Missing 90% of 1v1s, strikers only score screamers or tap ins

[LordKaivalya]

I've had a recurring problem where my strikers almost regularly miss 1v1s with the goalie, no matter how good they are they keep butchering clear cut chances. I've seen my strikers only ever score from deflections, tap ins or absolute screamers. rarely do the calmly put one past the keeper. 

I was under the impression that the "places shots" ppm would improve their conversion rates but they only seem to miss more where earlier at least occasionally they would absolutely smash one into the back of the net, now they just hit it off target or smash it right at the goalie. What PPM would improve how they handle chances? Tobia Corti, my regen striker has great pace and and dribbling , do I have him round the keeper instead of shooting directly? Anyone tried different PPMs? Lobbing sounds disastrous 

[forlegaizen]

calling @Svenc at the front office to lay down the truth with is stats

No offense, just a friendly jab, I actually like your posts, shows a reliable perspective based on real life numbers

 

 

 

[Svenc]

50 minutes ago, forlegaizen said:

calling @Svenc at the front office to lay down the truth with is stats

No offense, just a friendly jab, I actually like your posts, shows a reliable perspective based on real life number

There is no stats for 1 vs 1 ones in the game forlegaizen. You are right, purely stats don't show all, this is also the tactical forums, which means looking for possible solutions. But stats may sometimes help to put things into perspective. Opta's Big Chances is the closest to such a stat there is. It's definition is " A situation where a player should reasonably be expected to score usually in a one-on-one scenario or from very close range. " However, you won't find any source that argues a class forward on his level would convert much more than about a good 1 in 3 of his one on ones. Excluding penalties of course. It's a one on one, rather than a one on zero, after all. This is also demonstrated some in this vid with the first shot .  As "one on ones" are such a hot topic every year, maybe it should be included as a stat!  My personal take is that this is in big parts such a "hot topic" due to the "drama" of the situtation. E.g. one on ones are overrated due to that a bit. There are also possibly more frequent in-game than in football. However, I also doubt that FM is perfectly accurate here too.

There's harder ones and easier ones  naturally.  Obviously all depends on the angle, on the assist (whether it gives the forward much time, as obviously a ball played straight in his running path is different to one where he has it played in his back and may have to turn from a very narrow position etc.). Similar, if he has a huge distance to travel at pace and the defenders on his trail, that's also a bit difficult. Whether the forward is able / does finish with the first few touches or not is also a factor as the more he dwells the more time the keeper has to anticipate / come off his line to worsen the angle. If you bet those are 50/50s in general or even better, you'd lose money long-term, anyway. Similar if you would bet that the players would make all the difference in the world alone. Top competitive sports is settled in margins of superiority, not decisively hugely edges. Thus, if you wanted to, you could roughly "simulate" your average 1 vs 1 "streak" by picking a six sided dice. Every time you roll a 5 or 6 it's goal. Every time you don't...

As for stats, all I see in the above is that each forward scores about a goal per match. As that screens don't show the actually shots, and thus the generally conversion, looks about very decent to me. Purely stats wise, we know that the "gurus" on this have absolutely mental conversion rates with their forwards anyway. Some you won't see in football in general. Rashidi for instance more recent has posted his forward as showing a shot on target converion of like 1 in 1.5 (over half a season), which is unreal. However, he knows the thing inside out (and probably has also gained a bit of inside knowledge how things may click on a purely coding level from communicating to SI directly over the years // e.g. testing). And with that... over to those boys.

[anorthernboy]

Saido Mane has been wasteful in 1v1 with the GK IRL this season. Like really wasteful. Salah has had plenty of 1v1 GK situations that he has missed but he has smacked a couple in the top corner from the edge of the area. Just trying to add perspective.

[Svenc]

22 minutes ago, anorthernboy said:

Saido Mane has been wasteful in 1v1 with the GK IRL this season. Like really wasteful. Salah has had plenty of 1v1 GK situations that he has missed but he has smacked a couple in the top corner from the edge of the area. Just trying to add perspective.

An impression which may be some supported by some of this.

However, it would be easy to conclude he was simply a terrible forward. In parts this will be because he has that many opportunity. I don't think anybody in the world would argue Agüero or Morata to be amongst the worst / most wasteful forwards in the PL. It's simply that by and largue, the forward simply is not expected to score in most of his situations. Which includes most 1 vs 1s. Indeed, whilst you shouldn't treat such stats alone as "gospel", Salah is actually outscoring what he is "expected to score" this season.This is also key to roughly "appreciating" any possible scoring streak. Ronaldo's in the league I cannot possibly comprehend, tho. Up until last week, he needed 100 shots over months (7 per match), for 4 goals. One of which a penalty.... And almost all of his shots being in the actually "danger zone" in front of goal. FM for sure may have some woeful finishing, but anything like that I have never seen in-game. Let alone by a player of that stature.

