Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
prot651

Favorite FM Series

What is your Favorite FM Series  

234 members have voted

  1. 1. What is your Favorite FM Series

    • FM06
      4
    • FM07
      19
    • FM08
      22
    • FM09
      6
    • FM10
      14
    • FM11
      11
    • FM12
      63
    • FM13
      21
    • FM14
      16
    • FM15
      23
    • FM16
      17
    • FM17
      40
    • FM18
      37


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, shirajzl said:

What in fact happened is that people playing FMs of the past just put together a tactic they fancied, frequently with no rhyme nor reason, often exploiting the many flaws of the MEs at the time without even realizing. They were winning stuff easily, convinced they understood tactics, which couldn't be further from the truth.

Players convinced they had learned anything when in fact it was them breaking the game: All the more reason to get the engine and AI more robust (and finding better ways to keep the game accessible, which an exploit is a horrible illusion of). :D  Btw, whilst it's a 100% viable way of playing, all those players are need to be told from my end is that they effectively could go into the editor outright, same thing in effect, which is still totally an option. Editing also doesn't break the game, so doesn't lead to the random weird stuff you get from breaking the core engine (exploit tactics randomly lead to all kinds of random matches as they have holes everywhere, still do -- in the league that may not matter much, but in a knock-out competition can cost you badly). From looking around, you still don't need to put any effort in with the current bach of tactics though... virtually nothing matters. This goes far beyond "understanding tactics" -- tactics don't do any such stuff anyway.

This is literally players never having played the game, or needed to manage, technically. They score the same goals the AI cannot defend no matter what players, which is impossible to recreate otherwise. Breaking the engine has also lead to a lot of weird stuff though in general, not merely inside the matches; making the game seem more crazy and random, and oft worse, as it was (so, it's unlikely SI are going to code exploits in in the future ). Would be interesting to run another difficulty poll! But as you argued too, guys being around FM forums are a niche in itself, let alone this one. It's become even more divided ever since Social Media went through the roof.... ever since the days, a lot of stuff has gone straight to the Twittersphere, YouTube, etc. Workshops, too.

The only traditionally forum I've seen growing in the past decade is a German one, but it's the only German speaking one, and the game can only grow there as it's been a niche game in Germany. FM19 will mark the first official German release ever since about 2007... From looking around, such primarily "exploit" tactics platforms have shrinked greatly too. I personally would attest that some to the fact that playing that way, doing that every release, how often can you do this before it becomes routine? And from a creators end, they have to go through the same process too for the same, perhaps even worse results. The discussions typically seem centered around showing the fantasy results and record around, one screenshot after another. So there's never been much depth to such communities in the first place to me too.  Dunno though. :)

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


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

Players convinced they had learned anything when in fact it was them breaking the game: All the more reason to get the engine and AI more robust. :D  Btw, all those players are need to be told from my end is that they effectively could go into the editor outright, which is still totally an option. Editing also doesn't break the game, so doesn't lead to the random weird stuff you get from breaking the core engine (exploit tactics randomly lead to all kinds of random matches as they have holes everywhere, still do -- in the league that may not matter much, but in a knock-out competition can cost you badly). From looking around, you still don't need to put any effort whatsoever in with the current bach of tactics though... virtually nothing matters. This goes far beyond "understanding tactics" -- tactics don't do any such stuff anyway. This is literally players never having played the game, or needed to manage, technically. They still don't. They score the same goals the AI cannot defend no matter what players, or anything.

I'd argue breaking the engine has also lead to a lot of weird stuff though in general, not merely inside the matches; making the game seem more crazy and random, and bad, as it was (so, it's unlikely SI are going to code exploits in deliberately in the future ). Would be an interesting thing to run another difficulty poll... tempted to! But as you argued too I think, guys being around FM forums are a niche in itself. It's become even more divided ever since Social Media went through the roof.... ever since the days, a lot of stuff has gone straight to the Twittersphere, YouTube, etc.

A difficulty poll is an interesting idea, for me of the versions I have played for any great length it would be in order of difficulty

 

FM09

FM16

FM07

FM10

FM12

FM11

FM05

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

I prefer the theory that FM2012 Is/remains some popular because it was the end of a rope. An all around polished product that without significant changes couldn't be pushed further ahead. However, one, that SI at the core deemed balanced enough to consider not patching the core engine -- get this -- in 12+ months running. So the focus behind the scenes could be elsewhere. FM11 was the easier game anyway, as due to a few "morale" issues it was:

- borderline impossible to ever enter a relegation fight even after a surprise promotion
- go on loooooooooooong streaks and claim such surprise promotions

Which had a few to do with how morale worked then, and that the most extreme ends could be maintained throughout the squads for a very long time running. Coupled with the "scared chicken" AI defensive tactics and their universally abysmal morale squads, there were always 2, 3 teams in each league that once they started losing .... they just wouldn't stop. This was only ever adressed by FM2012. Still a huge thread on this, btw. One of the biggest if you sort threads by their size ever.

Plus I'm confident FM06-08 were easier too, as you had Diablo and Kimz crazy arrow exploits -- we're talking exploits here where it didn't even matter if you were thouroughly outplayed. Every time your side went forward, you had a big chance to score, as players would be unmarked in the opposition area.  The thought of FM2012 remaining some popular primarily because players would prefer win buttons would make me feel depressed. :D [If I were SI, I'd totally include those, mind as a feature].

Hi Svenc,

the thread you posted was due to a morale bug in fm12 no? the points below were due to a morale bug in fm11?

- borderline impossible to ever enter a relegation fight even after a surprise promotion
- go on loooooooooooong streaks and claim such surprise promotions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tony Wright 747 said:

A difficulty poll is an interesting idea, for me of the versions I have played for any great length it would be in order of difficulty

Interesting order -- is that ranked from easiest to most difficult or vice versa though, Tony? :D I consider the first ones I'd played to be the most difficult, in parts because I never downloaded any tactics, etc. Still won titles and stuff, despite not having much a clue. Also remember a really horrible season though, 3/4 wins (and curiously, no sacking).  If the theory is true that the versions where it is the easiest to win stuff with the least effort are the most popular, and that players didn't know how they did it (by hitting upon exploits and/or putting up random tactics), there's loads of easy money to be made here. All SI needed to code was a game mode where you are guaranteed promotion/titles -- but the seasons playing out just enough drama so that you feel some excitement along the way. They don't need to code any AI for that, they can  lay off half of their staff including the ME team (sorry Paul -- you're fired).

All they needed was a few clever scripts that would ensure the illusion the player mattered, presto. I know this is a bit sarcastic -- but if the game can grow by supporting a fantasy players never understood anyway, that'd be the easiest thing to do. That's not how I see things, mind. I think everybody deserves a simulation proper -- including somewhat understanding it (provided he has an interest in understanding some of football/management), and given the tools do to such, or at least, assistants taking it over for his -- what he then does to it is up to him. :) It seems vital to communicate too though what tactics are meant to do in the game though -- and where, from SI's end, breaking it may start. Some of the clue may be in what AI managers are at best capable of doing with teams..

Quote

the thread you posted was due to a morale bug in fm12 no? the points below were due to a morale bug in fm11?

@penza Sorry, for the lack of clarity. Yes this was my experience from FM11. If you read through the thread, it was never a bug as such, but it somewhat influenced "streaks" as was found by SI and then patched some. It wasn't purely about morale, mind. It never is. It is/was a combination of entire squads being on abysmal/superb morale for weeks/months. The teams sitting at the bottom typically are the worse ones anyway, and vice versa... so...

