Match results decided before game?

[puffascruffowitz]

When I first played FM in FM15 in my first season I took Arsenal to the CL finals against Barcelona and lost 3-0. I haven't replayed a game since (I realized there's no point as it ruins a save), but that one time I did replay it.

It took me less than 10 times to get a win against them. The original loss I was absolutely outclassed. It had that feel of some FM games where there's nothing you can do. The opposition is just too good. 

That's just one example that completely disproves your argument. This was a game I had no business of winning. And still I managed to squeak a win past Barca in I think 5 or 6 tries. What is your response to that? 

[Etebaer]

vor 9 Stunden schrieb FrazT:

@Etebaer  Please read my last post- I have hidden your last 2 posts

Sorry to disturb your reality...

[Snorks]

On 01/02/2019 at 19:23, sporadicsmiles said:

 

 

Edit. Who would have thought I would reach post 2000 discussing probability theory 

What were the odds on that?

Sorry admin .... couldn't resist

[FrazT]

2 hours ago, Etebaer said:

Sorry to disturb your reality...

The reality is that I posted a request for posters to stick to the topic and keep their posts relevant to FM.  Twice thereafter, including one immediately after my post, your posts did not do that.  If users do as we ask, we can all move on- it is really quite simple.

[Etebaer]

I took a curve to the Topic - results are predetermined in a way that is not reflected by mathematical modells that do not include human behavior factors!!!

 

PS: Maybe it became not clear so...PEACE!

[Seb Wassell]

On 03/02/2019 at 03:31, Mitja said:

Well thats crazy and almost unbelievable even far lesser teams should be able to knoc out Utd in 30 attempts. It would be interesting to see their tactics but i really doubt this could be tactical issue, did Utd use any strange formation with extra men in midfield?

I would argue that this is the sticking point. Man U are not playing Juventus 30 separate times, they are playing them once over and over.

Take yesterday's Man City 3-1 Arsenal match. If they played back-to-back 30 times over the course of a season, yes you would expect varying results, likely falling in favour of the 'superior' team but not exclusively. However this is not what is happening. Man City and Arsenal are experiencing groundhog day. Without outside input the match will tend massively towards that same 3-1 result. Iwobi will make that same mistake every time as the events leading up to his decision will remain the same, thus his decision will likely remain the same and that goal will inevitably occur. With no external force applied there is no reason for any of the outcomes to change with the exception of random/luck. If the factors that are present at kick off are strong enough there may not be enough random/luck to overcome these and alter the result in any significant fashion. A match isn't decided only on the day, it is the end result of hundreds of inputs in the weeks building up to the match. If 99% of this is already in place, then repeating that final 1% is going to yield very little variance in outcome, theoretically 1 in 100 in fact (assuming all inputs are equal).

Now of course in FM that Iwobi example is extreme, we do not see the same identical match play out every time as there are enough changing factors to give us a different set of outcomes. However if the overriding factors remain static the match is likely to tend towards the same result, simply with differing details. 

A more complete experiment would be to replay an entire month or even season, rather than a single match on a single day. This should yield the varying results that we are looking for.

[forameuss]

5 hours ago, Etebaer said:

I took a curve to the Topic - results are predetermined in a way that is not reflected by mathematical modells that do not include human behavior factors!!!

 

PS: Maybe it became not clear so...PEACE!

Or, behind door number 2, they're not predetermined at all.  Why is that so hard for some to grasp?

[Mitja]

Yes but not 30 out of 30. Random element in football is too big I would agree maybe about tennis but even Djokovic wouldn't win 30/30. No way.

[Seb Wassell]

35 minutes ago, Mitja said:

Yes but not 30 out of 30. Random element in football is too big I would agree maybe about tennis but even Djokovic wouldn't win 30/30. No way.

This is what I was referring to in my above post though. It isn't strictly 30/30, it's 1/1 30 times. Djokovic would probably win the same match over and over unless you significantly changed something beforehand.

