Breaking down a parked bus.

Svenc · January 10, 2019

2 hours ago, bar333 said:

I'm still thumping the AI overall and winning trophies with a club like Stuttgart, negative net spend, etc. I'm still winning most games comfortably. I'm in the middle of, as of right now, a 28 match unbeaten run in the league. The AI isn't really putting up a challenge anymore than it ever did. In fact, I'd argue it's the opposite - the AI's ludicrous negativity actually makes the game easier in the long run because in the vast majority of league games I'm facing opposition that is not interested in the slightest in scoring a goal or challenging me at the back. I don't think I've ever had an unbeaten run that long and honestly I don't see it ending any time soon. It's not that I'm a genius - the AI isn't trying to beat me so of course I won't be beaten. I've had the best defence in the league every single season and barely concede goals, I can get away with playing 17 year old wonderkids at the back because they won't be tested anyway. The AI offers no threat whatsoever outside of the odd set piece even when they are trailing.

How many goals do you concede in the BL, out of interest? Reminds me of Long-term saves FM 15 in particular. First Season as THE top dogs, even the AI managed Bayern Munich went with less than 10 Goals / 34 match days conceded on the occasion. They just never faced a challenge as like 90% of Opposition was Content with a draw/not getting trashed. Of Course, counter attacks on that Version were inherently somewhat toothless, and Teams sitting Deep also found it hard to get back out of their half a bit (partly ME inherent), contributing to this. As you say, it's a statistical probability. I tried to go with conceding 0 Goals on that release. Like every time when going up on the score sheet, playing endless keepball. Oft easy to do, FM 19 included, like this -- in particular if the Opposition doesn't push much up anyways. But at one Point, i would concede a goal. Typically, form the corner/set piece. For as Long as you don't get oppositioin down to Zero shots, you will concede a Goal -- and then there's also the likelyhood of own Goals, Bugs, and individual Errors in General.

By FM16, that very same AI lost up to 8 Matches with Bayern first Season -- with one of the then most dominant Squads in the game. [Which is/was partly connected to that the AI never, ever gets the message if it's spanked for its overly aggressive approaches to begin with in a specific match -- basically most AI do is to react to scorlines, and the very top of the Reputation chain may expect no less than a Sound win. What an Opposition, other AI included, is actually doing -- it's not on their radar much].

SI should either way seriously consider this, as simply altering the AI can Change the game experience significantly -- even without touching the ME at all (not suggesting that it shouldn't be touched, mind). The most defensive Ai approaches, with basically the entire backline plus at least a CM on defend Duty, have never been particularly realistic to begin with. Certainly not when applies for prolonged minutes of a competitive match between competitive Teams (which is, Teams playing in the same league/Tier).

bar333 · January 10, 2019

@Svenc Generally I'm always on less than 0.5 goals a game in the league. This may not sound so extreme but it's hugely skewed by both long range screamers and set pieces. I honestly couldn't tell you the last time I conceded a goal that didn't fall into one of those two categories. Bayern are the only team that reliably scores VS me from open play.

I could even cut those down somewhat by taking preventative measures once I'm in control of the game, like pushing Dline higher and defending narrower, they should limit long shots and set pieces in dangerous areas but as I've said I just don't really bother.

Teams having 0 shots on target against me is a very common occurrence. Many times they don't even have a shot on goal until the 80th minute or so when they finally decide to start playing but the game is already well past them at that point, maybe they get a couple of pot shots at goal and a corner.

herne79 · January 10, 2019

18 hours ago, bar333 said:

Nah, I'm not having it. It's broken code, not a design decision. File under "Bugs", of the almost game-breaking variety.

From reading this thread the issue - despite the thread title - seems to have developed away from how to break down the parked bus (although that remains an issue in and of itself), and evolved into the frequency with which the parked bus appears.

That being the case, if you believe there is broken code, bugs or the AI needs a tweak to not be so cautious so often, then the best thing you can do is start a new thread in the Bugs forum (ME Issues). Upload your game save with lots of match pkm examples and make specific reference to each match where you think something needs to change.

It's unlikely the Developers will read this thread and even if they do they won't act on anything without specific examples (and lots of them) to backup your point. So the only way this will get looked at is by starting a thread in the Bugs forum and uploading lots of examples. There seems to be other people in this thread who have noticed the same thing as you, so the most helpful thing they can do is add their own examples to a Bugs forum thread you create.

fidelitywars · January 10, 2019

11 hours ago, bar333 said:

I say 'understandably' because the real reason we're all here is we enjoy the tactical side of the game, to different extents obviously but still. We all want to buy the illusion that FM sells. And I share that - I want the team to play a certain way, I want to feel rewarded for what are basic tactical decisions but in my head I'll tell myself they're making all the difference, etc. It's precisely for these reasons that this issue with FM19 is so egregious in my opinion. It makes games too samey, it seriously limits the beautiful football moves you want to see because those are difficult to pull off against such negative tactics, it forces you to play a certain way. It makes the journey boring as hell.

Brilliantly articulated; completely agree with this. Results have never been the issue; it's about a style and an interest in producing football that you'd expect the technically-gifted players in my team to be capable of.

Instead, FM19 is an exercise in repetition - facing opponents often entirely uninterested in any form of progressive play and waiting for penalties/set-pieces/long shots to win you the game. It's the same game every time owing to a lack of interplay/dribbling/creativity/through-balls and that's just intensely, numbingly boring and offers no enjoyment whatsoever. The most frustrating aspect of all of this is that when facing teams who do offer a little adventure (a vanishingly small sample size), it does appear possible to play nice football and score impressive goals but this only ever appears to happen when counter-attacking; players just don't seem interested in even trying to play through a set defence (an issue massively exacerbated by poor forward movement).

Experienced Defender · January 10, 2019

18 hours ago, bar333 said:

Except it is easy to score and it is easy to win though. I feel like one recurring theme when people complain about FM19 whether on this issue or the ME issues is that people think it's about results for those complaining. I see it both in @Experienced Defender and @Rashidi's posts.

There's no difference between my success on FM19 and what I had in previous years managing big clubs (which I didn't start with since atm I'm with Stuttgart, but I made it huge in a clubhopping save). It's the same results but with far less goals conceded and less goals scored, more comfortable wins but not nearly as many tight and close games or 5,6 nil drubbings against the trash teams.

I'm still thumping the AI overall and winning trophies with a club like Stuttgart, negative net spend, etc. I'm still winning most games comfortably. I'm in the middle of, as of right now, a 28 match unbeaten run in the league. The AI isn't really putting up a challenge anymore than it ever did. In fact, I'd argue it's the opposite - the AI's ludicrous negativity actually makes the game easier in the long run because in the vast majority of league games I'm facing opposition that is not interested in the slightest in scoring a goal or challenging me at the back. I don't think I've ever had an unbeaten run that long and honestly I don't see it ending any time soon. It's not that I'm a genius - the AI isn't trying to beat me so of course I won't be beaten. I've had the best defence in the league every single season and barely concede goals, I can get away with playing 17 year old wonderkids at the back because they won't be tested anyway. The AI offers no threat whatsoever outside of the odd set piece even when they are trailing

So (if I understood you correctly), you aren't struggling to either win/get results or score goals, but are actually unhappy with the AI being overly "negative" (ultra-defensive), right? Okay, but in that case, your issue with the FM is not for this tactics section of the forum but the general discussion or something like that, I guess.

Though your opening post did suggest your issues were of a tactical nature :idiot:

Svenc · January 10, 2019

9 hours ago, bar333 said:

@Svenc Generally I'm always on less than 0.5 goals a game in the league. This may not sound so extreme but it's hugely skewed by both long range screamers and set pieces.

Thanks! That's fascinating and currently somewhat to be expected what with the higher success rates of both. On some prior Releases, FM18 excluded, you COULD average a crazy amount of "screamers" and enjoy Fantasy success ratios. HOwever, it took heavy data Edits (every Player Long shots etc. 20) plus a Team encouraged to fire it.

Traditionally, all hugely defensive AI works out it a set piece or a Long shot Situation most of the time. So it follows that if the General success Ratio of each is higher, you may still concede a couple goals… In General seen over the entire season, you should Benefit more of those though. Against Teams Camping, most of the Play happens in their half. Which means more set pieces and (Long) shot opportunities for your Team. As you say, in the current Situation you may work on defending Long shots, but don't Need to bother either way as the AI is this negative it doesn't even much aim for a win anymore most of the time. More often than not, it simply tries to avoid gettingn trashed. The massive amounts of AI negativity is totally an issue.

Zolero · January 10, 2019

I've tried to follow all the tips I could get from this thread and many others and I also fail to create good enough chances. I've never been the one to cry over the game and still have some itty bitty faith in this but my last game almost broke my heart (screenshot). It has come to the point where no longer know what to try, whether its full attacking with with overlapping fullbacks and a forward that can head the ball or underlapping and trying to get to decent shooting positions. Just needed to get this **** out of my head with a whiny post and then I'll try to get back to it.

Robson 07 · January 10, 2019

On ‎30‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 13:46, Rashidi said:

Personally when i want to break down a parked bus, i think of how i can get more bodies into the box for attacks. This means not giving the opposition even a chance to get the ball out. So i end up playing on really high lines....

Apart from a flippant remark I've kinda steered clear of this thread but I did raise an eyebrow when I saw the above quote as one of the earlier replies. I'm not able to comment on the coding of the AI's match plans but from what I see on this forum an awful lot of people's tactics are set up like a Barcelona / City / Liverpool anyway. By that I mean high lines, possession, gegenpress etc. We all squeeze the life out of our opponents and then wonder where the spaces are. Then @Rashidi who is an influencer I'd suggest, makes those remarks and it sort of reinforces that thinking. And that's fine but it may simply be exacerbating the AI's behaviour. If your tactic relentlessly forces the opposition into a bunker then expect them to end up in a tight defensive shell. And probably expect your goals to come from long shots and set pieces. And probably expect their odd goal against the run of play come from a long punt over the top.