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


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

Interesting order -- is that ranked from easiest to most difficult or vice versa though, Tony? :D I consider the first ones I'd played to be the most difficult, in parts because I never downloaded any tactics, etc. Still won titles and stuff, despite not having much a clue. Also remember a really horrible season though, 3/4 wins (and curiously, no sacking).  If the theory is true that the versions where it is the easiest to win stuff with the least effort are the most popular, and that players didn't know how they did it (by hitting upon exploits and/or putting up random tactics), there's loads of easy money to be made here. All SI needed to code was a game mode where you are guaranteed promotion/titles -- but the seasons playing out just enough drama so that you feel some excitement along the way. They don't need to code any AI for that, they can  lay off half of their staff including the ME team (sorry Paul -- you're fired).

All they needed was a few clever scripts that would ensure the illusion the player mattered, presto. I know this is a bit sarcastic -- but if the game can grow by supporting a fantasy players never understood anyway, that'd be the easiest thing to do. That's not how I see things, mind. I think everybody deserves a simulation proper -- including somewhat understanding it (provided he has an interest in understanding some of football/management), and given the tools do to such, or at least, assistants taking it over for his -- what he then does to it is up to him. :) It seems vital to communicate too though what tactics are meant to do in the game though -- and where, from SI's end, breaking it may start. Some of the clue may be in what AI managers are at best capable of doing with teams..

@penza Sorry, for the lack of clarity. Yes this was my experience from FM11. If you read through the thread, it was never a bug as such, but it somewhat influenced "streaks" as was found by SI and then patched some. It wasn't purely about morale, mind. It never is. It is/was a combination of entire squads being on abysmal/superb morale for weeks/months. The teams sitting at the bottom typically are the worse ones anyway, and vice versa... so...

cool thanks!

yes I agree, if they do implement at least a corner exploit, it would make people enjoy it a lot more as its their choice if they want to use it or not!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Svenc said:

Interesting order -- is that ranked from easiest to most difficult or vice versa though, Tony? :D I consider the first ones I'd played to be the most difficult, in parts because I never downloaded any tactics, etc. Still won titles and stuff, despite not having much a clue. Also remember a really horrible season though, 3/4 wins (and curiously, no sacking).  If the theory is true that the versions where it is the easiest to win stuff with the least effort are the most popular, and that players didn't know how they did it (by hitting upon exploits and/or putting up random tactics), there's loads of easy money to be made here. All SI needed to code was a game mode where you are guaranteed promotion/titles -- but the seasons playing out just enough drama so that you feel some excitement along the way. They don't need to code any AI for that, they can  lay off half of their staff including the ME team (sorry Paul -- you're fired).

All they needed was a few clever scripts that would ensure the illusion the player mattered, presto. I know this is a bit sarcastic -- but if the game can grow by supporting a fantasy players never understood anyway, that'd be the easiest thing to do. That's not how I see things, mind. I think everybody deserves a simulation proper -- including somewhat understanding it (provided he has an interest in understanding some of football/management), and given the tools do to such, or at least, assistants taking it over for his -- what he then does to it is up to him. :) It seems vital to communicate too though what tactics are meant to do in the game though -- and where, from SI's end, breaking it may start. Some of the clue may be in what AI managers are at best capable of doing with teams..

@penza Sorry, for the lack of clarity. Yes this was my experience from FM11. If you read through the thread, it was never a bug as such, but it somewhat influenced "streaks" as was found by SI and then patched some. It wasn't purely about morale, mind. It never is. It is/was a combination of entire squads being on abysmal/superb morale for weeks/months. The teams sitting at the bottom typically are the worse ones anyway, and vice versa... so...

Hi Svenc  Yes sorry most difficult at the top, easiest at the bottom

Edited by Tony Wright 747

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, penza said:

 

yes I agree, if they do implement at least a corner exploit, it would make people enjoy it a lot more as its their choice if they want to use it or not!

:D
The one "positive" thing with a purely corner exploit is that it wouldn't require players to make completely illogical (open play) tactics. The type that gets players raging about "getting FMd" due to those tactics getting burnt for being illogical --  primarily scoring and defending via exploits, which even the AI sometimes can have a reply to as they all play a bit differently. Purely corners, there's only this much nonsense you can do in the corner instructions... maybe sitting all eleven players into the opposition box, dunno. I'm as anti-exploit as it gets though. Not because it bothers me that you can exploit, except maybe in multiplayer. There will be always some imbalances likely anyway that you can target if you want to. But for the aforementioned reasons... players thinking they understood the game some, only to find out after years that they'd just succeeded via exploits. Or them being under the impression that's what the tactical parts of the game would be supposed to be like... get it "right" and you have the worst sides winning all over.

There's always been a lot far less frustrating and time consuming ways to make the game easy than spending/testing hours for game breaking tactics too for every single release/possibly patch. Some of them are even officially supported. I can relate to the arguments that different players would be interested in different areas of the game. There's stuff I've never spend time on myself.. tutoring, even youth development, barely scratched the surface. Similar to levels of depth/challenge. But that's where assistants and similar may come in. Possibly even with different skill levels. Far more natural way to handle this. Exploits that keep thousands from seeing what the game really is or how it works would be a horrible short-term solution around a long-term design challenge. You won't get every player equally interested into every area of the game. The good news is that there is evidence that real managers delegate various tasks too -- and yes, this can include proper tactical assistants just as well!

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Svenc said:

All SI needed to code was a game mode where you are guaranteed promotion/titles -- but the seasons playing out just enough drama so that you feel some excitement along the way.

You just described FIFA FUT. There's a soul-destroying elastic-band system to make new players feel accomplished and have a chance against better players (and as you'd expect, better players get horrendous handicaps at random times so that rookie players can have a shot).

It is dark tunnel with no way back. I think the focus should squarely be in making a 100% realistic game, and  then simplifying menial tasks that people don't want to do, like you said, assigning an assistant to handle player development, training, and old sorts of other things if the player doesn't want to get bogged down with detail.

We can throw in an 'starting mode' to put new players on rails (they can't be sacked, morale doesn't drop too low, they get an injection of cash if they go negative, etc) but once you turn that off, the game should feel real for the things you've chosen to manage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, tacticsdude said:

You just described FIFA FUT. There's a soul-destroying elastic-band system to make new players feel accomplished and have a chance against better players (and as you'd expect, better players get horrendous handicaps at random times so that rookie players can have a shot).

It is dark tunnel with no way back. I think the focus should squarely be in making a 100% realistic game, and  then simplifying menial tasks that people don't want to do, like you said, assigning an assistant to handle player development, training, and old sorts of other things if the player doesn't want to get bogged down with detail.

We can throw in an 'starting mode' to put new players on rails (they can't be sacked, morale doesn't drop too low, they get an injection of cash if they go negative, etc) but once you turn that off, the game should feel real for the things you've chosen to manage.

yes but also tactical aspect like if you get a an amazing AI assistant they should be able to handle everything and you can over-achieve having said that.. .a 100% realistic game is impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted for FM17 since I only have FM14, FM16, and FM17 in my collection and I feel that FM17 is the best of those three.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well 161 people voted

FM12

FM17

FM18

These seem to be the most popular but FM12 seems to be a long standing favorite . I wonder if FM17 and FM18 will fall once FM19 and further are released . FM13 and FM15 are also popular choices . Maybe people prefer a game to work better rather than keep bringing in new ideas that bog the game down .

Anyways thanks for voting

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or maybe, as this long-winded thread has proved, people either like the most recent version, or they like when the game was easier.  It really is that simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading lots of opinions (here and elsewhere), it seems that the best versions of  the last 10 years stand at:
FM 08
FM 13
FM 15

This is in terms of ME realism, good balance of richness of detail, approachable interface and a general sense of immersive fun for more than the casual user (so 50+ hours). I say this for anyone looking to try an older version and planning to spend 100+ hours.