[Fosse]

IRL xG data is fairly reliable and if I remember correctly Ted Knutson also said there scored at a rate of about 1 in 3

[FatRonaldo]

4 hours ago, anorthernboy said:

Saido Mane has been wasteful in 1v1 with the GK IRL this season. Like really wasteful. Salah has had plenty of 1v1 GK situations that he has missed but he has smacked a couple in the top corner from the edge of the area. Just trying to add perspective.

And what about Messi keep missing constantly in game? does he tend to miss a lot IRL aswell? (now svenc, you are going to post the same screenshot of messi which is from FM2014?)

I'm not saying he should score every chance in game, but there is obviously a problem with finishing in this game.

I only assume that the problem occurs when 1 manager choose the "wrong" approach, tactic in general, mentality or shape, it feels for me that the ME translate it badly in a way where you get chances, sitters which constantly being missed (i'm not talking about "clear cut chances" which the game translate it badly in the statistics, because i know it's buggy, i'm talking about 1 on 1 situations and complete free sitters which way too often being missed).it gives the user a false indication about the match, the user might feel this way: "OK even though i missed a sitter, or multiple CCC, my team is doing fine because we are getting quality chances" and he keeps playing with his approach/tactic in that match and he loses 1-0, while the scorer of the opposition team gets 100% chance rate (which tend to happen IRL sometimes, but how often it tend to happen in FM?), where is real life statistics? how it's possible that the opposition is so successful in front of goal? (it can also be lower league players) getting around 100 or even 75% in front of goal and I'm not talking about messi or ronaldo which obviously in real life each of them needs to get around 4 chances to score and even more.

Now, it's alright if players missing sitters, but why it doesn't happen to the opposition? he end up scoring goals on sitters, or 1 on 1 situations (after his 1st chance), while he has a very low attributes and angles in front of goal.

why it doesn't translate it in the same way like you meantion as it's in real life? (where strikers missing chances and CCC, and sitters?)

you can give me examples how teams "FM'd" bigger teams IRL, but using those examples which tend to happen IRL, while in game it happens very often, it's just unrealistic.

Players like Rashidi and Cleon maybe even other players in the forums can end up with strikers scoring even 20 goals per season (just an example), but this is because they always using the "correct" approach per game and they are experienced enough to read the game and becaue of that the game doesn't penelize them (or they are getting penelized less often, than the casual user which can cause him to over frustration) because it feels the game translated bad tactical approach in a way where your team miss sitters, and CCC.

Yes, football is a frustrating game, you need to expect to be frustrated when playing FM in general 

but in terms of FM for the casual gamer, it can be a real pain in the ass.

I'm not talking about those who downloaded tactics or didn't read anything about mentality, shape and the fundumentals features in game, it's their own fault that their strikers aren't scoring or their team failing because they have no clue what they are doing and why they choose their own tactic.

I'm talking about those who sit for hours and read a lot about the game to try understand why they fail, I'm talking also about myself.

This is something that needs to be fixed, i don't know how is it in FM18, but in FM17, this is my impression from it and also my experience.

[ferrarinseb]

6 minutes ago, FatRonaldo said:

And what about Messi keep missing constantly in game? does he tend to miss a lot IRL aswell? (now svenc, you are going to post the same screenshot of messi which is from FM2014?)

I'm not saying he should score every chance in game, but there is obviously a problem with finishing in this game.

I only assume that the problem occurs when 1 manager choose the "wrong" approach, tactic in general, mentality or shape, it feels for me that the ME translate it badly in a way where you get chances, sitters which constantly being missed (i'm not talking about "clear cut chances" which the game translate it badly in the statistics, because i know it's buggy, i'm talking about 1 on 1 situations and complete free sitters which way too often being missed).it gives the user a false indication about the match, the user might feel this way: "OK even though i missed a sitter, or multiple CCC, my team is doing fine because we are getting quality chances" and he keeps playing with his approach/tactic in that match and he loses 1-0, while the scorer of the opposition team gets 100% chance rate (which tend to happen IRL sometimes, but how often it tend to happen in FM?), where is real life statistics? how it's possible that the opposition is so successful in front of goal? (it can also be lower league players) getting around 100 or even 75% in front of goal and I'm not talking about messi or ronaldo which obviously in real life each of them needs to get around 4 chances to score and even more.

Now, it's alright if players missing sitters, but why it doesn't happen to the opposition? he end up scoring goals on sitters, or 1 on 1 situations (after his 1st chance), while he has a very low attributes and angles in front of goal.

why it doesn't translate it in the same way like you meantion as it's in real life? (where strikers missing chances and CCC, and sitters?)

you can give me examples how teams "FM'd" bigger teams IRL, but using those examples which tend to happen IRL, while in game it happens very often, it's just unrealistic.

Players like Rashidi and Cleon maybe even other players in the forums can end up with strikers scoring even 20 goals per season (just an example), but this is because they always using the "correct" approach per game and they are experienced enough to read the game and becaue of that the game doesn't penelize them (or they are getting penelized less often, than the casual user which can cause him to over frustration) because it feels the game translated bad tactical approach in a way where your team miss sitters, and CCC.