Now I'm not looking to defend SI nor am I knocking what @Rashidi suggests. As an instrument it'll work, but it is going to work a certain way and a lot of matches or highlights may end up looking the same over and over. In fact I see some repetition in my own save but I accept that's a consequence of this version/patch and how to an extent I'm also on trend to a degree myself with latest tactical fads.

Rashidi · January 10, 2019

52 minutes ago, Robson 07 said:

Apart from a flippant remark I've kinda steered clear of this thread but I did raise an eyebrow when I saw the above quote as one of the earlier replies. I'm not able to comment on the coding of the AI's match plans but from what I see on this forum an awful lot of people's tactics are set up like a Barcelona / City / Liverpool anyway. By that I mean high lines, possession, gegenpress etc. We all squeeze the life out of our opponents and then wonder where the spaces are. Then @Rashidi who is an influencer I'd suggest, makes those remarks and it sort of reinforces that thinking. And that's fine but it may simply be exacerbating the AI's behaviour. If your tactic relentlessly forces the opposition into a bunker then expect them to end up in a tight defensive shell. And probably expect your goals to come from long shots and set pieces. And probably expect their odd goal against the run of play come from a long punt over the top.

Now I'm not looking to defend SI nor am I knocking what @Rashidi suggests. As an instrument it'll work, but it is going to work a certain way and a lot of matches or highlights may end up looking the same over and over. In fact I see some repetition in my own save but I accept that's a consequence of this version/patch and how to an extent I'm also on trend to a degree myself with latest tactical fads.

High line..... then overload and create the space. And yes of course, sometimes you will score from long shots and set pieces and even deflected goals but doesn’t that also happen in real life, or is FM some fantasy football game where these kind of goals shouldn’t happen.

Some people may have the quality in their systems to score Overloads and others may not be good enough and have to settle for the scraps.

Robson 07 · January 10, 2019

20 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

And yes of course, sometimes you will score from long shots and set pieces and even deflected goals but doesn’t that also happen in real life

Absolutely, yes. Not suggesting otherwise for one moment. The simplest answer to the opening post on how to beat the bus is simply "shoot on sight". If defenders back off deep, dribble or shoot. I don't particularly have a complaint regards that or at all really. Previous post was mostly observational.

akkm · January 10, 2019

30 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

High line..... then overload and create the space. And yes of course, sometimes you will score from long shots and set pieces and even deflected goals but doesn’t that also happen in real life, or is FM some fantasy football game where these kind of goals shouldn’t happen.

Some people may have the quality in their systems to score Overloads and others may not be good enough and have to settle for the scraps.

how often do you think the long goals happen in real world by the barcas/citys playing against deep lying defences

Also by overloads against deep lying defences..what do you mean by that

bar333 · January 11, 2019

2 hours ago, Robson 07 said:

Apart from a flippant remark I've kinda steered clear of this thread but I did raise an eyebrow when I saw the above quote as one of the earlier replies. I'm not able to comment on the coding of the AI's match plans but from what I see on this forum an awful lot of people's tactics are set up like a Barcelona / City / Liverpool anyway. By that I mean high lines, possession, gegenpress etc. We all squeeze the life out of our opponents and then wonder where the spaces are. Then @Rashidi who is an influencer I'd suggest, makes those remarks and it sort of reinforces that thinking. And that's fine but it may simply be exacerbating the AI's behaviour. If your tactic relentlessly forces the opposition into a bunker then expect them to end up in a tight defensive shell. And probably expect your goals to come from long shots and set pieces. And probably expect their odd goal against the run of play come from a long punt over the top.

Now I'm not looking to defend SI nor am I knocking what @Rashidi suggests. As an instrument it'll work, but it is going to work a certain way and a lot of matches or highlights may end up looking the same over and over. In fact I see some repetition in my own save but I accept that's a consequence of this version/patch and how to an extent I'm also on trend to a degree myself with latest tactical fads.

I used to think that. In fact that approach made sense to me and worked in previous years when facing a parked bus. You can see from the tactics I posted that I'm not normally playing a high press.

What I've learned from this thread in that regard though has helped me. It made me observe the AI more closely in full match mode and see what they do, and upon doing that I quickly realized more often than not the AI has no interest whatsoever in playing football, much less scoring a goal. By "inviting" them on all I was doing was allowing them to dominate possession in their own half and take no risks with either their passing or forward runs.

At the end of the day the AI needs to be willing to make the bare minimum effort to score in order for you to be able to exploit spaces and gaps in their shape when possession is gained. And quite simply it's not showing that willingness. So the best bet for me has been to move to far more aggressive tactics than the ones I posted. I don't want the let the AI play because the AIs idea of "playing" in these games is to just waste time on the ball from the first minute.

Rashidi · January 11, 2019

1 hour ago, bar333 said:

At the end of the day the AI needs to be willing to make the bare minimum effort to score in order for you to be able to exploit spaces and gaps in their shape when possession is gained. And quite simply it's not showing that willingness

No the AI does not need to attack me to give me space. I can still overload the AI and score in most cases, if I have the better players. With LFC I expect to win against the burnley's of the world, if they park the bus. I have the quality of players to unlock them. In fact if they don't want to come out I just keep on overloading them till they ship a goal. I even did that against Chelsea once who was sitting back defensively against a team that hadn't lost a game the entire season. In the end Chelsea were pulled apart by the way we kept switching play from one left to the other finally leaving us with that pocket of space to do a cutback for 6 players who were attacking the box.

The AI has finally been given the option to sit back and defend, and at times successfully, from what I gather from the forums. Its vengeance time for the AI after 20 years of being on the receiving end of attacking systems. Its the first time defensive shape has been added to the game, and I guess it will take some time before this balancing act is fine tuned. For now though...that middle ground is missing somewhat.

akkm · January 11, 2019

25 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

No the AI does not need to attack me to give me space. I can still overload the AI and score in most cases, if I have the better players. With LFC I expect to win against the burnley's of the world, if they park the bus. I have the quality of players to unlock them. In fact if they don't want to come out I just keep on overloading them till they ship a goal. I even did that against Chelsea once who was sitting back defensively against a team that hadn't lost a game the entire season. In the end Chelsea were pulled apart by the way we kept switching play from one left to the other finally leaving us with that pocket of space to do a cutback for 6 players who were attacking the box.

The AI has finally been given the option to sit back and defend, and at times successfully, from what I gather from the forums. Its vengeance time for the AI after 20 years of being on the receiving end of attacking systems. Its the first time defensive shape has been added to the game, and I guess it will take some time before this balancing act is fine tuned. For now though...that middle ground is missing somewhat.

That's just misleading though. AI is still on the receiving end of attacking systems this year...it's just in a different way in the past...whether its through attacking generating corners or long shots or whatever people are still winning matches...it's just the way they are winning them is consistently at variance with the way things happen in the real world and essentially this is because the way teams attack in the real world is simply not simulated at all well this year.

And whilst defensive shape has been added which is obviously a good thing it's masking fundamental issues many of which have been highlighted very well in terms of how teams actually attack in the real world with more dynamic movement, pass selection, players control/agility in tight spaces

The game is not littered with a plethora of goalless draws so clearly teams are still winning and thus attacking teams are still winning over defensive teams its just the means to create in and around deep lying defensive teams isn't simulated well

really what's happening is undersimulation of attacking gives the false impression that its good defending that's stopping things and making things harder and creates a false impression of it being clever to break down defences but whats actually at play is those breaking down these defences are just doing so by gaming the code and they (despite what the may think) are not breaking defences down in FM with tactical nous ...that impression is severely misplaced as the tools to do so simply aren't simulated this year.

really don't know if defending is actually any good...yes fundamentally narrow shape defending is a plus but without attacking being properly simulated one can't conclude anything about how well the defensive elements will hold up.

You're right to say balance is off but the middle ground is not missing somewhat...it's nowhere to be seen.

I read a post saying someone saying logic gets rewarded in FM and of course this is right in certain elements but it's also incorrect in other aspects.

I posted before about certain feedback leading FM the wrong direction in terms of leading it towards simulating highly simplistic things such as...oh if you're playing against a low lying defence draw them out...yeah like guardiola/poch/klopp et al train their teams to do that...that's baffling to suggest that and think it has merit at the higher end of the game...of course it it logical but there's a bigger picture at play as to why it's just not a thing in real world soccer.

It's also arguably logical to suggest that the more players and the more you get the ball in the box the more chances you will have to score goals (sam allardyce type simplicity) but again there's a much bigger picture at play there as well in terms of how the ball gets into the box and movement/angles of runs etc of players to get on the end of those passes into the box and of course control of the ball/game to alleviate pressure on one's own defence by not just lumping the ball into the box at any occasion turning over possession.

FM has moved away from simulating attacking sophistication cratering this year with the well documented central play lacking to reward more reactive defensive enabled 'soundness' with more simplistic attacking patterns...frankly i'd lump overloads into that...yes it has a certain validity in terms of positions/movements on the pitch to get into positions but the way movement this year has been undersimulated again you're really just gaming the code and not getting your players to move around the pitch into advantageous positions for fundamentally sound footballing reasons and certainly not any level of sophisticated movements.

Really some of these things are things which can give certain players a level of granular 'feel' of control lever wise its jose style simplicity tactically and one of the reasons why he has been exposed...it's not that he has failed to adapt...it's just he is a tactical simpleton and always has been and actually has very little sophistication especially from an attacking point of view...so he has no clue how to set a team up to play like a guardiola/poch/emery/klopp team.