The causal user that does not seek a long-term challenge would most likely enjoy FM12, 17 and whichever is the current version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@tacticsdude

Whats your logic for deducing the current version suits the casual user...by that logic you're dismissing your own conclusion of what are best versions in that when fm08, fm13, fm15 were current versions the casual user would enjoy them but would not seek a long term challenge with them but at the same time they retrospectively offer a general sense of immersive fun for more than the casual user...they can't be both

I always find it amusing when people make conclusions on the merits of certain engines...most engines since the rewrite were imbalanced in favour of defending...some of them more heavily than others. People who favour reactive tactics and who like to garner a sense of it's their 'tactics' and input that is making a difference to their team winning rather than the players on the pitch lean towards certain engines that essentially enabled this with under simulation of attacking play inducing people to like the perceived 'toughness' but really all that was happening was match engine was biased towards defending...people just didn't/still don't realise that's the case and concluded 'its tougher therefore better'...but it was tougher as it was biased towards defending with stunted attacking capabilities and that presented a challenge or actual lack thereof if they thought it through properly. 

 

The real challenge for anyone who considers themselves tactically adroit is to have attacking/decision making/technical skills/agility/movement to the max and then see how their tactical skills stack up to be able to stop that or the flip side of being able to tap into those enhanced attacking elements to break down opposing defences...of course defending will need to be on point as well.

 

FM13 saw an almost exclusive through ball through the air 'fix' to create goals through the middle...it was one of the most underdeveloped engines yet but people liked it for whatever reasons they liked it.

Share this post


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

Whats your logic for deducing the current version suits the casual user...

This is an opinion/poll thread. I was interested in the opinions of the community due the ongoing conversation about the ME/AI etc. I've been reading a lot of player opinions spanning back a few years.

My comment was simply my summary of the opinions I found. While opinions are all over the map, a few themes keep recurring.

This is a game, so what is fun?  I see this divided into 2 brackets:
- the users that don't care too much if the ME is realistic (usually playing shorter careers [but of course not always] and/or just not too immersed in tactics)
- And the users that want to set their tactics in detail and see them come to life, usually playing longer and wanting more out of the ME

Sure this is too simple a way to separate the audience but I'm jut trying to make an overarching point. For instance, FM12:
- Softcore players (new, casual or not too involved with tactics) had a blast. The game felt real, they felt in control, they achieved success with their tactics and lived the dream of coaching their team to glory.
- Hardcore players overall don't seem to have thought much of the game. They think it was too easy, once you figure out the ME it impossible to play a long career

Now to be fair, I'm a hardcore player and I loved FM11(/12) and don't necessarily agree that it was too easy or that the ME was broken beyond use, but I'm summarizing the opinions I read not just my own.

Also, other things go into it as with any game. FM12 was more refined than versions prior. Same with FM08. But a lot of the success or criticism centers in the actual ME because that's the core of football. So versions that had a better ME, that gave you a better run for your money are more appreciated by hardcore players.

Softcore players appreciate the package as a whole more. They'll mention the graphics and the general feel of the experience. This is part of the immersion factor too, because if the game feels real to you, and the speed of play and the stuff that arrives at your game inbox feels engaging, then you are having a great immersive time.

For instance, many softcore players would complain that a game gets bogged down in detail and that the ME is much harder than the year prior (FM13). But for the same version many hardcore players have the exact opposite opinion (more interesting with more detail, and the ME is a better challenge).

 

18 minutes ago, akkm said:

would not seek a long term challenge with them but at the same time they retrospectively offer a general sense of immersive fun for more than the casual user...they can't be both

I don't think I'm seeing your point. You can have a great immersive fun experience inside of the first 50 hours even with that game that you'll ultimately find unsatisfying. This is the case with FIFA and PES that only reveal their thorough suckiness once you've figured out the systems and become attuned to the crappy momentum and AI cheating on you. Then the game is far less fun.

To be clear, my point was that football games hold well for the first 50 hours even under some critical scrutiny, because it takes some time to develop a sense for the game and advance your club's project. It is only past some serious time with the game, often well past the 100+ hr mark that players start becoming attuned with the patterns and judging the quality of the game in a more informed way. That's why you'll see a lot of the people here say that having played 200+ hours does not negate your right to have a negative opinion of the game.

I personally have near 400hrs on FM17 and think it is easily the easiest FM I've played. I can't stop winning trophies with barely trying. It was certainly fun for the first 50 hours when I was in Div 2 and accepting the ME's odd behavior as potentially a lack of skills from my Div 2 players or myself as a new game user, but once I got past 150 hrs and I'm playing with Div 1players against known Div 1 teams, the flaws of the ME become glaring and the magic goes straight out the window.

And going back to the core of the matter (which version of FM is most fun), that's another very good way to summarize:
- Some players get to that point where they see the flaws of the ME and find them distracting (mostly hardcore players)
- Many players don't get to that point (casual or less tactical) or simply don't care (better sense of humor for enjoying games?)

So under those brackets, the first group would probably appreciate FM 08, 13, 15, and the second group is likely to have more fun with FM 12, 17, 18

Again, that's just my interpretation of the opinion's I've read.
(Personally I hated 15, but I think that's cause I hated the tactics UI and the team morale felt like a rollercoaster ride. I did love FM11, so my personal journey contradicts my findings on other people's opinions. I was supposed to love 15 and find 11 wanting, but it was the opposite for me)

Share this post


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

but really all that was happening was match engine was biased towards defending...people just didn't/still don't realise that's the case and concluded 'its tougher therefore better'...but it was tougher as it was biased towards defending with stunted attacking capabilities and that presented a challenge or actual lack thereof if they thought it through properly.

Hm.. possibly bias go two ways though. Curiously it's never been easier to just sit back / park the bus in order to stage upsets than on Fm 2011/12 imo. Even the "exploit" tactics of that era universally kept 7, 8 players always glued behind the ball. Aside of AI tactical issues which made it e ven harder for AI against such massed defenses, the lack of then ME inherent lateral support movement in attacks talked about by the mods too factored into it too. I had recorded a vid (sadly deleted) where I let a side run against 2 simple banks of four. Almost every time they got in front of the box they eventually ran out of options and blasted it long. Since the rewirte, I had actually one time been raging how harder it had become to stage Cup upsets that way. On some releases since the rewrites sides sitting deep / focused on defending had it even very hard to get out of their half all that much -- which is one of the prime reasons why by FM 2015, even an AI managed Bayern Munich could go a fully season with a record breaking low of 8 goals conceded in the league. Add to that the oft toothless counter attacks in general. Interesting theories though -- by both of you!

That said, defending is easier than attacking in any sports. But any unintentionally bias may go both ways. In retrospect, it was a bit too easy back then. FM 2012 was also the game where I got a pretty unremarkable Rosenborg side surviving a CL group consisting of Real and Milan that way. How couldn't I end up frustrated with releases initially where that suddenly stopped being possible that way. Apparently I'm an oddball though. Since there has certainly always been a big time bias by players to lean towards attacking football for sure. :D

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FM 14. Turned Molde into a competitive champions league club and dominated the Norwegian league. Also won the Europa league with Celtic. Without cheating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@tacticsdude

reasonable explanation there of your conclusions post

 

One thing on the hardcore thing and a more challenging match engine. The thing is the match engine providing a better challenge is one sometimes the result of 'reverse exploits' if you will which neuters attacking capabilities...since rewrite we've seen in fm13 the requirement for through ball through the air and (I don't remember specifically since that which one was which) we've seen other restrictive things such as

- high defensive lines not being exploited

- finishing from players being put on one on ones inadequate

- play through the middle blocked most years bar fm17

- play forced out wide necessitating overpowered crossing

- number of long shots too high

- less varied finishing

This in addition to under simulated attacking in general is what's made it more challenging...that's what I mean by the balance favoured defending @Svenc. So whilst it may be more challenging for hardcore users some of the reasons they find it so has been it has had attacking elements of the game diminished allowing the impression it's more challenging and a feeling of it's less exploitable...but it's just the exploits of previous versions (ie everyone's bug bear of through balls/speedy players which seems to have caused many all sorts of trauma) has been displaced to other less apparent 'exploits' or 'reverse exploits' 

