new researcher is probably needed for Manchester United. No disrespect to whoever he or she may be, but come on now. That's the equivalent of giving Messi 15 for finishing. 

It's not the end of the world btw, just continually baffles me especially when much goalkeepers are given more.

Obviously you DO need to state to the Man Utd researcher your reasoning for the very fact it HASN'T changed for years!! 

I don't know the researcher in question, but to say a new researcher is needed based upon ONE attribute being wrong in your opinion is really disrespectful and pathetic. He will have approx c36,000 pieces of detail on Man Utd to be on top of and for whatever reason he believes 15 is ok. Maybe if you put a case forward he might just change it.

Edited March 4, 2018 by diddydaddydoddy

[Federico]

39 minuti fa, Chris21 ha scritto:

He's had 15 for one on ones for years now and has become probably the best goalkeeper in the world.

Out of interest... are you a Man U fan?

I don't expect someone neutral appointing De Gea as "the Messi of goalkeepers"

[herne79]

32 minutes ago, Chris21 said:

If I have state to a researcher why I think David De Gea deserves more than 15 for one on ones then my God  Just watch football and you'll see why. He's had 15 for one on ones for years now and has become probably the best goalkeeper in the world. If this needs to pointed out then I think a new researcher is probably needed for Manchester United. No disrespect to whoever he or she may be, but come on now. That's the equivalent of giving Messi 15 for finishing. 

It's not the end of the world btw, just continually baffles me especially when much goalkeepers are given more.

As @diddydaddydoddy points out please don't start being disrespectful just because you have a different opinion.

If you have an issue with the data, you should raise this in the Man Utd data issues thread https://community.sigames.com/topic/411489-england-official-manchester-united-data-issues/.  Note that you'll need to offer more evidence to support your opinion than "just watch football and you'll see why".

Before you do raise an issue, please ensure you read both the opening post in that thread and the forum FAQs https://community.sigames.com/topic/411694-data-forum-faq/.

 

[RobertPage]

3 hours ago, MBarbaric said:

 

@szp there is a quite clear response from @Nic Madden in "too many long shots thread on bugs forum". From the response, I gather that it reflects upon other issues as well.

here's the gist of it:

"As stated in this thread previously, we are very happy with the overall balance of the ME. The stats of: goals per game, shots per match, shots on target, shots off target, shots taken from inside the area, shots taken from outside the area, shots converted from these positions, goals scored by players of specific positions etc... are very well balanced and close to real life stats." 

appears there are no sufficient evidence the stats are off 

 

"As stated in this thread previously, we are very happy with the overall balance of the ME. The stats of: goals per game, shots per match, shots on target, shots off target, shots taken from inside the area, shots taken from outside the area, shots converted from these positions, goals scored by players of specific positions etc... are very well balanced and close to real life stats." 

and here we have whats probably one of the main problems with SI. Too busy trying to replicate real life statistics when the match engine itself lacks realism. There's zero point in having these stats being accurate when they make for such a poor looking/ frustrating to watch game. There has to be a balance. The balance is worse off than it has been for a very long time

[Dagenham_Dave]

2 hours ago, Federico said:

Out of interest... are you a Man U fan?

I don't expect someone neutral appointing De Gea as "the Messi of goalkeepers"

Apart from anything else, De Gea is still relatively young for a goalkeeper. What would be the sense in giving him 20 for this stat just now only to see him improve in real life, where would you go from there? 

[masno]

5 hours ago, MBarbaric said:

 

@szp there is a quite clear response from @Nic Madden in "too many long shots thread on bugs forum". From the response, I gather that it reflects upon other issues as well.

here's the gist of it:

"As stated in this thread previously, we are very happy with the overall balance of the ME. The stats of: goals per game, shots per match, shots on target, shots off target, shots taken from inside the area, shots taken from outside the area, shots converted from these positions, goals scored by players of specific positions etc... are very well balanced and close to real life stats." 

appears there are no sufficient evidence the stats are off 

 

I was getting hopes up for FM19,that they didn't fixed the bugged corner-flag shots because they were already with a new ME ready to deploy on the next launch, and would be waste of their time fixing this. But after what I read, all my hopes that FM19 will be the next big change and we would have a new ME (or at least a ME that don't have major problems every single year) with new nice features, maybe more 3 years 

[OLLMEISTER1]

On 03/03/2018 at 10:43, MrPompey said:

LOL placebo effect - you see what you want to see:

These are the Winter Update  ME changes as confirmed in GD:

MATCH
------
- Fixed rare ball physics bug
- Improved individual team talk reactions
- Fixed team talk assistant advice when winning competition
- Fixed passing accuracy assistant feedback
- Fixed issue where stadium/players sometimes appear black
- Fixed score diverging in online matches
- Additional individual team talk button added to player’s row on team talk table

If you are happy then who am I to complain

They have never denied making changes either. 

[Svenc]

3 hours ago, RobertPage said:

and here we have whats probably one of the main problems with SI. Too busy trying to replicate real life statistics when the match engine itself lacks realism. There's zero point in having these stats being accurate when they make for such a poor looking/ frustrating to watch game. There has to be a balance. The balance is worse off than it has been for a very long time

And here we arguably have the reason why staff information / communication isn't as common anymore. Statistical analysis has always been one important part of assessing the game's ME. But far from the only one. Where do I know this from? From years when the forums were probably a bit more inviting for staff to post their stuff. They even posted the stats they collected. Unlikely that this will happen now, though I would be very interested myself. Pity. One part of the ME main coders job is watching matches full back to back -- and the best bug reports have always been those that dissect such matches second by second, including the good, the bad, and the ugly. This has been happening ever since the game has existed, and I doubt it is much different nowadays.  I think it's all legit points we raise, but I also think that if the game were anything near as frustrating/random as  football would be, this place would --explode--. And I don't mean merely bugs, or the current limitations as to the defensive phase, or anything. I mean this in general. Football matches on average are settled by the slightest of margins. Not seldom those margins come about by error, misjudgement and good old random chance. This can happen and influence streaks in sequence. The league tables lie. What is  perceived as "form" is oft nothing but randomness. Any gambling company prominently features Win-Draw-Loss records on their online portals, as they can bank on this, and know better.