Yes, football is a frustrating game, you need to expect to be frustrated when playing FM in general 

but in terms of FM for the casual gamer, it can be a real pain in the ass.

I'm not talking about those who downloaded tactics or didn't read anything about mentality, shape and the fundumentals features in game, it's their own fault that their strikers aren't scoring or their team failing because they have no clue what they are doing and why they choose their own tactic.

I'm talking about those who sit for hours and read a lot about the game to try understand why they fail, I'm talking also about myself.

This is something that needs to be fixed, i don't know how is it in FM18, but in FM17, this is my impression from it and also my experience.

If you felt FM17 that way just take a look at long shots ME thread in General Discussion which makes you feel 17 is far better. 

[FatRonaldo]

4 minutes ago, ferrarinseb said:

If you felt FM17 that way just take a look at long shots ME thread in General Discussion which makes you feel 17 is far better. 

I will be fair, I played really small amount on FM18 so I don't have much experience with it, I refunded the game because of the UI.

sometimes i also see long shots in FM17, but the reason i assume it's because of strikers isolation and also maybe the resault of the ME penelizing for using the wrong approach, such as roles, duties mentality shape etc...

[Svenc]

3 hours ago, FatRonaldo said:

but in terms of FM for the casual gamer, it can be a real pain in the ass.

It can. And much can be attributed to misleading / missing feedback. Some to UI too no doubt.  Not going to post everything again. But since I was asked to reply, there were threads on most of that in the past weeks.

On whether Messi / Ronaldo can ever miss. (for the stat buffs, up until the weekend he was underperforming his Expected goals rate in the league by -10 goals, converting a historically poor 4 attempts of 100, which is a factor in Madrid's league performance this season either way).
On "realism" -- "stuff only happens in FM with some frequency".
On "scoring rates", on why it seems "only opponents every blue moon score from few shots" and "perception issues".
On feedback.

"Sitter"  is terrible football punditry brainwashing terminology right there, and any bad finishing would affect every side. Looking at the screenshots in general the OP seems to have at least decent conversion rates,  so a bit of a different topic, naturally.

[ferrarinseb]

1 minute ago, FatRonaldo said:

I played really small amount on fM18, i didn't felt well with this game because of the UI so i made a refunded and changed back.

sometimes i also see long shots in FM17, but the reason i assume it's because of strikers isolation and also maybe the resault of the ME penelizing for using the wrong approach, such as roles, duties mentality shape etc...

I know im not tactic expert but im planning to switch back to FM17 if the players still shooting mindlessly near box time and time again after the next patch. 

[FatRonaldo]

6 minutes ago, ferrarinseb said:

I know im not tactic expert but im planning to switch back to FM17 if the players still shooting mindlessly near box time and time again after the next patch. 

None of us is a tactical expert, if we were we would not have been playing FM.

but it's a shame that there are players who want to learn the game and are constantly failling to understand it and it's not like they didn't made any effort to understand it.

[anorthernboy]

In my last season as Liverpool manager I had Salah as an IF/A and Coutinho in a CM/A position and role.

I found Salah was missing an alarming amour of CCC's.  When I analysed the chances he was just inside the corner of the 6 yard box. He was shooting straight at the keeper each time. When I went further back in the move I could see he started out far too wide as a result of my CM/A being positioned too high. Salahs angle to goal was too steep. 

I set the CM to support and now Salah can start to narrow his run much sooner and thus reduces the angle of his run to goal. He is converting more consistently now and from the same chances as the previous season as he is narrower when he has his chance. This gives him a bigger portion of goal to aim at. 

I'm not saying the game doesn't have it's flaws. The angle some players shoot at is very strange. What i have found is i can reduce the wasted chances by analysing the chances from different angles and Then make small role changes. Then analyse again.

[LordKaivalya]

Has anyone seen any improvements with PPMs?

5 hours ago, anorthernboy said:

In my last season as Liverpool manager I had Salah as an IF/A and Coutinho in a CM/A position and role.

I found Salah was missing an alarming amour of CCC's.  When I analysed the chances he was just inside the corner of the 6 yard box. He was shooting straight at the keeper each time. When I went further back in the move I could see he started out far too wide as a result of my CM/A being positioned too high. Salahs angle to goal was too steep. 

I set the CM to support and now Salah can start to narrow his run much sooner and thus reduces the angle of his run to goal. He is converting more consistently now and from the same chances as the previous season as he is narrower when he has his chance. This gives him a bigger portion of goal to aim at. 

I'm not saying the game doesn't have it's flaws. The angle some players shoot at is very strange. What i have found is i can reduce the wasted chances by analysing the chances from different angles and Then make small role changes. Then analyse again.