So whilst people are making conclusions based on previous exploitative elements being eliminated they are benefiting from other 'exploits' such as the balance favouring defending but just not realising it ie they are actually exploiting the match engine's under simulation of attacking play to their benefit but concluding it's their tactics/input...not consciously of course but still by having attacking elements not as they should be they are tapping into that to benefit their teams output/performance...so in essence they are exploiting the match engine as it stands just not in glaringly obvious ways or concentrated  way like speedy/no collision detection but at the same time they are exploiting it. This could be argued on all engines but that's where balance comes into it to avoid that conclusion...which is clearly tricky

Last year was the first time since Fm12 that play through the middle was better enabled with more through balls more evident. Is it a coincidence that these are the two most popular series...I don't know the answer to that but I suspect it has some contribution towards it. I know @tacticsdudeyou suggest it was easy but all series are easy once you just start to move the pieces around the board but some success feels less rewarding and less realistic than others as of course can be more rewarding in others...just because it's more challenging as there are less obvious exploits doesn't make it better necessarily and if it's more challenging as attacking play is under developed then where's the real enjoyment/challenge in that...essentially you're just succeeding against an underdeveloped/latent match engine against a limited means to attack ...sometimes the challenge can be presented that it offers a 'different' means by which to win matches...ie hardcore users have generally played many years and have got used to certain elements of the match engine as it developed so being presented with something different than before is a challenge in itself. FM12 to FM13 was example of that...fm13 was horrendously under simulated from attacking point of view...goals/incisive play was almost an addendum to what preceded it in a move and required to produce goals rather than goals/incision being produced through organic smart/good/intelligent /nuanced attacking so some hardcore users may have liked it for the exploits it enabled from an underdeveloped attacking point of view in addition to exploits removed. 

 

The real question is is it more challenging in a realistic way and a more balanced way so you are being presented with a genuine challenge tactically for hardcore users whilst also allowing less invested (immersive wise) users to just pick up and play and want success. The thing is in the real world many coaches can pick up and play given a certain quality of player...you'd want to do something fairly badly to make a team of a certain quality play badly consistently...of course there's plenty who can and do do that but football is one of the few industries which consistently rewards consistent failure from a hiring of managers point of view so the only that really suggests its quality of player that dictates success in real world on a consistent basis rather than quality of manager's tactical input (of course motivational/psychological/human factors etc also contribute to how good a manager is to enable a team's success) so FM should be reflective of that. After all take Guardiola or any other manager and give them conference level footballers playing in premiership for a season employing the same tactics they do with high level teams and they'd finish last every time.   

 

The means to create a challenging isn't designing an exploit free match engine...it's inevitable that people will exploit it no matter how hard or how well SI code it...its to design an engine that realistically as possible reflects real world attacking and defensive behaviour and thereafter let the chips fall as they may...yes certain things can be tightened to mitigate any glaring exploits but that can only be done once things are simulated to the max on both sides of the ball. 

The hardcore users should enjoy the challenge more of trying to stop a fully simulated Man City under guardiola/barca side with all its attacking might and guile from winning a head to head from a tactical deployment of their players and having the attacking capability to exploit their vulnerabilities in a single match or running away with the league with the quality of their players...and I'm sure they would.

Has the match engine got 'better' since the rewrite...on the whole remarkably so taking the helicopter view. Is it lacking in certain elements..most definitely but in the context of enjoyment in this thread it's incorrect to dimiss enjoyment of some users based on what is perceived to be easy based on using exploits where some are more 'challenging' but are actually tapping into match engine 'reverse exploits' which are just more subtle and numerous than the obvious speedy/non collision avoidance thing...people are getting enjoyment out of both sides of this but just tapping into variant forms and degrees of match engine exploits 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FM12 without a doubt. Spent 1173 hours on that one and loved every single minute of it. Had some of my biggest saves on there (Deportivo, Braunschweig, FC Torino, St. Etienne). All around amazing year with a lot of great stories. I can't really pin it down and explain why FM12 was the best one IMO, from my memory how I feel about the game I'd like to say it felt way more accurate in "this is the setting I chose and this is the consequence of my choices". It felt more clear, raw, transparent, more "alive" than recent versions of the game. It might be Nostalgia also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, akkm said:

@tacticsdudeSo whilst people are making conclusions based on previous exploitative elements being eliminated they are benefiting from other 'exploits' such as the balance favouring defending but just not realising it ie they are actually exploiting the match engine's under simulation of attacking play to their benefit but concluding it's their tactics/input...


I was actually proposing that on the last iterations prior to the rewrite it was far easier to defend in masses than on some releases thereafter. And that it was connected to undercooked attacking movement in FM11/12 that made this possible (see also posts made by mods on the last page about the robotic attacking movement -- players basically moving forward and backwards "on the rails", whereas in current releases you have playmaker types etc. roaming all over the place to offer themselves. Never again could I drop all off, sit all back, soak it all up and spring back to back Cup upsets ever since. Admittedly as pointed out, it was a bit down to inefficient AI tactics too then. IF anything, it was a couple later releases that had a far bigger "bias" towards attacking play. It made me put FM 2015 on hold prior to the last patch, as you could simply throw numbers forward, and turn the worst forwards into the most successful goal scorers in the league (without going into the defending details as to why). :D FM15 to this day is probably still the one release where everybody and then some ended up playing top heavy formation attacking football, as overloading the areas remained far more efficient, and counter attacking was comparably toothless. This toothless, that top sides facing sides focused on the defense every week could go seasons conceding 10 goals --> see also even the AI managed Bayern Munich conceding no more than an all time record 13 goals in the screenshot.

Now any such experience is a bit subjective. But bias would go two ways. The game does not become easier or harder because attacking/defending would be undercooked, whichever it is. You can both play some defensive or attacking football at varioius points of a season / match. From experience though, players prefer to go down the attacking route, as it's more "exciting". You have that same effect on Fifa/PES, where everybody picks Barca/Real and then attacks. What can make the game harder is how much is down to players vs. your input (i.e. man management, tactics). On the defending tactics end, FM12 you just needed to have a mass of players sitting behind the ball. On the attacking end, various releases had borderline "super dribblers" (even post FM12). You just needed to field them. That's where the balance is tactically. Anything else is just a personal preference/bias torwards attacking or defending play, a bias that is some inherent to any sports anyway, as defending is easier than attacking. I'd argue SI aren't deliberately undercooking attacking play, but try to simulate somewhat "realistic" football. It's a misconception that the rewrite occured to make the game harder. It was done as in football you don't see forwards ghosting through defenders to pick up through balls that would never come off on an actual pitch (not even on Fifa). And if they may tone finishing rates, they make look at football rates rather than fantasies likewise. Whether they succeed is  up for us to gauge...

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I know you were suggesting iterations prior to the rewrite were easier soak it up. And it should be hard to open up deep lying defences however the means to achieve that is done. Thats also an element of defending /attacking rather than all situations on the whole

 

In the instance of the playmaker roaming...they can roam all over the place and receive the ball if they're not pulling the trigger to slot in players into advantageous positions/creating chances ultimately the benefit of the roaming and improved movement for whatever technical reasons is almost superficial to its ultimate functionality of creating chances

 

Whats your definition of a one on one...of course angle of keeper/composure of forward/morale/situation within a match and importance within match and season/proximity of defender/space to run into/speed forward moving at amongst other factors will affect how a one on one is finished.