Jose main defensive attribute of players behind the ball, full backs lack of adventure going forward, playing narrow with central mids staying central and deep to stop more expansive teams will get no rocket off the ground. His teams have usually operated best utilising the likes of duff/robben/eto/ronaldo on the counter attack or his go to move when chasing a game of putting on fellaini (or huth in liverpool 2005 semi at anfield) and bypass midfield and get it into box is all logical at it's simplest sense but we've seen it's too simplistic and it's effectiveness is dependent of getting breaks and high quality of players to eek out results and jose has been the beneficiary of high class players over the years to get him results. His man utd team lacked cohesion/purpose/shape attacking patterns wise as he coached the basic level movement and passing options...instead going with highly simplistic instructions of using rashford/martial/lingard pace on the break or get set pieces and load men into the box or get it wide and get crosses in, or up to the big man lukaku...he was essentially reliant on moments to create and score rather than proactively creating with superior and more dynamic way of playing or basically a million miles from the advancements dynamism wise attacking patterns of guardiola/poch/klopp and others

But these Jose tactical traits are what FM has implemented to enable that linear translation of eg change fb to wb get crosses in/overload certain areas or whatever to elicit that feeling of 'oh how great a tactical decision that was'...absolutely it has to give that being a management simulation but this year has seen a MASSIVE drop off in quality attacking play in terms of pass selection/movement

In relation to this thread @herne79has correctly identified the issue is twofold in terms of ability to properly break down a deep lying defence with proper football fundamentals and then the frequency with which AI teams employ that and further within that the actual depth of defensive line is continually too deep compared to real world ie real world defences don't keep that depth or shape that readily.

The ability to break down these defences is reliant on central play attacking patterns getting a significant bump to reflect real world football and not FM code enabled means to break it down. In addition to well documented through ball/attacking movement issue there should be a distinction made between through balls (which are seriously undersimulated all years but this year it's been stark) and what are just quality passes (ie not definitively a strictly defined through ball) of passes in tight areas/threaded passes into feet/passes into pen area putting player in for a shot given angle of run/one twos etc etc...these are also severely undersimulated and needed to break down tight defences

Interestingly the teams that play against deeper lying defences like barca/city/liverpool more recently/bayern and so on and so forth actually score bucket loads of goals season in season out.

City beating burton 9-0 had 10 through balls played from central positions, nearly all of which were played INTO central positions and 24 key passes many played from central positions...yes massive mismatch of ability levels but FM just isn't simulated to do this currently. Yes City do utilise cut backs a lot these days but again a lot of the preceding passes to the one for the cutbacks are played from central positions in tight spaces eye of the needle type which are sorely absent from FM.

So bottom line is the means by which teams in the real world break teams down (especially deep lying defences) is SEVERELY undersimulated this year so any continuing defence of this year's engine citing examples of doing so is just gaming the code/seeing examples of fundamentals at variance with real world or just using a 'see this example' with a 20/80 approach...ie their exception is held up as the norm.

Defending or normalising the current engine and saying 'it can be done' impedes the development of the match engine in the short/medium and obviously long term

Saying 'oh well this makes it more rewarding/difficult' leans more to someone who wants to get short term 'hits' of them thinking it's great tactical decision making making them win games which again is essentially gaming the code. The likes of this will keep FM further away from simulating richer and more fundamentally authentic real world patterns of play (attacking play especially)

Were real world attacking patterns of the likes of city/liverpool actually simulated well within FM then you'd actually have a legitimate challenge/difficulty level within the game in that trying to match these teams would be very very tricky tactics wise and also if this was the normaI teams could play this way as well meaning City/Liverpool within FM would consistently post bigger points/goals numbers and they'd be doing it in a more realistic way.

Those who continue to complain of overpowered attacking and resist/object to the simulation of better and more dynamic attacking patterns movement/pass selection/dribbling/guile/fluid and cohesive team movement really don't want a realistic simulation at all and just want a more gameable engine allowing them a feeling of 'better tactical management' 'faux difficulty/challenge' but not for sound footballing reasons...just want simplistic levers to pull and say change A = B and thus goals. They want to move further away from the feeling that it's the players on the pitch making the difference to their team's results/output and more towards their perceived tactical input making the difference. This of course is all part of the balance SI has to implement to satisfy all tastes for the game but making the engine less realistic to satisfy the 'tactical gurus' debases the engine itself quality and realism wise and actually makes it easier to play and a more banal exercise rather than engendering enjoyment out of watching your team go out and play quality football...as said this approach just makes it more an exercise in gaming the code as the difficulty/challenge rather than a fundamentally sound challenge football wise or put even more bluntly it's a 'code gaming tactical' challenge and not a realistic footballing tactical challenge

It just makes it further removed from real world football

VinceLombardi · January 11, 2019

25 minutes ago, akkm said:

really don't know if defending is actually any good...yes fundamentally narrow shape defending is a plus but without attacking being properly simulated one can't conclude anything about how well the defensive elements will hold up.

While I agree that the attacking motion of AMC and Strikers has been blunted compared to previous versions, I will go out there and definitely say that the defense has improved as well.

The impact for the user is so significant in dealing with defensive sides because it's getting nipped at both ends. The attacking movement is worse and the defending shape is better.

Just putting a ball carrier near a defender use to guarantee that he bite and give up his position. Heaven forbid you use strikerless or an F9. The CD would chase players like a dog after a cat. That has for a large part ended and that is a big improvement.

akkm · January 11, 2019

2 minutes ago, VinceLombardi said:

While I agree that the attacking motion of AMC and Strikers has been blunted compared to previous versions, I will go out there and definitely say that the defense has improved as well.

The impact for the user is so significant in dealing with defensive sides because it's getting nipped at both ends. The attacking movement is worse and the defending shape is better.

Just putting a ball carrier near a defender use to guarantee that he bite and give up his position. Heaven forbid you use strikerless or an F9. The CD would chase players like a dog after a cat. That has for a large part ended and that is a big improvement.

I agree defending is fundamentally better with changes made but there's no point saying AI is on it from a defensive point of view as attacking being seriously diminished means judgement on how good it is is inconclusive.

Bizarrely increasing defending and diminishing attacking just means they've moved further apart and balance is further away than it should be decreasing the over realism of a simulation of football

off topic..what do you think of lafleur

Rashidi · January 11, 2019

1 hour ago, akkm said:

The ability to break down these defences is reliant on central play attacking patterns getting a significant bump to reflect real world football and not FM code enabled means to break it down. In addition to well documented through ball/attacking movement issue there should be a distinction made between through balls (which are seriously undersimulated all years but this year it's been stark) and what are just quality passes (ie not definitively a strictly defined through ball) of passes in tight areas/threaded passes into feet/passes into pen area putting player in for a shot given angle of run/one twos etc etc...these are also severely undersimulated and needed to break down tight defences

This thread seems to be some veiled attempt at moaning about lack of central attacking play, are we talking about how to break a parked bus or not? I am getting real confused.

Have you even noticed how differently Liverpool play against a parked bus? They don't even play the same way like they usually do, same goes with City. And by the way even now my LFC hammers a parked bus.

I tried to make it challenging with a 4312 away from home and even then it wasn't an issue

So if you saying that the attacking side is under-simulated, then I wonder how exactly. I will agree there is an issue with corners and long shots, and with 2 roles specifically in the attacking third. I and many others have raised enough bug reports for those examples. In both these games I didn't draw them out, I literally parked myself in their half and went to work pulling them apart with player movement, and dribbling movement by my players to drag players out of position. When I use a good side to play I depend on the individual players in my side like Mane and Shaqiri to make the kinds of runs and passes that I need to achieve the positional overloads that I am after. Its the way LFC and sides like City find and use space on a football pitch, but they aren't the original proponents of the system. Real world LFC kind of movement is achievable in FM19 right now, so don't say the engine can't do it. I reckon i will have to release the Best of the Kop for this season much earlier, how we ripped Chelsea apart was classic Klopp. He likes to create chaos in attack, where you don't even know which target is going to bang the ball into the back of the net.

Robson 07 · January 11, 2019

@akkm I think your big post was a cracking one. A great vent and some well made points. I hope it's read by the right people. However as a reader it does feel (only in places) that your frustration is aimed at other gamers or customers that come on to this forum to help, read or learn. None of us punters can change the game's fundamentals. It being a tactic forum and all most us are simply saying how we get around what the game gives us. How we get results from certain challenges faced. None of us though can give you something beyond the limits of the code.

p.s. Lafleur is no McVay :cool:

fidelitywars · January 11, 2019

@akkm - this is the finest summary of the game's current position i've read on these forums.

Here's to hoping that SI can reduce these issues before the FM20 cycle...

VinceLombardi · January 11, 2019

7 hours ago, akkm said:

Bizarrely increasing defending and diminishing attacking just means they've moved further apart and balance is further away than it should be decreasing the over realism of a simulation of football

I don't think that was an intended effect and would agree that as it pertains to certain attacking roles and positions, they are not playing as expected/designed. In that regard it is unfortunate and I hope it is resolved.

But I think the "poor central play" that is commonly cited is overblown. I haven't had any issues getting players forward, or getting throughballs, or a passing game in the midfield to involve attackers. It might be a little less than it was before, but that's more on defensive improvements than attacking being broken.

In previous versions, everytime you parked a player with the ball near a CD, they abandoned their duty defending the STC to meet the ballcarrier. And as soon as he did that passing lane was open and the playmaker took advantage for a through ball. It was hardcoded, no matter what the PI were and was a defensive failing that, I for one, am really happy has been resolved.

And of course it's going to significantly reduce through balls and the effectiveness of the short pass game that seems so popular. You could drop any Tom, Dick, and Harry in at AMC and watch them get 10+ goals and 10+ assists over a season. That should have been questioned as accurate simulation, but gauging reaction it seems it was accepted as the way it should play.

As for overly negative football, the AI issues, and whether it's accurate to real life, I can't add much. I haven't seen it. Whether that's because of the way I play or the fact I am still early in my save, I don't know.

Only thing I can confirm in that regard is that the AI is sometimes way too slow trying to get themselves back into a game. If your down 2 goals, waiting till the 80th minute to go attacking, isn't going to work.

As for Lafleur, I have tempered optimism. He isn't McVay, but he doesn't need to be. He has an established HoF quality QB. McVay needed to turn around a young guy not living up to his potential. I'm happy he is keeping Pettine and am just hopeful that Lafleur brings a playbook that was designed some time after the advent of the internet.