I've got a Mezzala that's on attack so I think I don't have the same issue. He gets near the edge of the penalty box more and only ever makes late runs. The centre forward though hits the ball right at the keeper too often. And these come from a variety of chances, both central and slightly wide to really wide. He seemed to score the ones with harder angles more frequently. I wonder if that has something to do with basic goalie positioning where they protect the obvious angles but can't really do much more if they aren't top goalies? Maybe that's bs. 

[Wavelberry]

I have a striker with no PPMs and he has scored quite a few one on ones. About as many as you'd expect actually given the chances he gets. Scottish 5th tier and he's decent for the level. I reckon at least a third of his 25 goals last season were when he was through the defensive line.

[fmfan74]

Well for me I am playing lower league vanarama south as western super mare.  As you know they are semi pro Sunday kickers.  I have seen my strikers overtake defenders one on one and score countless times against the keeper.   Was great feeling.  And all their stats are around 8 to 10.  I have also seen blunders where my strikers miss open goals.

Does the opposition keeper stats play a big role why you don't score one on one's who knows.  But how important is it that your striker has good balance or technique including other important stats for one on one's.   How about vision or dribbling not to forget telling your player to run at defence.   Just some tips from me that's all.

[Svenc]

On 27.1.2018 at 08:22, fmfan74 said:

Well for me I am playing lower league vanarama south as western super mare.  As you know they are semi pro Sunday kickers.  I have seen my strikers overtake defenders one on one and score countless times against the keeper.   Was great feeling.  And all their stats are around 8 to 10.  I have also seen blunders where my strikers miss open goals.

Shouldn't be that big a surprise as the level of opposition defenders is also lower. In general, I'd forget about attributes intitially altogether. If SI takes real life research into account (and there is evidence they do -- as much as possible), the player itself won't make the world's difference as aruged prior. Superior skill doesn't merely show in conversion rates, much moreso in the rate a forward at all gets opportunity. Which is also why you (and your opposition) can make it an added struggle to score for the best forwards, and vice versa the worst ones can have it reasonably easy to score on each interception. Typically as he's gifted space to do just this.  If you approach the game from that perspective that world class guys should score no matter what and vice versa, you're in trouble either way. It's a cliche that persists though.

In the above demonstration of Opta's "Expected Goal" stats there is a Can shot outside the box taken from a not very centrally position, where it's demonstrated that on average, such shots are scored about 1 in 30 times (3,5%). There's a comment below the video arguing that if that shot was by De Bruyne, he'd score those like at penalty rates. The player makes a difference, but not anywhere close to this. De Bruyne since 2014/2015 has had almost 200 shots from outside the area for 13 goals, which is a conversion of 7%. Most of his goals are too actually scored from just at the edge of the area, in a central position, which is a remarkably difference to the shot demonstrated in the video by Opta precisely due to the angel and in parts, distance. In otherh words, they were easier to score, and Opta would have awarded them a higher "score" to begin with. Much the same will apply to one on ones. The comparably more difficult ones from my experience have always been those where the forward has no angle to work with, and may be forced to do turn and shoot first time. Those are the ones for which the long-term roughly 1 in 3 conversion may not apply.

Typically they are created from a through ball from a central position in front of the goal, where the keeper is standing directly between the goal and forward, and doesn't have to move any to close the angle. This also in tendency produces more shots hit straight at the keeper precisely due to such.  Finishing issues have always had a very logical fix. You need to create a multitude of chance types rather than a very specific one. And ideally, it would fall to different finishers, as they can have their off days, grow frustrated, etc. The aforementioned type of one on one is typically created if you barely have any players wide advancing into the opposition final third, are congesting the area by pushing every central player up or vice versa keep an army of players behind the ball, and feed an isolated advanced forward with through balls from deep. That may also result in the one on one where the forward has a huge distance to travel at breakneck pace, has defenders on his toes and gives the keeper added time to asses and move off hsi line. Like in this very prominent one from a few years ago.

Whilst I personally think the long shot conversion (and general shooting accuracy) of the current release should be heavily investigated -- I can't take any statement arguing "forwards would miss every one on one" serious. And neither should SI.

 

[sporadicsmiles]

On a different note. None of those players have spectacular composure, which is important when 1v1. Whilst that should not make them miss everything, it will play some part in their conversion rates.

What kind of 1v1 are you creating? How much time and space do the players have? Can they take them on their favoured foot? Are they under pressure from defender or keeper? What angle is the shot from? 

 

[anorthernboy]

Attributes do not seem to matter. I've just beaten Palace 2-1. 

22 shots

14 on target

6 CCC

2 goals

Palace

2 shots

1 shot on goal

1CCC

1 goal

[Svenc]

The type of the chance matters more than the attributes. As that's how it should be. No matter what, some situations are blatantly easier to score than others. Not all CCC's are equal. It's a shoody stat too, and not very reliable. It doesn't even have a definition to begin with. Managing also isn't stats, either way, as it ignores the run of play that would lead to those final stats. Addiationally, a "below average" player is only "below average" for his respective level. He's still competitive, or outside of AI shenanigans the club wouldn't field/play him. In parts as FM's range of attributes models professional or semi-professional footballers. So that's not a 1-20 on a "pub level to world class" scale. That's 1-20s on a "semi-professional to professional" scale.