I've seen you post on it before on a thread and suggested circa one in three of even better chances including one on ones but attached two articles suggest the number is higher and there is quite a deviation between conversion of 'big chances' between teams. One is for roughly half a season and one for just 6 games but the overall conversion rate of big chances is 50% for half season and 44% for 6 games.

It would be interesting to see big conversion rates of strikers to compare deviation between them...i guess factors such as quality of chances may impact conversion rates as bigger teams and thus better strikers may face deeper lying defences therefore the 'window' for a one on one for top class striker may be smaller in terms of time and space to convert. Deffo there are differences in even quality of one on ones

With regard to FM i was referring to (not sure) but maybe it was FM15 or FM16 where high lined defences giving up one on one chances players had space and time but conversion rates were very poor. Even within years you do see certain tweaking of conversion rates of one on ones within FM but I suspect conversion rates since rewrite are less than real world. 

@Svencdo you have other stats on one on ones ?

 

http://www.planetfootball.com/quick-reads/ranking-premier-league-teams-shot-big-chance-conversion-rates/

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/2627769/manchester-united-have-the-worst-clear-cut-chance-conversion-rate-of-all-the-premier-league-teams-this-season/

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, akkm said:

Y

@Svencdo you have other stats on one on ones ?

 

 

Roughly 1 in 3 based on any study. Which also is incorporated into "Expected Goals" models you see currently going around. E.g. when Morata a couple ago weeks was lambasted for missing three in a match, and everybody suggested he should have at least scored a hat-trick, such models suggest that assessment may have been a bit over the top. It's a different topic though, and one that in my opinion will never go away until FM makes it clear how it models anything such. E.g. possibly even including similar feedback, as according to the main coder from discussions a few versioins ago, there are easier and more difficult one on ones, and the pace of play is considered too. My personal opinion has always been though that these are oft overrated due to their dramatic nature, in particular as outside of a professional keeper, barely anybody understands the impact of the angle, and how much of an edge that keeper has when coming off his line to make the target smaller and smaller. As said, I feel this can never be settled until anything like that is introduced, and even then it will spring debate (even if the game were actually 100% accurate, which same as anything it highly unlikely is, missed stuff is always frustrating -- except if it's the opposition that misses  ). Then again, what would be a game of football without any debate! :)

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voted fm6 by accident, should have been fm7. Other votes were fm8 and fm12. 

 

As for the question, it was heading to the right direction since fm14 to fm17 but I think fm18 has taken a step back. Potentially so that it can take a leap with fm19 as we've seen with older versions but we have to wait and see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, AI-brahimovic said:

I can't really pin it down and explain why FM12 was the best one IMO, from my memory how I feel about the game I'd like to say it felt way more accurate in "this is the setting I chose and this is the consequence of my choices". It felt more clear, raw, transparent, more "alive" than recent versions of the game. It might be Nostalgia also.

From your other post I would say that you are right about the natural feeling of the game. You probably found the previous tactics UI more natural to convey tactics (as did I). Also, back in 11/12 the players were smarter, so you didn't have to micromanage roles the way you have to do now. It was easier to tell the players what to do and expect them to put in an acceptable performance (like it would be IRL).

And I don't think it is nostalgia. I played FM11 and FM17 extensively in the last 12 months, and I can attest that FM11 feels real in a way that FM17 fails to deliver. The ME and tactics UI in FM11 are more immersive and less visibly flawed. Whatever the failings of FM11/12, I had to work much harder to get wins so there was a feeling of accomplishment, and I had to work less hard to convey my tactics, so I felt better connected to my squad. Those 2 things alone make FM11 a far superior game than FM17.

 

Edited by tacticsdude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 ore fa, tacticsdude ha scritto:

And I don't think it is nostalgia. I played FM11 and FM17 extensively in the last 12 months, and I can attest that FM11 feels real in a way that FM17 fails to deliver. The ME and tactics UI in FM11 are more immersive and less visibly flawed. Whatever the failings of FM11/12, I had to work much harder to get wins so there was a feeling of accomplishment, and I had to work less hard to convey my tactics, so I felt better connected to my squad. Those 2 things alone make FM11 a far superior game than FM17.

 

It's just really amazing how the spectre of perceptions of the game can differ from user to user, as I felt exactly and massively the opposite. FM11a "far superior game than FM17"? Well that's a big piece of a statement, speaking subjectively of what is supposed to be an objective topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Federico said:

FM11a "far superior game than FM17"? Well that's a big piece of a statement, speaking subjectively of what is supposed to be an objective topic.

We've talked this to death. I have written an entire book chapter about why FM17 is an inferior game and why FM11 was better. If you want an objective conversation and feel like reading 10+ pages on the subject, lookup my other posts.

Here specifically I was replying to a fellow player that's trying to figure out how the game 'feels', and from that perspective I have feelings too, and my feeling is that FM11 was more fun. That we express subjective opinions does not impede us from also being capable of having an objective conversation elsewhere.

And as a quick reminder, the thread's topic is 'favorite' FM series, as in personal preference. I can and have argued my objective points regarding FM17, while as a whole I am also a gamer and have personal opinions on what's more fun.

Share this post


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

Also, back in 11/12 the players were smarter, so you didn't have to micromanage roles the way you have to do now.

Please explain how we "have to" micromanage roles now?  And how was adjusting a myriad of sliders half a centimetre one way or another not micromanaging?  I appreciate you may have a personal preference for FM11, I'm just confused why you think we have to micromanage roles now (or in FM17 which you are playing).

I know I've suggested this to you before but if you really do believe this kind of thing then heading over to the Tactics forum to ask for help might prove useful for you.  The last time I felt the need to micromanage roles was in FM13 when sliders stopped being a thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, herne79 said:

I know I've suggested this to you before but if you really do believe this kind of thing then heading over to the Tactics forum to ask for help might prove useful for you.  The last time I felt the need to micromanage roles was in FM13 when sliders stopped being a thing.

Probably a perception brought about as "roles" are since an integral part of the coding, and you need to take that into account. E.g. lots of hard coding going on. Back then roles were mostlythe same template given different slider instructions you could adjust. This development only really started by FM14ish, and has benefits and limitations. The limitations being that each role now has a distinctive behavior (coded by SI). That is, it can be a perceived limitaion in some cases at least. Play makers making themselves available everyhwere, but also the half back behavior you could not replicate via sliders -- nor was the segunda volante behavior possible. SI give you the roles, and you pick them, and that is for you to manage // deal with. It's somewhat adjustable, but some of the role-inherent behavior they code is set. That decision had some supporters and doubters back then, and it's understandable to see why. Paul AFAIR made it clear that he prefered to go down that route, as he was not comfortable with players being able to "invent" their own football roles completely from scratch -- in a sense.

Ever since CM, the human player was incidental to the game world around his. Everything you can assess, the AI can. To me personally that's the most fascinating thing of  concept. Most games make you firmly the centre piece of the universe -- and the simulation around you is only as deep as required for the game to roll along to your actions. F'r instance: If you quit a club on early Fifa Manager and came back a few years later, you would notice that there was no real "club AI simulation" going on. The ground you had expanded, the finances, they'd be reset. AI clubs/managers basically only exist/ed as competition for both results and transfers. Many games are/were set up like that. On CM/FM, as you play along, AI managers develop/influence the clubs with the same tools as you do. They even attend press conference which you can follow via their history screen, they have fallouts with their players, etc. A player (re)inventing football, so to speak, would unbalance that. You're not supposed to be The Special One. You're not even supposed to be The Normal One. You're just One Amongst Many Hundreds -- tied to the same roles coded by SI in this case ever since.

Then again, I could be wrong and it's something else. :D

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeh I understand all that @Svenc :thup:.