BadanieLuck · January 12, 2019

I think Rashidis post about only using 10% of the toolkit is one of the most important posts in recent times on this forum and should be sticky. Most of us would like to stick with our preferred formation, but this may not be feasible anymore with the improved defensive AI in FM19. I’m sure it’s doable, but it’s difficult.

I’m currently playing with Benfica and recent games have been tight affairs. Thanks to individual quality (mostly in form of longshots and set-pieces, this is FM19 after all) we managed to keep our win streak going ... just. I was constantly running into games often described in this thread with barely any quality chances, ultra defensive setups and boring games to watch. Games that looked like this:

As you can see they played a very defensive 4-1-4-1 DM formation, which is very effective against my 4-2-3-1, as it perfectly counters any advantage a standard 4-2-3-1 gives. They defend very deep and narrow, each of my players is covered by their respective counterpart. DM covers AMC, CMs on CMs, FBs and Wingers in a deep setup take care of my players out wide.

Something needs to change, so let’s go through this step by step by showing and explaining my thought process. Spoiler alert! This was the result against my next opponent who again played a defensive 4-1-4-1:

So how did we get there. First I was going through the problems I had against these setups.

Problem: Wingplay. Wingers and Fullbacks together defend deep, therefore barely space and time to pick out players in the box resulting in a lot of wayward crosses.

Possible solution: Reduce amount of wingplay as it is ineffective. Use IWC for more control in midfield / Remove AML/AMR to add players in other areas.

Problem: AI easily dealt with most crosses as they heavily outnumbered us in the box and are not challenged enough by our physical or heading attributes.

Possible solution: Add more bodies in the box / At least one physically strong or tall striker with good heading abilities.

Problem: No natural overloads anywhere around the pitch. Midfield trio not able to create anything productive (lots of sideways passing, not enough control in the center of the pitch and golden zone).

Possible solution: Add additional midfielder for more control and better passing options in final third.

These are the problems I quickly picked up by watching the games with possible solutions to fix these issues. Now, are the solutions complementary to each other or can I make it work with my team? How can I change my 4-2-3-1 to solve these problems?

This was my 4-2-3-1 I used to play with:

And this is what I come up with:

Why? Because this formation and tactic incorporates all the solutions I came up with from above.

Removed both advanced wide players as wingplay was ineffective, replaced them for an additional striker = 1st and 2nd solution

Additional striker is relatively strong, tall and good at heading = 2nd solution

Additional striker plus retaining my AMC on attack results in more bodies in the box = 2nd solution

Added another midfielder for more control in the center of the pitch. Always a player free = 1st and 3rd solution

The 4-3-1-2 checks all boxes and the players I have are suited to play this way. We beat them comfortably 5-0. 4 goals from open play. 1 set-piece. A simple formation change did the trick. No PIs (expect for FBs to stay wider) and barely any changes to the TIs, staying true to the club (and my preferred) philosophy. Using only about 30% of the toolbox resulted in a completely different experience.

Goals

Let’s analyse the goals. We lose the ball in the final third. I maintained my intense pressing system and this shows why. I don’t want to give the opposition any time to breath. Rangel and Brito immediately go to work and force the ball back. The AI is on the back foot and we capitalize. Rangel pushes forward, we have the bodies in the box and Origi is quick off the mark and makes use of the chaos. 1-0!

https://media.giphy.com/media/fxCk8H8qLWTdr05roZ/giphy.mp4

The second goal shows the advantage of the extra man in midfield. Pepe is in acres of space. Interesting thing to note, he is a DLP on defend duty, but still occasionally he will advance forward because A) the space and reading of the game he has and B) the use of the positive mentality. He has all the time in the world to pick out a pass and in this case it’s especially easy to find Origi as we dragged the opposition around. A good turn and finish from the Belgian. 2-0!

https://media.giphy.com/media/1oCv3yDYmp72GptUcG/source.mp4

Goal number 3 highlighting solution 1 and 2, the strong striker winning the physical duel against his marker to finish off a sweet cross from close range from my advanced fullback who (through tactical changes) has way too much time and space to deliver the ball. 3-0!

https://media.giphy.com/media/eswjqEcEMDLdtXISme/source.mp4

Goal number 4 was a set-piece so I won’t go into that. We are 4-0 up at this point, it’s the 91st minute and the AI is still incredibly defensive and never tried going forward. Brito is again in way too much space. This time the cross gets intercepted, but I still have players lurking around the box for that 2nd ball. Dantas picks it up, runs into the space in the box and finishes it cleanly into the bottom corner. 5-0!

https://media.giphy.com/media/ipZSE1tqiE3COKhNnJ/source.mp4

We should have scored more, the opportunities were definitely there. The tacticis also far from perfect and needs tweaking here and there as we still have lots of shots from distance.

Nonetheless we completely dismantled a parked bus and a formation that used to be our kryptonite. And all of that, by using only about 30% of the toolkit.

mrgoal100 · January 12, 2019

hace 2 horas, BadanieLuck dijo:

I think Rashidis post about only using 10% of the toolkit is one of the most important posts in recent times on this forum and should be sticky. Most of us would like to stick with our preferred formation, but this may not be feasible anymore with the improved defensive AI in FM19. I’m sure it’s doable, but it’s difficult.

I’m currently playing with Benfica and recent games have been tight affairs. Thanks to individual quality (mostly in form of longshots and set-pieces, this is FM19 after all) we managed to keep our win streak going ... just. I was constantly running into games often described in this thread with barely any quality chances, ultra defensive setups and boring games to watch. Games that looked like this:

As you can see they played a very defensive 4-1-4-1 DM formation, which is very effective against my 4-2-3-1, as it perfectly counters any advantage a standard 4-2-3-1 gives. They defend very deep and narrow, each of my players is covered by their respective counterpart. DM covers AMC, CMs on CMs, FBs and Wingers in a deep setup take care of my players out wide.

Something needs to change, so let’s go through this step by step by showing and explaining my thought process. Spoiler alert! This was the result against my next opponent who again played a defensive 4-1-4-1:

So how did we get there. First I was going through the problems I had against these setups.

Problem: Wingplay. Wingers and Fullbacks together defend deep, therefore barely space and time to pick out players in the box resulting in a lot of wayward crosses.

Possible solution: Reduce amount of wingplay as it is ineffective. Use IWC for more control in midfield / Remove AML/AMR to add players in other areas.

Problem: AI easily dealt with most crosses as they heavily outnumbered us in the box and are not challenged enough by our physical or heading attributes.

Possible solution: Add more bodies in the box / At least one physically strong or tall striker with good heading abilities.

Problem: No natural overloads anywhere around the pitch. Midfield trio not able to create anything productive (lots of sideways passing, not enough control in the center of the pitch and golden zone).

Possible solution: Add additional midfielder for more control and better passing options in final third.

These are the problems I quickly picked up by watching the games with possible solutions to fix these issues. Now, are the solutions complementary to each other or can I make it work with my team? How can I change my 4-2-3-1 to solve these problems?

This was my 4-2-3-1 I used to play with:

And this is what I come up with:

Why? Because this formation and tactic incorporates all the solutions I came up with from above.

Removed both advanced wide players as wingplay was ineffective, replaced them for an additional striker = 1st and 2nd solution

Additional striker is relatively strong, tall and good at heading = 2nd solution

Additional striker plus retaining my AMC on attack results in more bodies in the box = 2nd solution

Added another midfielder for more control in the center of the pitch. Always a player free = 1st and 3rd solution

The 4-3-1-2 checks all boxes and the players I have are suited to play this way. We beat them comfortably 5-0. 4 goals from open play. 1 set-piece. A simple formation change did the trick. No PIs (expect for FBs to stay wider) and barely any changes to the TIs, staying true to the club (and my preferred) philosophy. Using only about 30% of the toolbox resulted in a completely different experience.

Goals

Let’s analyse the goals. We lose the ball in the final third. I maintained my intense pressing system and this shows why. I don’t want to give the opposition any time to breath. Rangel and Brito immediately go to work and force the ball back. The AI is on the back foot and we capitalize. Rangel pushes forward, we have the bodies in the box and Origi is quick off the mark and makes use of the chaos. 1-0!

https://media.giphy.com/media/fxCk8H8qLWTdr05roZ/giphy.mp4

The second goal shows the advantage of the extra man in midfield. Pepe is in acres of space. Interesting thing to note, he is a DLP on defend duty, but still occasionally he will advance forward because A) the space and reading of the game he has and B) the use of the positive mentality. He has all the time in the world to pick out a pass and in this case it’s especially easy to find Origi as we dragged the opposition around. A good turn and finish from the Belgian. 2-0!

https://media.giphy.com/media/1oCv3yDYmp72GptUcG/source.mp4

Goal number 3 highlighting solution 1 and 2, the strong striker winning the physical duel against his marker to finish off a sweet cross from close range from my advanced fullback who (through tactical changes) has way too much time and space to deliver the ball. 3-0!

https://media.giphy.com/media/eswjqEcEMDLdtXISme/source.mp4

Goal number 4 was a set-piece so I won’t go into that. We are 4-0 up at this point, it’s the 91st minute and the AI is still incredibly defensive and never tried going forward. Brito is again in way too much space. This time the cross gets intercepted, but I still have players lurking around the box for that 2nd ball. Dantas picks it up, runs into the space in the box and finishes it cleanly into the bottom corner. 5-0!

https://media.giphy.com/media/ipZSE1tqiE3COKhNnJ/source.mp4

We should have scored more, the opportunities were definitely there. The tacticis also far from perfect and needs tweaking here and there as we still have lots of shots from distance.

Nonetheless we completely dismantled a parked bus and a formation that used to be our kryptonite. And all of that, by using only about 30% of the toolkit.

Outstanding.

tajj7 · January 12, 2019

Just re-iterate my point, 2nd placed Man City played this against me at HOME, they are unbeaten in a good 15+ games winning almost all of them and are obviously a top team full of top players, but they do this -

Do you realistically see the real life Man City doing this against Liverpool at home? No of course not, they would try to win the game. Which sadly they did in this case because one mistake by my team allowed them to score their only shot on target, but this was like in the 80th minute after I had spent all game trying to break them down as they were basically parking the bus.