You (and your opposition) can make it harder to score for the best forwards. You (and your opposition) can make it reasonably easy to score for the worst (on their respective level). Additionally, in one-off matches anything goes anyway. The scoring rates in individual matches in football too are massively variable. One week you're losing to 2 dfks against the odds. The other you win off a sneaky corner despite being battered all match. The consistency lies in keeping the better chances, and reducing oppositon to worse ones. That's not about any of the game's flawed stats. That's about space. In real football, finishing woes can last for weeks, months. Additioally, big teams miss more big chances, as they create more. Unfortunately, the game lacks feedback on any this. As long as players have such huge misconceptions, it won't much help without added feedback.

[sporadicsmiles]

9 hours ago, anorthernboy said:

Attributes do not seem to matter. I've just beaten Palace 2-1. 

22 shots

14 on target

6 CCC

2 goals

Palace

2 shots

1 shot on goal

1CCC

1 goal

I get stats like that all the time, and usually I win comfortably when doing so. So it is not as if this type of behaviour is scripted. Sometimes I fail to break a side down, and that happens. Football sometimes sucks, you move on. Over the course of a season, I win by 3 goals more than I fail to break a side down.

Anyway these things do not tell the full story. Firstly, using CCCs as a meter for how many you should score is not the best. There are some obvious issues in how CCCs are counted. I often see things called CCCs that are no such thing (shots from close to the goalline, for instance) and shots that are clearly excellent chances not counted (shots through a congested area by an unmarked man in the box, quite often). Assess the quality of the chances you create by yourself, because CCCs are not the best metric.

Secondly, assuming that your CCCs were all excellent scoring chances, a 1 in 3 conversion rate is not at all bad. This is one game, and probably it could have been 5-1 or 0-1 depending on your luck, and how the opposition managed to play. Do not forget, you have won this game.

Thirdly, you are clearly playing more attacking that Palace. I am willing to bet the Palace goal was from a counter attack, or at least from a passage of play where they got the ball forward quickly and capitalised before you had chance to get back into positions properly. Their chance was probably really good. As the attacking side, you have to build up around a packed defense, and it is always going to be harder to score.

Finally, you won. It does not matter. 2-1 or 5-0, you get 3 points. I do not get people who are deeply upset when they win. If you are consistently not winning games you should, it is either tactical or personnel that is the problem. The game makes no differentiation between human and AI. If the AI can do it, you can do it.

Anyway, have you never tried to do what Palace did? I have, it is very pleasant when it works (which is not that often). Some of my best ever results came from defending and then taking the chances I create. Knocking Partizan from the UCL with TNS 3-3 on aggregate was my best. I had 4 shots in the entire two legs. Partizan had 20+, at least. But we defended well, and made sure their chances were not that good. And that our own chances were. Swings and roundabouts.

[seanDCFC]

The frequency of certain animations for the missed one on ones i see need re-evaluated. Most of these shots are frequently missed so horribly in these situations, strikers with great finishing / composure missing clear one on ones by so much shouldn't happen as frequently as it currently does (although should happen sometimes of course). It would be better if we seen keepers making more saves in these scenarios or the shots hitting the post or going just wide would help. 

[Svenc]

8 hours ago, sporadicsmiles said:

I get stats like that all the time, and usually I win comfortably when doing so. So it is not as if this type of behaviour is scripted. Sometimes I fail to break a side down, and that happens. Football sometimes sucks, you move on. Over the course of a season, I win by 3 goals more than I fail to break a side down.

The "problem" from a player's perspective is that he perceives that as unjust. The reason he does so is:

a) One of perception. Greatly demonstrated in this classic thread (and this post plus the next three to four). I've argued this in the past, but the vast majority of players are at least onpar to AI in terms of shot conversion without even realizing. However, to work it out, you have to manually go through every match. Not ideal.

b) One of AI dynamicism/tactical decision making. Unlike the majority of players, AI can approach matches in a way to not even try to have a load of shots. They may simply sit back and soak it all up for periods of matches. You can do, if you want, 90 minutes through. The stuff they create mostly isn't dangerous, unless they're gifted a counter. But every once in a while, one of the few stuff is converted. It may be the screamer from yards out from the player who has a long shot of 5 -- he's still a footballer too. Additionally, AI may switch stuff upon conceding, to something more attacking, rather than sitting on an loss. From that point on, their attacks may become a bit more dangerous, and that can happen purely in the last ten minutes of match. Whazzam, few AI shots, but a goal on the occasion.

As the player never has this due to his approach, it's perceived as unfair. It's not unfair. It's AI managing fundamentally different to the majority of human players.