I'm just genuinely confused why adjusting umpteen sliders for each player on the pitch is not seen as micromanaging, whereas picking roles from a set list (albeit with some allowance for further adjustment) is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/17/2018 at 07:01, Svenc said:

I prefer the theory that FM2012 Is/remains some popular because it was the end of a rope. An all around polished product that without significant changes couldn't be pushed further ahead. However, one, that SI at the core deemed balanced enough to consider not patching the core engine -- get this -- in 12+ months running. So the focus behind the scenes could be elsewhere. FM11 was the easier game anyway, as due to a few "morale" issues it was:

- borderline impossible to ever enter a relegation fight even after a surprise promotion
- go on loooooooooooong streaks and claim such surprise promotions

Which had a few to do with how morale worked then, and that the most extreme ends could be maintained throughout the squads for a very long time running. Coupled with the "scared chicken" AI defensive tactics and their universally abysmal morale squads, there were always 2, 3 teams in each league that once they started losing .... they just wouldn't stop. This was only ever adressed by FM2012. Still a huge thread on this, btw. One of the biggest if you sort threads by their size ever.

Plus I'm confident FM06-08 were easier too, as you had Diablo and Kimz crazy arrow exploits -- we're talking exploits here where it didn't even matter if you were thouroughly outplayed. Every time your side went forward, you had a big chance to score, as players would be unmarked in the opposition area.  The thought of FM2012 remaining some popular primarily because players would prefer win buttons would make me feel depressed. :D [If I were SI, I'd totally include those, mind as a feature].

FM12 - longest ever run by my Ass man to win the title, yup. I used to play it "ala" Chairman mode, basically I decide who we buy, and then I tell him what tactic to play, then I go on holiday mode. We win the title rinse and repeat. We did lose an occasional game here and there, but the AssMan was all powerful, oh wait, it wasn't. The fact that the AI couldn't fathom how to handle a lateral run just made it too easy to play the game.  You didn't even need to play with exploits. Its was a pure numbers exercise.  Create any balanced tactic get the right players in the right positions, and win. Even the Assman couldn't get it wrong half the time. FM12 and FM15 rank as the easiest versions of the game, FM15 had a golden mean. Create any balanced tactic with the right instructions on a specific mentality and shape, and go for another streak. Haven't seen such easy days since 03/04 - ( I am still trying to find the Xmas song some of the forum guys did from those days about super tactics and superbugs)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, herne79 said:

Yeh I understand all that @Svenc :thup:.

I'm just genuinely confused why adjusting umpteen sliders for each player on the pitch is not seen as micromanaging, whereas picking roles from a set list (albeit with some allowance for further adjustment) is.

I was thinking of the possible frustrations caused by the fact that you have to deal with some of the role-inherent behavior now. That's behavior that in parts wasn't even in FM 11 too. Including the runs and movements coded to specific roles. Everything was more of a "blank slate" in a sene, whereas now you have to 1) deal with that coded behavior, and 2) are "forced" to consider it all when trying to create your flavour of tactics. For the record, I think it was the right decision all in all and it also allowed things to be coded in that prior weren't possible.

I am more puzzled that somebody finds FM11 particularly challenging though for my aforementioned reasons. :D I can see why one can find FM17 not much challenging though, and much relates to the wide midfielder conundrum™  :p .

11 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

 ( I am still trying to find the Xmas song some of the forum guys did from those days about super tactics and superbugs)

 

Is it this one? Still a classic either way. :D

 

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


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

I was thinking of the possible frustrations caused by the fact that you have to deal with some of the role-inherent behavior now. That's behavior that in parts wasn't even in FM 11 too. Including the runs and movements coded to specific roles. Everything was more of a "blank slate" in a sene, whereas now you have to 1) deal with that coded behavior, and 2) are "forced" to consider it all when trying to create your flavour of tactics. For the record, I think it was the right decision all in all and it also allowed things to be coded in that prior weren't possible.

I am more puzzled that somebody finds FM11 particularly challenging though for my aforementioned reasons. :D I can see why one can find FM17 not much challenging though, and much relates to the wide midfielder conundrum™  :p .

 

Is it this one? Still a classic either way. :D

 

That was a good song but there was another even earlier than that. I can't quite remember the name of the song, but I think they even played it at SI towers for a bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, herne79 said:

Please explain how we "have to" micromanage roles now? 

I notice that we (all the people exchanging ideas here) are too often speaking about different things and then getting on each other's nerves for lack of a common ground.

This is what I mean about micromanaging roles, and the reduction of player smarts:
Say you have a player and you tell him to play CM/Auto. That seems to work (with some quirks but relatively fine enough). The player moves up and down with the play, comes back down to defend, moves up to participate in attack, takes a shot every now and then, tries a through ball every now and then, etc. Some do it more than others (attributes and such) but overall they play their role.

Now let's take an AML. What do you want him to do? Say you/me are a beginner trying to set up a 4231 with the '3' being AML - AMC - AMR. Let's focus on the AML.  Say you want him to have this role: AML/Auto, which is the same thing we did for the CM in the last paragraph. Except in FM17 that doesn't exist - simply not an option. So now we are forced to give him a specific role, when as a beginner I might just want to set him to auto, or even better yet, 'play to your style' which is something you might say to Neymar if you just bought him at PSG. But those are not options, so in order to determine what to instruct this AML, let's define what we want him to do:

- defend in a flat zonal 451. When we don't have the ball, fall into formation. Listen to your CM and FB and stay in line.
- when we attack: carry the ball, and give the team a few seconds to push up. Decide if you want to pass sideways, cut inside or go wide to cross.
- Don't repeat the same maneuver too often, keep the FB guessing. Cross a few, cut inside a few. Dribble into the box sometimes, and other times pass to the CMs and dart into the box to receive a through ball.

So, I just described someone like Neymar IRL. Now let's try to set the role in FM17:
Winger - nope. This guy always goes wide and doesn't defend competently. With support duty he passes sideways some times but also tries a few dribbles. With attack duty he always tries to dart forward (whether there's room or not) and doesn't wait for support.

AP - nope. This guy lingers back and doesn't attempt to cross or cut inside. He carries the ball and waits for support, but once the support arrives he doesn't push against the FB.

IF - nope. This guy hides behind the FB so that you can't give him the ball, and when he occasionally reappears in the game he'll try to cut inside even if the situation clearly calls for a side pass or a wide run.

WT - This is not an AML, more like an outlet player.

Raum. - This guy doesn't defend.

In summary, it is impossible to just tell him what we want him to do. But you have to choose a role. So you give him the closes one you think fits, and then one of 2 things will happen during the game:

1. He doesn't play like Neymar (there's no hope that he would), and the budding tactician managing this team can't see it and/or do anything about it
2. You keep an eye on his behavior and touch up his role throughout the game in order to make him do different things. If you need him to cross more you switch him to winger for 20 mins. If you need him to hold up play more you switch him to AP for 20 mins. If you are chasing the game and intend to play faster longer balls, you switch him to IF for 20 mins.

But even option 2 there is a sad compromise. Because he will focus on one task for 20 mins at a time and miss opportunities for other tasks during that time. The root of the problem is that the roles are on rails and the players are not welcome to think. A real player would work with the instructions but if an opportunity presents itself he would take it. If the instructions are not working he would still try to work within the system but look to get creative and try different things. In FM17 that behavior doesn't happen.

So in FM17 there are more roles which provides more detail, but they are also more on rails. Players are less clever about their game and thus can't adapt to the tactics not working. So FM 17 suffers of a double whammy:
1. You can't tell players how to play correctly (the tactics system just doesn't work right)
2. Players on the pitch won't adapt to the game to avoid mistakes and exploit arising chances

So it is a common occurrence in FM17 that users are setting up teams with tactics that neither work well, nor represent what you actually wanted them to do. This is not the user's fault, it is FM's fault for being too rigid, having an ineffective tactics UI, and not coding the players on the pitch to act smarter and naturally fill in instruction gaps like humans would.