They are managed by Emery in my game and his standard formation is 4-2-3-1, with an AMR, AML and AMC, as far as I can see he hasn't played this at all this year.

Just a clear example IMO that something is wrong with the AI and its approach IMO,

And just to re-iterate what others have said, its not about losing (If I had played this match 99 more times then its likely they would have all been draws or wins for me, because the AI doesn't try to win, they just fluked this one), I win almost all of the games like this and will draw the others, in fact this is my first league loss in about 2 years.

It's about the challenge and the football, it's just dire to watch and boring, to see good teams not actually try to win the game in the slightest.

As bar333 says its just boring, because every game is basically this, trying to break down teams that camp in their own box and don't try to win. I have literally had games with 40-50 shots against PL teams and regularly go past 30 shots. Barely a team shoots at me, I've had multiple PL games this year were the opposition has had 3 shots or less, in 23 PL games only 4 teams have got into double figures for shots against me, and we are talking barely here, the most shots I have conceded all year is 12. In 7 games this year against Chelsea, Man City, Man Utd and Arsenal, between them they have managed just 30 shots on goal in 7 games, because all of them have played this negatively.

akkm · January 12, 2019

On 11/01/2019 at 13:00, fidelitywars said:

@akkm - this is the finest summary of the game's current position i've read on these forums.

Here's to hoping that SI can reduce these issues before the FM20 cycle...

:thup:

fingers crossed alright

akkm · January 13, 2019

On 11/01/2019 at 10:15, Robson 07 said:

@akkm I think your big post was a cracking one. A great vent and some well made points. I hope it's read by the right people. However as a reader it does feel (only in places) that your frustration is aimed at other gamers or customers that come on to this forum to help, read or learn. None of us punters can change the game's fundamentals. It being a tactic forum and all most us are simply saying how we get around what the game gives us. How we get results from certain challenges faced. None of us though can give you something beyond the limits of the code.

p.s. Lafleur is no McVay

I'm all for the tactical input from some of the users...some of the posts are terrific in the tactical guides and the tactical feedback overall.

At the same time some of the feedback leads things the wrong way as described above and and has done over the years leading it to the current state of this year's engine. SI do listen to feedback despite what some may feel so it is useful to actually try to change the game's fundamentals.

with the state of this years engine and seeing certain defending of same then there's a need to actually acknowledge what's lacking for real development to happen and to make this easier to prevent circular balancing acts required by SI reacting to simplistic logic instead of simulating more fundamentally sound footballing logic/behaviours...whilst people correctly say there is no right/wrong way of playing...there actually is a BETTER way of playing...people who don't accept that are just confirming a bias and denying years of evidence in football.

So to get to that point better footballing decision making needs to be properly modelled and we are certainly not there yet and to see people defend the engine and say 'its fine it can done' is hampering the development of things and only leads to stagnation depsite SIs best efforts to advance things. No one is questioning the difficulty of the task of coding the dynamism of a football game and then on top of it people's/user's preferences for different elements of football styles they want to tap into to achieve results (deep lying/reactive football, counter attack, quick transitions, possession based, pressing and all that)...it's clearly a complex exercise.

I believe SI would reward attacking systems by default as a choice but it elicits too many complaints from users who then start to complain that it's too easy as they want to feel it's their tactical input generating success in FM...in the real world it's all about the quality of players...jose is prime example of that but even guardiola/klopp etc will do nothing in premiership with non league players...tactics are most influential with players playing against similar levels but coaching better player decisions/behaviours is what makes better players...that again is one of reasons for jose exposure...he coaches tactics not good decision making therefore his players don't develop and indeed stagnate and regress.

Again taking it back to FM feedback often directs it back to tactical reactionary inputs to help out defensively and strengthen that side of the ball. All defensive improvements are very welcome but not to the detriment of the attacking side of the game...especially when defending standards have regressed significantly in real world football with very few quality defenders/defences and the number of goals increasing and the big teams scoring large numbers of goals season in season out and also big players scoring massive numbers of goals especially when playing for dominant teams.

So really the attacking patterns decision making, pass selection & off the ball movements are moving further away from real world football in the top third...with the disconnect never so apparent to users as it has been this year. Again I wouldn't question SIs ability to code this, as difficult as it is to do, but I do think they are (naturally) aware of customer feedback and the stronger voices of previous years have led them the wrong way albeit a bucket load of the feedback has been spot on and has led to sounder engine as well..to be fair a lot of things up the top third are really excellent...it's just the more sophisticated pass decision making of a creative player of a messi/iniesta/ozil/isco ilk isn't properly simulated in addition the complementary off the ball movement to blend it all together to enable the slicker guile based cohesive fluidity that a barca/city/psg et al play like.

Previous years since rewrite (bar fm17) FM falls on the side of wide play balance wise to create chances/goals and teams/users tend to overachieve this way which is completely at odds with real world football...so FM has favoured the wrong behaviours but the a lot of the granular level tactical tweakers don't seem to mind this (in that I havent seen many of them complain about this over the years on the forums anyway) as it gives impression they are the ones 'moving the needle' to drive their teams success. If attacking was properly simulated and through the middle pass and move was on point then it gives the impression that things are too easy because firstly it can appear that defending is weaker and also thats it just easier to win that way so they want the 'faux impression' that things in FM are harder having to move things wide or other displacements of overpowered and disconnected creativity chance and goals wise...so essentially they are gaming FMs code by taking advantage of overpowered defending/undersimulated attacking by moving the pieces around the board but not necessarily for fundamentally good footballing reasons but more for code gaming reasons as as you say ...you can't give something beyond the limits of the code and are trying to get around what the game gives you...but I'm suggesting feedback has directed it towards a more limited simulation of the game thereby a more unrealistic simulation of the game.

The goal should be (and is) to give a more realistic simulation of the real world football game and that's why I think it's necessary to acknowledge its current limitations and change/improve the core default decision making to get there and not defend it's current state by offering as i said above examples just gaming the code/seeing examples of fundamentals at variance with real world or just using a 'see this example' with a 20/80 approach...ie their exception is held up as the norm.

This will just impede development. SI has acknowledged these issues this year as the feedback has been significant and on point and whilst fixing it is no easy task given the legacy code favouring wide play the length it may take is fair enough but any noise arising to start to say 'oh things are fine' is utterly self defeating in SIs quest to make a more realistic engine.

So yes that's why my feedback in parts can be perceived as having a go at users/customers but its more at any opinions which blocks the growth of the engine by defending the engine in its current form when its said oh well this is how it is in FM as it is in the real world...it's fine if its an admission of gaming the code as you point out to get around the limitations but not when its upheld as a 'this is how you do it as this is how its done in real world football' when that's not exactly the case.

This thread is an example of where its said...oh well breaking down a parked bus/deep lying defence should be hard...and again at its simplistic interpretation logically this makes absolute sense but this is far too linear logically to apply to FM in that in the real world counterintuitively the teams that play against the deep lying/parked bus defences the most score the most goals so go figure. So clearly its not as hard break these teams down as is perceived to be or indeed current FM allows it to be.

As said issues are the proclivity of the AI to utilise this tactically in addition the actual depth of defensive line the AI maintains proportionately time wise (ie theyre too deep too long in a game) with that tactic and the lack of simulation of better movement/pass selection/dribbling/ability to pass move in tight spaces all means it's at odds with real world.

No one is saying it cant be done in FM but its not being done consistently with the same footballing behavioural fundamentals as it is in the real world. And again whilst the example of deep lying defences/parked buses is cited as example of how to stop better teams and by extension good defending real world shows that these defences are still being dismantled (not easily by any means) with regularity with the bigger teams amassing large quantities of goals every season but in FM people feedback the opposite ie 'stop complaining about not being able to break down a parked bus as that's how it is'...that isn't capturing the bigger picture for the reasons explained above...so essentially that line is an incorrect defence of an undersimulated match engine. Yes it should be hard and yes it should depend as with everything with quality of players and there will be games things won't work or games where there will be the odd goal or whatever but FM is currently at odds with real world with how it bears out comparison wise.

VinceLombardi · January 13, 2019

3 hours ago, akkm said:

a lot of the granular level tactical tweakers don't seem to mind this (in that I havent seen many of them complain about this over the years on the forums anyway)

I think that this is a bit of a misrepresentation. Your tactical tweakers are less likely to be completely stifled by the engine as they use a larger part of the toolbox -- borrowing from the analogy earlier in the thread. This enables them to better adapt to what the ME is doing, and they avoid the pitfalls more easily. Issues in the ME are not new. In FM16 (last time I was forum active) there were threads every week discussing about how:

-IWBs were trash because they didn't go inside (they didn't),

-TM would break any tactic and turn it into hoofball (they did),

-it was impossible to build a team around defense (it was very difficult to keep cleansheets game to game as CD did not play well vs shortpassing games),

-gegenpressing was almost impossible to emulate properly because your guys didn't close down in the other half well (it was finicky and required a lot of PI),

-strikers and wide attackers didn't track back in defense (the solution was playing back in midfield strata, STC never did anything in defense, even the defensive forwards)

-players forced the ball to playmakers, even if they weren't open (they did, lacking other open options)

-counterattacking football wasn't possible (getting the counterattack event was finicky, and the only other way was to build attacking mentality tactics)

Up until a few weeks ago, I avoided all ball magnet roles because of the issues they caused in FM16. I still have never built a tactic featuring a player in the AML or AMR position because I have learned to play my MR and ML the same way, without worrying about defensive issues. I built a counter attacking tactic in FM 16 by abusing the highly structured team shape, attacking roles, and the highly attacking team mentality, because defensive mentalities were incredibly difficult to get to work.