[anorthernboy]

 WwOnly commentaryset to fastest with no replays. I refuse to watch the absolute garbage this match engine churns out.

Static defenders, 5ft wingers out jumping 6ft fullbacks.

Absolutely quality from Southampton in my last game. 2-0 down at half time to balls over the top. Don't push up as high I hear you say. I dropped the line they played in front of me. Finished 1-4. 

I have closing down set to full but my players just stand about whilst Southampton tap it around until they play in Shane Long who crosses twice to the back post for two headers. Winger 5"9' beats fullback 6"2'. Scenes.

Southampton play 4231wide with a midfield 2 of CM/s and B2B. Scenes.

I play Brighton in next game. They play 4231. I beat them 4-0 and they didn't have a shot at goal. Scenes.

[RodentofDoom]

Part of it is player expectations, we see the game telling us our team has had 20 or more shots at goal, and we sit there thinking 'why don't I have 15 goals??'. the match engine really does not help to dispel this either and often leaves me feeling/thinking the game is cheating

 

But then I calm down a bit and think things through and realise I don't have access to all the information.

The game occasionally drops small hint's about what the AI manager might be doing, but I can only see their assigned roles

Duties, mentality, shape & partnerships are all hidden.

 

This makes it confusing for a casual player like myself to understand what I have to change to have at least some chance of winning.

At the end of the day, this situation is caused by our lack of understanding

And in the game of "Rock, Paper, Scissors, Spock" that the match engine operates on ... we keep trying to play Leonard.

Basically, the team performs poorly & my forwards miss 98% of CCC's because I'm an idiot that got the team instructions wrong.

Then it's down to the hard work of trying work out WHAT I got wrong ... it's a nice challenge

 

[edit]

Very often the game gives us feedback that seems to tell us nothing .. during the match I sometimes see the phrase 

"XYZ Team have resorted to their normal style"

in the info ticker at the bottom.

 

All I know from that is .. their mentality just changed

what is was before ... I dunno

what is now .. again, I dunno, possibly standard ... 

 

how do I actually tell ??? awesome obfuscation from SI really

 

[Svenc]

15 hours ago, RodentofDoom said:

This makes it confusing for a casual player like myself to understand what I have to change to have at least some chance of winning.

To have some chance of winning, absolutely basics do plenty. 

Stop trying to understand the match engine. It has quirks, in parts it is closer to football, in other less. Try to understand how managers view/analyse matches and you may be getting somewhere more enjoyable. F'r example, a couple weeks ago Arsene cited the aforementioned analytics called "Expected Goals", even though he was accused of making excuses (such is life). The argument being that his side would produce chances, but missed them (e.g. the actual scoreline/s may have been harsher on his side than the actual performance had justified).  FM doesn't offer any such, and none of the stats it has is a replacement in any kind of way. There is massively evidence that Si try to take the same kind of studies into account that went some into building such stats, though, when modeling finishing calculations into the game. Actually, a few were even cited by a former mod, and he argued he was involved with some research for SI at that point. They all work from the same core factors that influence the likelyhood of scoring, as research on this has happened in the past decades. And that's not even arguing the game were accurate on this the tiniest bit.

Unfortunately, all of such studies in tendency contradict how football is typically represented on television (overdramatized, that is). As soon as you realize that even most of the better chances usually may have a roughly  1 in 3 chance of going in long-term average, and this includes most one on ones,  you may cool down and appreciate that finishing can be streaky all itself no matter with which forward. At least a few. You may also appreciate that having better/worse forwards only goes this far. The consistency lies in keeping the opposition to worse shots and getting the better ones for yourself. I really don't think it's that hard to get a feel of this, in particular as that's 22 figures kicking a ball around in-game all the same. Or, an estimation of such. The hurdles to overcome in-game are the unreliable statistical feedback (including the rotten CCCs), the post match reports that argue sides to be "unlucky" simply because they had loads of shots without scoring -- plus the in-match commentary which does its best to mimic overdramatized football commentary (HOW DID HE MISS THAT). And does good at it, in fairness. They are in no way an "objective" measurement of quality. You wouldn't do bad to ignore them outright.

Rest assured the game has never replicated the streaks that happen in football sometimes over months. Just look at Real Madrid's matches this season... and I mean all of them. And then watch some of Ronaldo's... records this term. Mindboggling. Probably the worst for any current Player Of thE year ever. But not at all a one-off. In tendency every big side "underperforming" has such streaks as one factor contributing. It's all about basic questions. How (in general) do sides in football increase the likelyhood of scoring? How do they do the reverse? Is there a reason why teams if at all only in the dying minutes throw loads of players into the box and lump balls to them? Are managers really spending millions on forwards who have like 50-100% better conversions than their current ones or isn't it that they hope to increase performances by a few percent? Why is it that most forwards only score a goal every other match at best anyway? Plus work out a methology if your finishing rates are really as bad as you perceive them to be. Forwards have stats in their profiles to be compared to. Team reports have shot coversions in their stats displayed also.