Edited by tacticsdude

Share this post


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

But even option 2 there is a sad compromise. Because he will focus on one task for 20 mins at a time and miss opportunities for other tasks during that time. The root of the problem is that the roles are on rails and the players are not welcome to think. A real player would work with the instructions but if an opportunity presents itself he would take it. If the instructions are not working he would still try to work within the system but look to get creative and try different things. In FM17 that behavior doesn't happen.

Isn't this what PPMs are for? Ie a player with 'cuts inside from right' played as a winger will still choose to cut inside as well. I know they don't work well all the time and some of them are close to broken but I think this is their function. What the player is likely to 'think for himself.

Share this post


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

Isn't this what PPMs are for?

No. They do have an effect in the way that you suggest, but player traits are not in the game as a way to tell your player how to play the next match, how to play the second half of the current match. There has to be a way to adjust the instructions for the match (not the education of the player as a whole).

The problem with the current roles system (outside of players being robotic):
1. They represent positioning for both phases (attack and defense)
2. They represent the philosophy of both phases (aggression, lateral movement, risk, approach to gaining advantage)
3. They are locked against 'counter intuitive' selections (like telling a player to dribble less if he is set to winger)

 

Think about how absurdly high FM is setting its own bar for the named roles:
Each role in FM contains an entire instruction set for attack and defense, and carries a bunch of hardcoded instructions on how to move and interact with other players.

So say I wanted a AML winger that doesn't challenge the FB on the dribble (that is: dribble and cross when you see green, but don't push it if you are being marked because the FB is a better defender than you are a dribbler), so using the FM named role model we would need this non-existing role:
cautious winger

But we are playing against Barcelona, so I also want him to come down to defend immediately and track aggressively any wing attempts, so the imaginary role is:
defensive cautious winger

But for the few times that we are in the final third through play development I want my FBs to overlap so I don't need the winger on the wing, instead I want him to blast into the box to become a target for crosses, so the role is:
defensive cautious winger/inside forward

 

How close is the FM tactics UI from letting me assign this role?
Keep in mind this is not some fantasy role, this would be perfectly at home for an AML playing La Liga.

Edited by tacticsdude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@tacticsdude All roles since we lost the sliders have preset instructions.  All roles before we lost the sliders also had preset instructions.  Essentially all that's really changed is instead of seeing sliders we see instructions, some of which are hard coded, some of which are optional.  We've lost some of the ability to customise (which I'd like to have back btw) but surely that's also reduced our "need" to micromanage: less options = less fiddling with micromanagement?

In the option you give about the CM auto or Neymar how does that demonstrate how micromanagement has increased?  That just describes issues you have with a lack of choice and that tactical system?

One other thing:

7 minutes ago, tacticsdude said:

so the role is:
defensive cautious winger/inside forward

 

How close is the FM tactics UI from letting me assign this role?

Pretty close.  WM(s) or (a) with additional PIs; IW(s) or (a); or perhaps even an IF(s) off the top of my head.  Other tactical instructions allowing of course, such as mentality and team shape which would act as modifiers and not to mention the attributes of the player himself.  Probably an attack duty with a more cautious mentality or a support duty with a more risky mentality due to the impact that would have on individual player mentality.

And wrt your Neymar example, can we accurately replicate how he plays?  No.  Can we accurately replicate how anybody plays?  I don't think so.  But we certainly can recreate a representation of how players and indeed teams play.  Is that enough though?  God no and I don't think anybody thinks that, keep evolving the game please.  However, the TC is not quite such the restrictive beast you seem to think it is.  It could absolutely be made much more clear what certain things do or how to go about representing certain aspects, and for more inexperienced players that can be quite daunting, but it is quite capable of handling subtleties and complexities as well as simple instructions.  It's just not always obvious how to and neither is it perfect.

Anyway, back on topic, my favourite FM series was probably FM16 as that's when I really started to understand these tactical subtleties, and what it and the ME are capable of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, tacticsdude said:

No. They do have an effect in the way that you suggest, but player traits are not in the game as a way to tell your player how to play the next match, how to play the second half of the current match. There has to be a way to adjust the instructions for the match (not the education of the player as a whole).

Player Traits are tendencies, not instructions.  Give a player the Trait to "Cut Inside" and he'll do it a bit more often than he might otherwise do.  But he won't always do it - he'll pick and choose his moments to do it, based (at least in part) on his Decisions attribute.

Personally I don't particularly like some (all?) Player Traits as even the tendency can be too restrictive at times, however they can be very useful to provide variety of play in otherwise one dimensional roles.  eg., Imagine giving a player the Raumdeuter role and that same player also having the Trait to Dribble More.  Now you have a player who will look to use the channels and his off the ball movement to get into position for that killer pass, but also scare the life out of defenders when he decides to run at them with the ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Svenc

Where are you getting the 1 in 3 in any study...that link to expected goal was based on that situation

Did a quick search into expected goals and one of its main proponents suggests big chance conversion is 40%

Also you mention keeper in one on one situation but also attacker has option to take a touch to improve his angle to finish...the forward has opportunity to make things to his advantage as well...it's not a one sided situation whereby the keeper gets to dictate things there.

 

Also read where Michael Caley shows that top players and top clubs outperform their expected goals so this suggest top players will finish chances more efficiently than lesser players in general this probably implies they will finish one on ones more efficiently as well

 

Another interesting takeaway is that through balls produce shots between 2 and 3 times as likely to result in goals than other shots taken from same areas in the pitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, herne79 said:

Pretty close.  WM(s) or (a) with additional PIs; IW(s) or (a); or perhaps even an IF(s) off the top of my head.

Have you tried these out or are you reading off a manual?

If you play him WM he won't attack enough, if you play him Winger he won't defend enough nor cut inside at all. If you play him IF he won't make himself available to carry the ball and he won't cross enough (won't defend enough either). The only solution I've come up is to play them with higher-up roles (winger support/attack) then give them man-marking instructions on the FB, that way they at least track one player, but they no longer cut inside when we have the ball, and what I need is a zonal approach not man-marking. I'm gaming the tactics UI more than using it to give instructions.

But I agree, we are getting off topic for this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, tacticsdude said:

Have you tried these out or are you reading off a manual?

Wow.  You've been warned (twice) about your rudeness in another thread, so consider this your final one.

20 minutes ago, tacticsdude said:

If you play him WM he won't attack enough

Tell that to Angel Di Maria when I played him as a WM(a) and he won the World Player of the Year award twice, scoring plenty of goals and making lots of assists.  So no, I didn't read it in a manual although I did write about it in the Tactics forum.

21 minutes ago, tacticsdude said:

if you play him Winger he won't defend enough nor cut inside at all

Already answered:

51 minutes ago, herne79 said:

Give a player the Trait to "Cut Inside" and he'll do it a bit more often than he might otherwise do.

A Winger can also defend quite well if you set him up correctly, even if you position him in the AML/R slots.  If you're not finding this then, again, visit the Tactics forum for help.

Anyway, it's becoming increasingly tedious talking to you so unless you continue to be rude you won't hear from me again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, akkm said:

@Svenc

Where are you getting the 1 in 3 in any study...that link to expected goal was based on that situation

 

It's not one situation, it's several if you click through Morata's shots also on that understat link. Those are all fairly typical ratings for a one on one. We used to have guys here arguing that they are converted at 1 in 4 rates! The finisher makes a difference, that's meant to be one of the uses of such metrics (which also have limitations): Whether they long-term outperform their "score" or whether they underperform. Short-term: Ronaldo had underperformed his xG at the start of this year by -10 goals, which is pretty massive, but you may have heard of his curious drought -- certainly big time contributing to Real Madrid's point drops in the league, no less as he gets by far Madrid's most finishes... that was basically 100 shots for 3 goals (+1 a penalty),... Don't think that's possible in FM, either way (perhaps for the better). Some guy did a video on Youtube showing half of those shots in sequence and numbering them, curiously his account was suspended a few weeks ago, that was a massive vid. :D In general managers spend millions on going a few extra percent, or try to on any competitive level, not getting large scale boosts to another level.