Its not that any of those things were how it was suppose to work or representative of RL. It shouldn't have been that difficult for a lot of those things. But by experimenting, the "tactical tweakers" were able to work around the shortcomings of the ME. It wasn't magic. It was hours of experimentation and watching matches. Its also not that the tactical tweakers are ME apologists. We just understand that ME shortcomings are always part of the game and rather than declare the ME broken because the F9 doesn't work right, we try to find other ways to get what we want and then share it with one another here on the forum. Collectively we overcome. And while ideal simulation would be awesome, we are working with what is here and trying to show others how to use the tools that we all have available. Nothing more, nothing less.

Some of the behavior of the AI described in this thread is definitely suspect and when that was the case, we have encouraged that they be logged as bugs. But in many cases, its not problems that are representative of a ME issue. For every "I Can't score because of stupid defensive AI" thread there is another "How do I stop the AI from scoring" thread. What is it? Is the AI too passive or too attacking? Or is it maybe neither and better explained by the way various individuals are approaching their tactics and the circumstances of their save? @bar333 is on some sort of crazy unbeaten streak. It prolly causes bugs with the AI evaluating its winning chances. Log it. @tajj7 has issues in his 2025 save. I have a sneaking suspicion that he has an impressive roster thanks to an aggressive transfer policy, and he is the 1st place team to the 2nd place Man City he had issue with. Would that cause an AI issue? I dunno. Maybe. Log it.

In both cases, maybe the AI just decided that they would try to get out of the match with as few goals against as possible to not screw up their GD and hope that another team beats you so that they can win the league that way. That's not unreasonable. I dunno. Log it so that SI can confirm or resolve.

But at the end of the day, no ME (or game) is perfect. At some point complaining just doesn't seem productive and if people really want to influence the game direction they need to be actively logging .pkm for SI. That will have way more impact than any thread or post here.

akkm · January 13, 2019

4 minutes ago, VinceLombardi said:

I think that this is a bit of a misrepresentation. Your tactical tweakers are less likely to be completely stifled by the engine as they use a larger part of the toolbox -- borrowing from the analogy earlier in the thread. This enables them to better adapt to what the ME is doing, and they avoid the pitfalls more easily. Issues in the ME are not new. In FM16 (last time I was forum active) there were threads every week discussing about how:

-IWBs were trash because they didn't go inside (they didn't),

-TM would break any tactic and turn it into hoofball (they did),

-it was impossible to build a team around defense (it was very difficult to keep cleansheets game to game as CD did not play well vs shortpassing games),

-gegenpressing was almost impossible to emulate properly because your guys didn't close down in the other half well (it was finicky and required a lot of PI),

-strikers and wide attackers didn't track back in defense (the solution was playing back in midfield strata, STC never did anything in defense, even the defensive forwards)

-players forced the ball to playmakers, even if they weren't open (they did, lacking other open options)

-counterattacking football wasn't possible (getting the counterattack event was finicky, and the only other way was to build attacking mentality tactics)

Up until a few weeks ago, I avoided all ball magnet roles because of the issues they caused in FM16. I still have never built a tactic featuring a player in the AML or AMR position because I have learned to play my MR and ML the same way, without worrying about defensive issues. I built a counter attacking tactic in FM 16 by abusing the highly structured team shape, attacking roles, and the highly attacking team mentality, because defensive mentalities were incredibly difficult to get to work.

Its not that any of those things were how it was suppose to work. It shouldn't have been that difficult for a lot of those things. But by experimenting, the "tactical tweakers" were able to work around the shortcomings of the ME. It wasn't magic. It was hours of experimentation and watching matches. Its not that the tactical tweakers are ME apologists. We just understand that ME shortcomings are always part of the game and rather than declare the ME broken because the F9 doesn't work right, we try to find other ways to get what we want and then share it with one another here on the forum. Collectively we overcome. And while ideal simulation would be awesome, we are working with what is here and trying to show others how to use the tools that we all have available. Nothing more, nothing less.

Some of the behavior of the AI described in this thread is definitely suspect and when that was the case, we have encouraged that they be logged as bugs. But in many cases, its not problems that are representative of a ME issue. For every "I Can't score because of stupid defensive AI" thread there is another "How do I stop the AI from scoring" thread. What is it? Is the AI too passive or too attacking? Or is it maybe neither and better explained by the way various individuals are approaching their tactics and the circumstances of their save? @bar333 is on some sort of crazy unbeaten streak. It prolly causes bugs with the AI evaluating its winning chances. Log it. @tajj7 has issues in his 2025 save as Liverpool. I have a sneaking suspicion that he has 10 of the top 20 players in the world thanks to an aggressive transfer policy and is the 1st place team to the 2nd place Man City he had issue with. Would that cause an AI issue? I dunno. Maybe. Log it.

But at the end of the day, no ME (or game) is perfect. At some point complaining just doesn't seem productive and if you really want to influence the game direction you need to be actively logging .pkm for SI. That will have way more impact than any thread or post here.

On 11/01/2019 at 13:43, VinceLombardi said:

But I think the "poor central play" that is commonly cited is overblown

See above with the pkm which shows definitively that the poor central play is far from overblown...its a very real and significant issue. core pass decision making to identify and execute through ball passes isn't being simulated properly to begin with So this is a glaring omission from the code to enable quality attacking play and therefore a significant element of a users/managers arsenal to try and help unlock all sorts of defences and all sorts of opposition lineups is missing...so basic default decision making is not in FM to try and attack and creativity is woefully short as a result.

On your last one...I think your comment about me misrepresenting is actually a misrepresention itself . I meant specifically in terms of wide play effectiveness Vs central play and not then engine as a whole which as you rightly point out has issues most years which is only natural given its complexity.

Overall you're kind of making my point for me there though.

As i was saying I think the 'tactical tweakers' have had some terrific posts and offer some great insights from the observations they have weaned from their granular level tweaking of roles/positions and all sorts of permutations with the tools/levers FM rightly offers up as a means by which a user can change the output of their team on the pitch. The ability to make those tweaks is a very obvious and crucial requirement of a football management game to allow the user to get the style they want to play and make changes within a game if that style isn't working against a particular opponent to change outcome. A deeper level of understanding of what all this can do is only appreciated by users coming on wishing to find solutions to things in FM.

Most of what you do is spot on and on point so I'm not making a sweeping statement in general even though that may come across. As said though I certainly do feel the tweakers would complain if central play was more effective than it has been or if creative/skilled players were able to replicate their real world level of talent or impact on games as that would give the tweaker a sense of loss of control or a feeling of their tweaking wasn't as having as discernible effect as the players on the pitch themselves . Even guardiola himself has said his job is to get the players up into the last third of the pitch so the players can use their talents to create/unlock/dribble/pass move their to score goals. I sometimes think the tweakers wouldn't like to see players in FM being so effective on the pitch as they start to feel its not them making the difference and that manifests itself in the 'oh it's too easy' complaint lol

The nature of the tactical tweaker is that they they engender more satisfaction/joy from making all these tweaks to things finding out all this stuff with workarounds/experiments and that is great...some do it to get a certain style, others will do so to get results, others albeit indirectly to get one over the engine...after all i suspect there aren't too many tweakers who tweak things to continually see their team underperform.

most of what they do is legit footballing wise but not all of it at all...some enter the realm of exploiting the engine...some may not even be aware they are doing it...for example central play has been undersimulated since rewrite with exception of 17 favouring disproportionately play from out wide. As in say last yr wing backs were having double digit assists on loads of quick tactics posted so this offers a fake (compared to real world football) means by which to score goals. Central play last year underperformed relatively speaking with poor finishing from chances created centrally or the wild shots again trying to funnel play centrally.

Central play has actually been undersimulated every year bar FM17 since the rewrite to varying degrees it just hasn't been as noticeable it to the same extent as this year. it's come in various guises

- Too many shots – as a result of underdeveloped ball circulation passing options/movement lack of through ball tendencies when there means when central players shoot meaning shot counts see serious spikes

- Too many crosses – as a result of propensity to use players out wide several iterations have seen numbers of crosses per game significantly exceeding real world. Mitigation of this may have taken form of improved defending positionally/restricting forays of full backs/wingers but the long term solution is to programme decision making to see recycling the ball of circulating inside as the better option/decision

- Poor finishing/lack of variation in finishing...generally in play through the middle. over the years some of the finishing from crosses/diagonal passes from out to win has been remarkably good

- Poor ‘one on ones’...again players slotted in through the middle have low finishing rates in FM (I know some question that but big chance conversion rates suggest higher rates some fmers like to admit )

- Play blocked through the middle forcing passes too frequently out to wider players

- offside frequency high most often preventing players slotted in through the middle

- If you consider the options for wide players cross from x2, cross frequency x2, aim crosses at x4 it offers an ability to have a more concentrated and specified means to attack and as a result may imply an increased frequency by which this will be utilised

- Crossing overpowered effectiveness wise...FM18 check out tactics uploaded on forums...many favoured wing backs some getting double digit assists which isn't a thing in the real world.

So essentially a key way to attack and create in football has been nerfed over the years so some using more reactive football were using 'reverse exploits' thinking there defensive setups were blocking things but core coding was what stopped it, last year goals from out wide were too prevalent which is just not a thing in real world football at the highest level

So overall things like this may get lost in the feedback they get from seeing their tweaks working out on the pitch in creating success and whatever style they may like to see but even with this happening it may not be for proper footballing reasons so they may be more comfortable with that. I'm not directing that at you as you seem well reasoned in your assessment of what's an engine issue vs tactical. But the bottom line is this nerfing of quality central play means the way goals get scored and created is displaced to other means which as said predominately over the years has been towards wide play...so if both were effective that's fine as people's preferences will be catered for but if it's to fall one side then it shouldn't be towards wide play/crossing as that's a more unrealistic representation of real world football and that's just basic helicopter level stuff. So most users over the years have come to realise and accept that the engine will always have it's faults and some are more minor than others and some will bother some more than others and one can understand repetition of even innocuous/minor issues can start to grate certain users but when a core issue of 'how teams actually play' is affected rather than an AML isn't tracking back by 5 yards or the F9 isn't doing as he should are all minor details in simulating how football is actually played compared to basic core decision making/movement etc.

a lot of users want the 'what it says on the tin' approach and a simple click and select to get results based on an expectation the correct footballing behaviours are in there to be weaned out.