I am eagerly awaiting some major upgrades myself to various areas. But think about it Robert, the game cannot win. I recently had an argument over a couple of points that bugged me in the game with someone. Whilst we both agreed that it is a bugbear to us, he saw this from a completely different perspective, namely from a fun/excitement point of view -- the kind of thing a match of Fifa would deliver in spades. Whereas I was firmly into the opposite corner, arguing that: "Yeah, that's all good, but I think you see this thing through rose tinted glasses, as that's not what football is, and what the game should strife for." Neither of us was right or wrong! I think it's precisely those errors and mess-ups that are harder to balance and code than any fluid attacking play. The latter is inherently accepted, in particular if it goes for the own team -- less so for the opponent, in particular if that opponent has a bunch of low attribute players. The former... is a bit more difficult. Tip: If you are unsure, check the demo. That half a season isn't suited for gauging all -- AI squad development, for a start. But the updates applied to it ensure that you can check hundreds of hours of patched up ME football  -- just like the main coders do. I am pretty confident that there will be bugbears in FM19, 20 and 32, but back then SI have never argued different. "Work in progress" was the officially credo, but I doubt anybody would say it in public nowadays, as that would be twisted into something that it's not.

Edited March 4, 2018 by Svenc

[Chris21]

2 hours ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

Apart from anything else, De Gea is still relatively young for a goalkeeper. What would be the sense in giving him 20 for this stat just now only to see him improve in real life, where would you go from there? 

Load up the game, search for goalkeepers with 15 or more for one one ones and give me reasons why each of those goalkeepers is better at one on ones as David De Gea. I wish you good luck. Anyone that thinks that stat is right him is clueless quite frankly.

Apologies to the mod who quoted me too. I tend to forget this place is run like an army boot camp these days. 

[FrazT]

@Chris21

Criticism of the game is always welcomed as long as it sticks to the forum rules.  When that criticism becomes personal against the SI staff, the researchers or the Mods, then it becomes unacceptable.  Please bear that in mind if and when you post again

[akkm]

1 hour ago, MBarbaric said:

@akkm

as far as I know, not all xG's are the same nor they have the same methodology of determining the outcome. However, most of them do include the position on the pitch where the player took the shot from (depending on who makes the calculation, the pitch is divided in up to 34 zones so central/wide is very much accounted for), the foot (stronger/weaker)... Don't know about the pressure being applied although I'd guess that is also accounted for, at least to an extent. That being said, xG isn't the perfect measurement, but it is as good as it gets at the moment. It is mind boggling why FM doesn't include this in stats as all the data is already in the ME and could be far more accurate than anything collected in real.

Yep..they are dependent on distance from goal/angle of shot etc but i think it's only one model that factors in proximity of defenders (or very few currently) or pressure on the ball...it's more based on as you say and yes not all Xgs are the same which was point i was making about one on ones...I wouldn't classify some one on ones as per what Xg may do...so on that basis the one on one depends on how it's classified...if it's grouping together more difficult angles than centrally and not factoring pressure on ball/proximity of defenders then it's diluting the 1 in 3 stat for this.

 

[Rashidi]

26 minutes ago, akkm said:

Yep..they are dependent on distance from goal/angle of shot etc but i think it's only one model that factors in proximity of defenders (or very few currently) or pressure on the ball...it's more based on as you say and yes not all Xgs are the same which was point i was making about one on ones...I wouldn't classify some one on ones as per what Xg may do...so on that basis the one on one depends on how it's classified...if it's grouping together more difficult angles than centrally and not factoring pressure on ball/proximity of defenders then it's diluting the 1 in 3 stat for this.

 

Xga is fairly involved the metrics themselves are numerous and while I would love for it to be added to the game, I just don't know whether it would take away processing power for something else. I'd much rather SI use xGa internally to determine how their own AI tactics do, and for that to be considered, they would have to agree that xGa is a worthwhile too. Nice to have, not too sure if it will ever make its way into the game. Plus isn't it proprietary?

[MrPompey]

9 hours ago, Chris21 said:

Load up the game, search for goalkeepers with 15 or more for one one ones and give me reasons why each of those goalkeepers is better at one on ones as David De Gea. I wish you good luck. Anyone that thinks that stat is right him is clueless quite frankly.

Apologies to the mod who quoted me too. I tend to forget this place is run like an army boot camp these days. 

One on Ones and De Gea.

Do we have any say premiership stats of the last few years for goalkeepers that detail who may be more successful than other GKs for one v ones. With this information you should / could justify to the Man U researcher else to the other researchers that their GK's need their stats reducing etc

I personally don't have a view, my eyes are mainly on L1 these days

[cjb1986]

anyone else getting a load of crash dumps since the update? ive had 2 in the 2 attempts ive had at playing since the update (about a month game time) as opposed to zero previously in 13 seasons 

[MBarbaric]

4 ore fa, Rashidi ha scritto:

Plus isn't it proprietary?

nope, anyone can do it if he can get hold of the data and knows his math.