Online it's hard to find published stuff, but this is all pretty much in line with anything that's ever been researched, be that from Pollard, Ensum, Taylor at all. Even for a shot to be considered anything better than a 1 in 10 chance (pretty much your average shot cnoversion), the forward has typically be to be in range and in space. SI are officially teamed up with STATS -- if they get wrong data here, then we're screwed. :D  Opta "Big Chances" include one on ones, but also anything from close range. I also would not be tempted to compare it to FM's CCC, which has been all over the place. Picking things up that are comparably hard vs. not picking stuff up that is comparably more easy.... from playing experience also. This assist for instance isn't only played straight into the forwards running path, he can finish with the first touch and the ball instantly changes direction, far tougher than a one on one for the keeper... more like a one on zero. Still not counted as a CCC. Whereas, this kind of one on one, from a narrow central position, into the forwards back, forcing him to turn and shoot and the keeper allowing to come off his line, has always been a comparably difficult one -- just my own personal playing experience. You can still convert in between 50% to over 60% of your seasonal FM CCCs (FM18). Earlier iterations rated far more silly stuff as a CCC.

It's a topic that interests me. I'd even contaced guys who analyze, and they would confirm me that people tend to overestimate any attempt, and that our perception is flawed by how football is being represented in the media (highlight reels showing goals, goals, goals etc.). I'd argue it's gotten me a bit of a better understanding of my results even, plus scoring streaks, despite FM's shortcomings and limitations. I'm advocating for there to be better feedback. No less as half of the post match reports you've ever gotten hadn't made much sense. Basically, if on FM a side had more shots and didn't win or struggled to score a fistful, it was either unlucky or wasteful. Not at all always the case. In particular if you're a team on the counter/parking the bus, that can be hugely misleading, with the game constantly telling you you were just lucky to not concede. :( FM doesn't make the most simplistic distinctions, whether a shot was from a set piece (typically pressured header in a jam packed box), counter attack (says it all), open play, anything.

@Rashidi If you ever find that song, let me know please! Sounds hilarious. :D

 

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, herne79 said:

Wow.  You've been warned (twice) about your rudeness in another thread, so consider this your final one.

Tell that to Angel Di Maria when I played him as a WM(a) and he won the World Player of the Year award twice, scoring plenty of goals and making lots of assists.  So no, I didn't read it in a manual although I did write about it in the Tactics forum.

Already answered:

A Winger can also defend quite well if you set him up correctly, even if you position him in the AML/R slots.  If you're not finding this then, again, visit the Tactics forum for help.

Anyway, it's becoming increasingly tedious talking to you so unless you continue to be rude you won't hear from me again.

I've also had wingers (and I still have this) cut inside without the PIs (obivously, because of the role) and without the Player Trait. All I had to do was play a player there with his strongest foot being the "inside" foot, so he naturally does it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Player roles are something I really appreciate about the more recent FM versions. It's just easier/quicker for me to assign a role than to mess around with individual player instructions, sliders, and so forth when making a substitution or adjusting a tactic.

My big frustration with the latest version(s) is with how much more clicking seems to be required with no discernible increase in fun factor. So in essence, I feel I have to do more work for the same reward. Orchestrating set pieces, scouting players, offering contracts, and setting up a backroom staff are tasks that used to be quicker.

For me, the FM15 version of the game was about the right amount of fussing/clicking. From that point on, I wanted developers to just refine the match engine so that we get a nice variety of goals and gameplay and to update the data. That's it. I would have kept buying the game in perpetuity, but alas, each year seems to incorporate some new feature that sucks some of the streamlined fun out of it for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Overmars said:

For me, the FM15 version of the game was about the right amount of fussing/clicking.

Out of all the versions I've played, FM15 was the only one I didn't enjoy at all. I didn't play the game for a few months, something that doesn't happen with other versions. It was just too easy. The ME wasn't bad, but AI managers far, far, far too defensive, far too early and easily and with counter attacking being toothless, it was a plan doomed to fail.

The amount of clicking etc hasn't ever been an issue, but in FM18 it has become one. It still doesn't stop me from playing, but it is a bit cumbersome in places. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Overmars said:

My big frustration with the latest version(s) is with how much more clicking seems to be required with no discernible increase in fun factor. So in essence, I feel I have to do more work for the same reward. Orchestrating set pieces, scouting players, offering contracts, and setting up a backroom staff are tasks that used to be quicker.

For me, the FM15 version of the game was about the right amount of fussing/clicking. From that point on, I wanted developers to just refine the match engine so that we get a nice variety of goals and gameplay and to update the data. That's it. I would have kept buying the game in perpetuity, but alas, each year seems to incorporate some new feature that sucks some of the streamlined fun out of it for me.

 

The worst they've done as far as the match days are concerned on that front is how everything is set up. Everything has it's separate sections to open, from the analysis, the stats, the feedback, everything. You open the screen, and then you have to close it again. Whereas on earlier releases everything was available from top down menus at a glance. The match analysis section on FM 15 was also the last one that had the "simplified" match analysis interface that had largely been unchanged in the game ever since. After that SI have expanded it a bit, which is good, but also has its (naturally) distractions; namely additional categories to click and chose from.

 

43 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

The ME wasn't bad, but AI managers far, far, far too defensive, far too early and easily and with counter attacking being toothless,...

 

@HUNT3R Was certainly a bit of a different experience... even Bayern AI breaking all defensive records at 10 goals conceded. And players be like: AI only/always scores and wins points from poor shots, set pieces, flukes, errors or bugs (where should it at all much score from if you play the likes of Portugal in a Semis of the EURO 2016 and they sit half their side behind the ball???), must be cheating! :brock: I still like/d to play FM15 too though, admittedly. After the final patch they had sorted out also the weird stuff with the duties and advanced players tracking back or not at all.

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


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

 

@HUNT3R Was certainly a bit of a different experience... even Bayern AI breaking all defensive records at 10 goals conceded. And players be like: AI only/always scores and wins points from poor shots, set pieces, flukes, errors or bugs (where should it at all much score from if you play the likes of Portugal in a Semis of the EURO 2016 and they sit half their side behind the ball???), must be cheating! :brock: I still like/d to play FM15 too though, admittedly. After the final patch they had sorted out also the weird stuff with the duties and advanced players tracking back or not at all.

Did you manage in Germany out of interest?

I can see how that happens, as all the other AI teams would just be completely defensive against them in every match, even the teams you'd consider at least close to Bayern's level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and as for favorite series, I didn't vote. I loved FM08 (you always remember your first :brock:), FM10 and FM14 so can't select them all.

Share this post


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

If you ever find that song, let me know please! Sounds hilarious. :D

 

It was on the old forums and it was a Xmas song, I doubt I can find it. I did download it years ago, not sure if I still have it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought fm14, 16 & 17 but always gravitate back towards my long fm10 save. I just find it more fun and more of a game than a chore! I also feel it’s more controllable from a tactics point of view, let me give an example

I had an aging but pacy striker on 10 who I could instruct, using the sliders, to sit on the halfway line looking for a break away if we were holding onto a lead in the last few minutes of a game. Nothing fancy, just sit on the half way line. On fm 16 & 17 I could find no simple way of asking a similar attacker to do the same thing without having to change my entire teams shape. He would invariably drift back and help out. If someone can show me a way to do this simple player instruction on a recent fm then I’m very happy to stand corrected

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...