I've tweaked the heck out of things myself over the years to get the team playing as I want or need depending on circumstances so am entirely comfortable with that as long as it's not tweaking to exploit deficiencies in the code but for fundamentally sound footballing reasons. However, when tweaks made don't enable the likes of central play as with this year as thread I attached here proves definitively then that's a fundamental issue with the engine itself so it becomes a chore to hear it being defended as 'oh it can be done'...it can't replicate the incisive, intricate patterned play of a city/barca/madrid or many teams who've chosen to play that way over the years so there's no point in saying it can.

Agree with you on pkms which is why I've posted to the appropriate forums as required.

ps I liked your nfl style application of playbook to FM thread...I'll be keeping an eye on it to ensure you're not using that granularity to exploit weaknesses in the code rather than doing it for the correct footballing reasons...kidding, it's a very cool idea you have there

Mitja · January 13, 2019

On 11/01/2019 at 01:52, bar333 said:

What I've learned from this thread in that regard though has helped me. It made me observe the AI more closely in full match mode and see what they do, and upon doing that I quickly realized more often than not the AI has no interest whatsoever in playing football, much less scoring a goal. By "inviting" them on all I was doing was allowing them to dominate possession in their own half and take no risks with either their passing or forward runs.

At the end of the day the AI needs to be willing to make the bare minimum effort to score in order for you to be able to exploit spaces and gaps in their shape when possession is gained. And quite simply it's not showing that willingness.

it's how defensive mentality works unfortunatly. irl team with such aproach (frustrate opposition) would be thrashed into pieces in no-time, in FM avarage team can even dominate possession against world-class opponents. until basics of mentality change or SI choses to get rid of mentality like fluidity nothing will change. it's been like that for decade.

Experienced Defender · January 13, 2019

22 minutes ago, Mitja said:

it's how defensive mentality works unfortunatly. irl team with such aproach (frustrate opposition) would be thrashed into pieces in no-time

Are you sure? Have you watched the yesterday's EPL game between Brighton and Liverpool? Yes, Brighton did lose the game 0-1 (from a penalty kick), but they were by no means "thrashed into pieces" despite playing very defensive football that frustrates opposition for most of the time (i.e. until they conceded).

akkm · January 13, 2019

On 11/01/2019 at 07:43, Rashidi said:

This thread seems to be some veiled attempt at moaning about lack of central attacking play, are we talking about how to break a parked bus or not? I am getting real confused.

Have you even noticed how differently Liverpool play against a parked bus? They don't even play the same way like they usually do, same goes with City. And by the way even now my LFC hammers a parked bus.

I tried to make it challenging with a 4312 away from home and even then it wasn't an issue

So if you saying that the attacking side is under-simulated, then I wonder how exactly. I will agree there is an issue with corners and long shots, and with 2 roles specifically in the attacking third. I and many others have raised enough bug reports for those examples. In both these games I didn't draw them out, I literally parked myself in their half and went to work pulling them apart with player movement, and dribbling movement by my players to drag players out of position. When I use a good side to play I depend on the individual players in my side like Mane and Shaqiri to make the kinds of runs and passes that I need to achieve the positional overloads that I am after. Its the way LFC and sides like City find and use space on a football pitch, but they aren't the original proponents of the system. Real world LFC kind of movement is achievable in FM19 right now, so don't say the engine can't do it. I reckon i will have to release the Best of the Kop for this season much earlier, how we ripped Chelsea apart was classic Klopp. He likes to create chaos in attack, where you don't even know which target is going to bang the ball into the back of the net.

I think your question asking about noticing how differently city/pool play against deeper lying defences than they normally is projection...no team plays the same way against a deep lying defence than they would a normal one. Though you could actually make an argument that such is the frequency city play against deep lying defences it IS more the norm for them . LFC/City themselves don't play the same way as each other against deep lying defences either.

Also again your examples of FM breaking down defences. No one is saying it can't be done and as always your tweaking to get around things is admirable but posting examples of bus breaking in FM to show you're doing as it's done in real world and say you're getting things in FM to work like the way LFC and city do in the real world is simply not the case from what you've posted there. I suspect you absolutely get certain instances of similar attacks/movements/passes/goals etc etc at times within the games but your first game there against palace there were 85 crosses by liverpool...that's off the wall and is indicative of an attacking pattern at odds with real world football...whether it be the ball being moved out wide too often or the decision making to cross too often or likely some combination of both but either way that's not how lfc or city or any other quality team for that matter will go about trying to break down a parked bus. As I say within that you probably did get instances of similarish moves it's clear the overall way your team attacked isn't representative of real world methods.

similarly 65 crosses against man utd suggests something similar so when you wonder how the attacking side is under simulated then you're really answering your own question with those examples...you've demonstrated how...that's not how teams go about trying to break down those teams...yes as I say moments within the game may resemble elements of real world and I suspect you're well able to tweak things to produce these instances but overall it's different.

Also the leicester game they had 47pc of possession so was that really a park the bus exercise. plus two were set pieces plus rb had 3 assists...though taa may well have been your set piece taker

akkm · January 13, 2019

6 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Are you sure? Have you watched the yesterday's EPL game between Brighton and Liverpool? Yes, Brighton did lose the game 0-1 (from a penalty kick), but they were by no means "thrashed into pieces" despite playing very defensive football that frustrates opposition for most of the time (i.e. until they conceded).

yet the teams who play against teams playing defensive football the most score the most goals eg city/lfc/barca/madrid/barca/psg...how is that happening do you think

Experienced Defender · January 13, 2019

4 minutes ago, akkm said:

yet the teams who play against teams playing defensive football the most score the most goals eg city/lfc/barca/madrid/barca/psg...how is that happening do you think

I didn't say that they don't score (and LFC scored vs Brighton yesterday). I said that in real life a team won't be "thrashed into pieces" by a top team just because of playing (very) defensively. Teams that play intelligent defensive football won't be thrashed (even if they lose a game). But you can also play very defensively and still get thrashed because you did not defend in the right way (relative to the opposition's playing style). So, just as there are many ways to play attacking football, so too are there many ways of playing defensively.

Btw, my reply wasn't even aimed at your comment.

Mitja · January 13, 2019

13 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Are you sure? Have you watched the yesterday's EPL game between Brighton and Liverpool? Yes, Brighton did lose the game 0-1 (from a penalty kick), but they were by no means "thrashed into pieces" despite playing very defensive football that frustrates opposition for most of the time (i.e. until they conceded).

i 've watched the game and i agree Brighton were ''defensive'' - parked the bus infront of penalty area but Liverpool totally dominated possession stats and by no meens Brighton tried to frustrate opposition by successfully employing short - possession oriented football with no intenet of being a threat. in FM such tactics (defensive mentality) will achieve far far more possession then they should.

Mitja · January 13, 2019

3 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

I said that in real life a team won't be "thrashed into pieces" by a top team just because of playing (very) defensively.

there is no such thing as defensive or attacking irl, at least not comparable to FM Mentality terms. and more importantly ''defensive'' teams never dominate possession by employing ultra-safe, short passing, possession oriented style. if Brighton tried to play such possession, frustrate opposition football (=defensive mentality) against L'pool yes it would get thrashed much more easily than yesterday.

Rashidi · January 13, 2019

11 minutes ago, akkm said:

yet the teams who play against teams playing defensive football the most score the most goals eg city/lfc/barca/madrid/barca/psg...how is that happening do you think

You are always making generalised statements, let's just take one example from this week, LFC vs Brighton. Brighton have scored in every home game they have played in, but for most of the game they were sitting deep against LFC. Using your argument we should expect LFC to have beaten them by a huge margin. It didn't happen. Football games aren't always as clear cut as you lay it out to be. In some games you will find teams struggle, in others they may concede an early goal and an avalanche occurs, high scoring games can be and are usually a sign of poor defending.

I just don't accept your argument that good sides who camp with better players should in most cases win by large scorelines, that doesn't happen in real life often.

Now in FM, this is a different thing, in FM we are playing against an AI that has been programmed to behave in a specific set of ways depending on a certain set of parameters. My point is that here, there are still weaknesses in the engine, i will not deny that, however, we can still whip the living daylights out of defensive sides. This may not be the case for everyone in the community, only a few players seem to be doing that. That alone proves that it can be done. It shows that within the game code itself its possible. Whether most people can do that is irrelevant. As long as one manager can produce results like that a programmer is going to sit back and go...its possible. Now the real challenge then for those programming it will be to improve how it happens consistently. So this is where i reckon it falls short in only two areas, long shots and the lack of central movement coming from 2 roles specifically.

The engine isn't perfect, but to say that the engine is broken because we need to be able to consistently beat parked defences with LFC or any other side you want to mention by big scorelines is just fantasy football. If there is a disparate level of quality like City vs Burton Albion, of course, we should be seeing big scorelines, but when they are not that far apart then if a side like Burnley decides to camp against United, United will need to break them down intelligently.

Experienced Defender · January 13, 2019

2 minutes ago, Mitja said:

i 've watched the game and i agree Brighton were ''defensive'' - parked the bus infront of penalty area but Liverpool totally dominated possession stats and by no meens Brighton tried to frustrate opposition by successfully employing short - possession oriented football with no intenet of being a threat. in FM such tactics (defensive mentality) will achieve far far more possession then they should.

I agree on this, but your initial comment (post) was about being "thrashed into pieces". And yes, you're right that in FM it's (much) easier to play a possession-oriented ultra-defensive football (with almost no attacking/counter-attacking intent) successfully than it is in real life. But on the other hand, it makes the game (FM) even more interesting/challenging (for those who like to attack and dominate), which is not bad IMHO

akkm · January 13, 2019

10 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

I didn't say that they don't score (and LFC scored vs Brighton yesterday). I said that in real life a team won't be "thrashed into pieces" by a top team just because of playing (very) defensively. Teams that play intelligent defensive football won't be thrashed (even if they lose a game). But you can also play very defensively and still get thrashed because you did not defend in the right way (relative to the opposition's playing style). So, just as there are many ways to play attacking football, so too are there many ways of playing defensively.