 

 

[anorthernboy]

It's not the representation of stats that bugs me.

My winger has just played a ball into the box. The pass avoided everyone and hit the post. My left winger runs in to tap the ball haome and hits the same lost from a yard out.

Coutinho hasn't scored from outside of the box in 3 full seasons. When I analyse his long shots he has men available to pass the ball to. He approaches the ball with his leg cocked, taking zero time to look at his options. He's an AP/s I'm CM so everything is in front of him but his PPM's of takes long shots and runs with ball often take over every time.

I would post plenty of images etc but I saw a thread in which a user was asked to post the match PKM so he did and got nothing back. Could that mean they couldn't explain what was going on? 

When you come up against a Messi or a Dybala the game can't really make them look good with tricks and step overs. I think it makes your players worse to make them seem better. My defenders just freeze whilst they run by.

Don't get me wrong I am winning games and scoring some decent goals along the way, it's just the garbage that's inbetween the good games.

[bar333]

The game has a serious issues with long shots and whatever algorithm is used to determine when\if a player is going to shoot from distance, if it even exists, is broken or seriously flawed. This is further compounded by the fact that long shots are downright useless in this game with 90% not even hitting the target.

I'm aware it's not the case, but it feels like 8 times out of 10, a player will shoot on sight the moment he gets within a certain range of goal. Personally I find it extremely rare to see goals scored in moves created through the middle, they almost all break down with someone deciding to shoot from the edge of the box, where conversion rates are around 1 to 50 maybe, if I'm optimistic. Goals come from wide play, the old cross-tap in move, because at least no one shoots from the byline or from insane angles (well... mostly) so the player is forced to try to find a teammate in the box.

[anorthernboy]

The angles that the ball flies off of at is extreme, downright unbelievable. I've witnessed a player running along the 18 yard box with the goal at a right angle from his direction, he shot straight out of play for a throwing. Scenes.

[LordKaivalya]

I do agree with those that say that the game does a terrible job representing a players quality or attributes in the match engine. There are occasions that just don't seem realistic, this is not only when it comes to tapping a ball in when there's no one with 10 feet of you but also the horrible highlights which really seem to have its criteria code broken. The amount of times I've seen world class players run with the ball for 10 yards and hit it hard at the corner flag while the commentator praised the skill involved makes me question my life choices.

[Svenc]

We're getting things mixed up. I'd agree that there is issues with shooting/finishing, in particular from range. I've also personally shown that a few versions back you could rack up completely fantasy goals from range if you had a side of specialists (transfered or edited). So whilst that's naturally a different ME release, that's not just user perception or anything. You guys are also sort of contradicting the opening poster, as conversely he claims he would only see his forwards scoring from tap-ins... and screamers. So, one on ones.

It's naturally hard to gauge (for ourselves) how many one on ones exactly are scored. However, from memory, there was but one time where it was officially acknowledged that there was a significant issue with a specific kind of one on one off a narrow through ball, which also related to a bug. Aside of that bug, the keeper reach was considered to good, and was tweaked. Else, I think polls such as these sum it up a bit of what a significant part of the ongoing issue is.. I'm actually tempted to run another one to check. But in this a majority ofthe voters were expecting completely fantasy conversion rates, some even rates borderlining on penalty conversions -- a static one on one where the forward doesn't even have to trap the ball at any pace, nor do any defenders close the forward down,  nor is the keeper allowed to move off his line -- which runs against the most modest of common sense.

At the very least, they have severe misconceptions about how attributes/traits impact it all (and as managers spend gazillions in the hopes of going a few extra percent on any level, arguably, should -- good luck with Aubameyang, Arsene).  Which may include the player running the poll, as he places a heavy emphasis purely on the player traits, and if at all considers anything else later (the supply, the touches taken, the angle of the run, the pace, the angle of the shot -- which is rarely considered by anyone but somebody who is actually a keeper and understands the impact of the angle better by profession). It's no wonder there is "one on one" threads every release (you can run a forum search) -- absolutely no matter how it's tweaked. I'd personally prefer the realism over the fantasy. Which is why I try to combat the biggest misconceptions, as far as possible. But since we were touching ranged attempts, there will be similar misconceptions likewise. Millions for a few extra percent is all this ever is.

[FatRonaldo]

you still don't get it, svenc?

ok, one on one being missed multiple times IRL, we all know that and we also watch football.

But it doesn't make sense that A team is missing while the team B have one shot and get one goal without having this real life missing statistics for team B, it's not balanced and it's quite annoying.

it's happening more than it happens IRL.

don't give me more of the same posts you are posting because it doesn't represent atleast my personal experience with the game (not talking now about RL, we are talking about the game), and you treat the game missing taps in like this game is so perfece and has no bugs.

[Svenc]

3 minutes ago, FatRonaldo said:

don't give me more of the same posts you are posting because it doesn't represent atleast my personal experience with the game (not talking now about RL, we are talking about the game), and you treat the game missing taps in like this game is so perfece and has no bugs.

Until you go through every match in your save, you can't work that out. I've also given you all the links and text you need to check. You seem to not have checked any of those. Suffice it to say, everything you experience is related to your input -- or at the very least, your skewed perception of what's happening, also on how your opposition on occasion plays.

[FatRonaldo]

1 minute ago, Svenc said:

Until you go through every match in your save, you can't work that out. I've also given you all the links and text you need to check. You seem to not have checked any of those.

I did, but I don't understand 80% from what you are typing.

[Svenc]

28 minutes ago, FatRonaldo said:

I did, but I don't understand 80% from what you are typing.

So let's forget about RL football (even though you may check all Burnley wins this season on whsocored.com, similar to all Real Madrid matches, ditto Liverpool, Tottenham -- or the first 10 matches of Crystal Palace, which all aren't one-offs, but yeah). You argue about your experience with the game. So what is it actually like? Can you go through every match to check and show? Such as this guy? (click!) If  no, there was never much of an argument on your side to begin with. There can't be, as you never have taken a truly look.

Also, you can't ever be your Team B (the one that on occasion scores off but a few shots, and be it by luck,) if you never set up to do so. AI does. Plenty players do. That's the only difference, as far as the game is concerned anyway. Even newbie posters experiment a few with tactics that gets them very few, shots, but may make it harder for opponents to score (click this!). .The difference is that AI opponents are not that extreme at their most defensive. And that they may not "park the bus" for the 90 minutes through. They may only do so when leading 1-0. They may switch to something more attacking when they want to score a goal.

If you don't understand any of that, I'm afraid you won't ever much understand the game. If you don't understand how dropping deep and keeping players behind the ball (in-game: defend duty) is making it more difficult for sides to find space for their shots and score, it's debatable if you at all understand football tbh.
 

[FatRonaldo]

You give me a post from 2012, how relevant it's to FM17? (if it's relevant it's an absurd that nothing have changed from 2012).

and why defend duties give more defensive stability than let's say support? i.e full back on support is already deep, full back on defend will make him even deeper and will support attacks only if my team is camping on the opponent half. so how good is that?!

IRL and in game it's possible to defend like Luxemburg did (like we saw against France), but this approach can handle this way the entire season? look at burnley recent results, do you saw them in the last matches?

they are able to get result  against man city, man united, but what happened against newcaslte? crystal palace? huddersfield? last time they played united they lost 1-0, lost to livepool, teams realised that more conservative way of play needed to be played against burnley.

but in game, only the team that goes Par the bus the entire season get's result, and the other team get's frustrated with chances (AI or user it doesn't matter).

but when you go conservative and you won't get results and you post here that you don't get result with your tactics, you get people to help (with really good faith) and you get advices than you need to add more support and attack duties.

becaue this is how managers approach and tell their players how to play.

it doesn't feel right that the user will get penalize for choosing one support duty more, but incase you make it defend duty the ME will react differently and make your team look better), it just doesn't feel right.

[Svenc]

22 minutes ago, FatRonaldo said:

You give me a post from 2012, how relevant it's to FM17? (if it's relevant it's an absurd that nothing have changed from 2012).

It's totally relevant because:

- Those stats are still in the game
- Your main argument is shot stats
- You can still open each match to check and post those stats all the way up into FM 2032.

As of Burnley, until December they conceded 20 shots per match -- but only had conceded 12 goals up to that point.The same as Manchester City. In other words, over months their opponents needed about 30 shots average to finally score a goal against them. My point being, in-game, this is one offs at best, unless their opposition, including you, would do something terrible. If that is not, then you can prove differently by showing what  your own experience is like. Similar to the above poster, match by match. If you only are in for a good rant though, there is the General Discussion forums.

[FatRonaldo]

5 minutes ago, Svenc said:

If not, then you can prove differently by showing your own experience. If you only are in for a good rant though, there is the General Discussion forums.

I could have prove it, but everytime it happens for long a long term it get out of the nerve and I start telling to myself "why do i need this garbage game to get out of my nerve", and i just rage quit and all the proves isn't there anymore.

and we are talking about sitters being missed, not shots in general (shots in general can be long shots which i don't care and no the main topic here even though that sitters also count as shots after all).

[Svenc]

4 minutes ago, FatRonaldo said:

I could have prove it, but everytime it happens for long a long term it get out of the nerve and I start telling to myself "why do i need this garbage game to get out of my nerve", and i just rage quit and all the proves isn't there anymore.

Nothing wrong with venting frustration. Possibly not the best forums for that though. This one is mainly where playeres discussing possibly solutions for problems go -- like the opening poster did by providing a few screenshots already. Just venting won't progress you anywhere.  And as you may have noticed, there's better players and worse ones frequenting these boards. The same as there are on any game.