Btw, my reply wasn't even aimed at your comment.

I know it wasn't aimed lol

And I agree with you they won't be thrashed into pieces but the top teams are scoring a heck of a lot of goals these days despite coming up against teams' default setup of a defensive one. For sure they are ways to defend and better set ups can contain better than others but I'd also suggest that many teams option of defending by numbers/parked bus/deep lying defences isn't as effective as it should be almost being a 'lazy'/comfort blanket exercise to stop teams and with the lack of quality defenders out there even good defensive set ups can take a beating depending of course on level of mismatch of teams but it still takes quality players to implement them

Rashidi · January 13, 2019

2 minutes ago, akkm said:

I know it wasn't aimed lol

And I agree with you they won't be thrashed into pieces but the top teams are scoring a heck of a lot of goals these days despite coming up against teams' default setup of a defensive one. For sure they are ways to defend and better set ups can contain better than others but I'd also suggest that many teams option of defending by numbers/parked bus/deep lying defences isn't as effective as it should be almost being a 'lazy'/comfort blanket exercise to stop teams and with the lack of quality defenders out there even good defensive set ups can take a beating depending of course on level of mismatch of teams but it still takes quality players to implement them

Yes, some teams can defend well and others are just bad at it. Remember the old days of United under Fergie, in those days any team that sat back and defended against them was toast. In today's modern game, that still holds some relevance.

Teams that defend by throwing every man into defence, and even going striker less struggle to create chances, in some cases they do ok. They walk away without winning, but they frustrate sides. Greece, Denmark, these are all historical examples of sides who were able to employ deep defensive football and still do well. Iceland play a striker less system and defended more than they attacked. But, some of these sides employ what some may consider defending from the front. They wait for the opposite side to move the ball far enough up the pitch before they begin their press, but they still maintain disciplined banks of two to deny sides passing lanes.

There are many styles of defensive football, some sides have only one target man, some sides play with 5 at the back. Those sides that have historically played 5 at the back have been the ones that usually end up struggling. Oddly enough even in FM when i see a side go into a 5 man defence i actually become very happy and i start unloading on them. No one is saying that defensive sides have an inherent right to win, what i am saying is that there are different ways to defeat defensive sides. When a 5 at the back comes up playing defensively against me, there is one specific formation that ALWAYS gets whipped by me. Here i know exactly what to do with my team of players. There is another which is a 541 that i actually struggle against cos it has a failsafe to counter me.

Mitja · January 13, 2019

12 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

The engine isn't perfect, but to say that the engine is broken because we need to be able to consistently beat parked defences with LFC or any other side you want to mention by big scorelines is just fantasy football.

the engine is ''broken'' for many reasons, how mentality works being maybe most important one.

Experienced Defender · January 13, 2019

And one more thing (not aimed at this particular thread or anyone specifically). I've seen a number of posts in this forum where someone complains about having this or that issue and asks for tactical advice, but at the same time emphasizing that they do not want to change certain elements of their tactic because "they want to play in that particular way". But what if it's exactly those particular elements (instructions, roles, duties or even mentality) that are the main cause of one's tactical issues? How is anyone supposed to offer meaningful advice in such cases?

Rashidi · January 13, 2019

17 minutes ago, Mitja said:

the engine is ''broken'' for many reasons, how mentality works being maybe most important one.

Well that is your opinion and you are free to express it, but if you have a better way of representing Mentality in the game then come up with a workable alternative. The developers aren't averse to adopting ideas from the community, they have done so in the past and will continue to do so.

For now this is the way SI have done it , this is their gameworld playing the rules they have designed. I can't come up with a better alternative so i try and understand it and work within their rules. If you feel that it needs to be reworked, then come up with a better way of translating it.

crusadertsar · January 13, 2019

People will keep defending it, but in its current state the engine is more broken than working. It is not just the imbalance in defense, if you are top team most teams in the league will be more defensive against you but also the defenders get a boost. It is just frustrating to have most of your crosses blocked even when you use worldclass wingers. It is not just wingplay that is broken. I gave up my 4-4-2 narrow diamond since I just couldn't create any plays down the middle despite having a team made for it. Worldclass strikers do not score beautiful varied goals like in reality, now most you see is from set pieces and long shots. To give an example Aguerro only scored 9 goals for me all season and I used a premade vertical tiki taka tactic. He was simply stifled by all the parked buses. You can check out "Aguerro 200" to see the variety of goals that he scores in real life. In another save, Pogba was top scorer despite Man United having plenty of talented forwards.

Mitja · January 13, 2019

10 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

And one more thing (not aimed at this particular thread or anyone specifically). I've seen a number of posts in this forum where someone complains about having this or that issue and asks for tactical advice, but at the same time emphasizing that they do not want to change certain elements of their tactic because "they want to play in that particular way". But what if it's exactly those particular elements (instructions, roles, duties or even mentality) that are the main cause of one's tactical issues? How is anyone supposed to offer meaningful advice in such cases?

fair comment but this logic can't aplly to AI who won't change their tactical aproach to adjust to current ME logics. basic football principles need to work as they should. for example teams that employ defensive tactics shouldn't dominate possession aginst attacking teams.

Mitja · January 13, 2019

7 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

Well that is your opinion and you are free to express it, but if you have a better way of representing Mentality in the game then come up with a workable alternative. The developers aren't averse to adopting ideas from the community, they have done so in the past and will continue to do so.

For now this is the way SI have done it , this is their gameworld playing the rules they have designed. I can't come up with a better alternative so i try and understand it and work within their rules. If you feel that it needs to be reworked, then come up with a better way of translating it.

fair enough but this extreme mentality issues that produce strange looking games and strange stats has been a major issue for a decade. as a paying customer i'm interesting in having game i can enjoy like i enjoyed fm17 for example. anyway i've been saying this for long time, get rid of mentality (just like fluidity) and many problems will disapear. i hope you can understand where i'm comming from.

Experienced Defender · January 13, 2019

10 minutes ago, Mitja said:

for example teams that employ defensive tactics shouldn't dominate possession aginst attacking teams.

While they usually don't, it's not impossible (even in RL football). Primarily because sometimes "attacking" teams deliberately allow the defensive ones to have more possession in order to try and draw them out of their defensive shell and thus create some space for a quick counter. In real life football such kind of strategy usually works better than in FM.

herne79 · January 13, 2019

12 minutes ago, crusadertsar said:

People will keep defending it

Take that sort of comment elsewhere, or keep it to yourself.

People don't simply "defend" the ME regardless. They explain, they offer different opinions, but they never just "defend" and I'm sick and tired of people saying this.

If you want to add constructive discussion or criticism to this thread or any other in this forum you're welcome to. If you just want to moan about people defending the ME, broken engines or make whiney little threads about how tired you are of things then take it elsewhere.

Experienced Defender · January 13, 2019

10 minutes ago, Mitja said:

get rid of mentality (just like fluidity) and many problems will disapear

And what would be an alternative to mentality?

BadanieLuck · January 13, 2019

vor 32 Minuten schrieb Mitja:

fair comment but this logic can't aplly to AI who won't change their tactical aproach to adjust to current ME logics. basic football principles need to work as they should. for example teams that employ defensive tactics shouldn't dominate possession aginst attacking teams.

Well, let's employ some basic football principles.

You play against a team that would happily take a draw. You don't put enough pressure on them, you let them have the ball and give them time to make decisions. Ofc they are going to try to keep the ball and you are making it easier for them. I need to win (they don't) and for that I need the ball. So I switched to a very intense pressing setup to get me that ball back quicker and now I'm averaging 60% per game against ultra defensive sides. That's basic football principles.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a bit overblown and the AI clearly can't deal with that yet, but just a bit and something that is (or should be) easily changed with small amounts of fine tuning. I also think the ME has a lot of issues this year and I'm far from happy with it, but many points people raise are often their own shortcomings or misunterstandings of the game.

Mitja · January 13, 2019

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

While they usually don't, it's not impossible (even in RL football). Primarily because sometimes "attacking" teams deliberately allow the defensive ones to have more possession in order to try and draw them out of their defensive shell and thus create some space for a quick counter. In real life football such kind of strategy usually works better than in FM.

not really sure about it, once attacing team scores yes but usually it's them who need to do the pressing, right.

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

And what would be an alternative to mentality?

no alternatives are needed. player roles, team and player instructions, ppms, transition instructions. mentality was needed back in CM days where there were 6 or 7 team instructions. the game doesn't need instruction that is modifier to all other and nobody understands.

if there's are instructions like passing length, tempo, time wasting, TTB, CF all influencing passing decisions why do you need mentality to modify all that? player with exactly the same above mentioned passing instructions will behave completely different on attacking or defensive mentality. what's the point of having midfield playmaker set to direct passing and TTB often and then at the same time mentality will modify it to something else?

example. frustrate opposition - lower tempo + time wasting. possession football lower tempo + short passing. attacking/defensive football - more/less attacing roles + many of team instructions and so on.

Mitja · January 13, 2019

9 minutes ago, BadanieLuck said:

Well, let's employ some basic football principles.

You play against a team that would happily take a draw. You don't put enough pressure on them, you let them have the ball and give them time to make decisions. Ofc they are going to try to keep the ball and you are making it easier for them. I need to win (they don't) and for that I need the ball. So I switched to a very intense pressing setup to get me that ball back quicker and now I'm averaging 60% per game against ultra defensive sides. That's basic football principles.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a bit overblown, but just a bit and something that is (or should be) easily changed with small amounts of fine tuning.

totally agree but currently and it's been like that for long time defensive (mentality) sides can easily dominate possession even against top opponents without thinking of being a threat. that's how mentality works.

Sign In

Breaking down a parked bus.

Recommended Posts

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post