[Smurf]

This thread reminds me of Good Will Hunting quote for some reason

 

Quote

Why shouldn't I work for the N.S.A.? That's a tough one, but I'll take a shot. Say I'm working at N.S.A. Somebody puts a code on my desk, something nobody else can break. Maybe I take a shot at it and maybe I break it. And I'm real happy with myself, cause I did my job well. But maybe that code was the location of some rebel army in North Africa or the Middle East. Once they have that location, they bomb the village where the rebels were hiding and fifteen hundred people I never met, never had no problem with, get killed. Now the politicians are sayin', "Oh, send in the Marines to secure the area" cause they don't give a ****. It won't be their kid over there, gettin' shot. Just like it wasn't them when their number got called, cause they were pullin' a tour in the National Guard. It'll be some kid from Southie takin' shrapnel in the ass.

And he comes back to find that the plant he used to work at got exported to the country he just got back from. And the guy who put the shrapnel in his ass got his old job, cause he'll work for fifteen cents a day and no bathroom breaks. Meanwhile, he realizes the only reason he was over there in the first place was so we could install a government that would sell us oil at a good price. And, of course, the oil companies used the skirmish over there to scare up domestic oil prices. A cute little ancillary benefit for them, but it ain't helping my buddy at two-fifty a gallon.

And they're takin' their sweet time bringin' the oil back, of course, and maybe even took the liberty of hiring an alcoholic skipper who likes to drink martinis and ****in' play slalom with the icebergs, and it ain't too long 'til he hits one, spills the oil and kills all the sea life in the North Atlantic. So now my buddy's out of work and he can't afford to drive, so he's got to walk to the ****in' job interviews, which sucks cause the shrapnel in his ass is givin' him chronic hemorrhoids. And meanwhile he's starvin', cause every time he tries to get a bite to eat, the only blue plate special they're servin' is North Atlantic scrod with Quaker State.

So what did I think? I'm holdin' out for somethin' better. I figure **** it, while I'm at it why not just shoot my buddy, take his job, give it to his sworn enemy, hike up gas prices, bomb a village, club a baby seal, hit the hash pipe and join the National Guard? I could be elected president.

Cause and effect of decision making I guess. 

[cjhill44]

I still stand by the opinion that something is scripted.

 

A perfect example is I have noticed my title rivals Liverpool have been matching or beating my results regardless who they are playing nearly every week. If I get a 4-0 win, they win 5-0. Next week I win 3-0, they win 4-0.

Also played a game against Chelsea at home (I am Man Utd btw). After hitting the woodwork 5 times in the match and coming back from 1-0 down then 2-1 down to draw 2-2 we are in complete control of the game but come the 88th minute they score from a header. At exactly the same time, Liverpool take the lead 1-0 at home to 19th placed Swansea. I knew it would happen. This sort of thing has been happening in FM for years and it’s not just down to pure coincidence, it’s happened too many times to me. 

[XaW]

6 hours ago, cjhill44 said:

I still stand by the opinion that something is scripted.

 

A perfect example is I have noticed my title rivals Liverpool have been matching or beating my results regardless who they are playing nearly every week. If I get a 4-0 win, they win 5-0. Next week I win 3-0, they win 4-0.

Also played a game against Chelsea at home (I am Man Utd btw). After hitting the woodwork 5 times in the match and coming back from 1-0 down then 2-1 down to draw 2-2 we are in complete control of the game but come the 88th minute they score from a header. At exactly the same time, Liverpool take the lead 1-0 at home to 19th placed Swansea. I knew it would happen. This sort of thing has been happening in FM for years and it’s not just down to pure coincidence, it’s happened too many times to me. 

Yup, it's all a conspiracy to get you.

[vishers]

8 hours ago, cjhill44 said:

I still stand by the opinion that something is scripted.

 

What do SI possibly gain by writing code that scripts matches? If ever it came out that this was the case then that would be the immediate end of the series. Seems a big risk to do something which ultimately would only be designed to annoy their current base!!

[cjhill44]

1 hour ago, XaW said:

Yup, it's all a conspiracy to get you.

 All games do it. FIFA does it in abundance, FPS games do it

Just with fm the way some events occur means it cannot be pure coincidence every time. Something in the game has to be pre-determined before the matches start 

[cjhill44]

4 minutes ago, vishers said:

What do SI possibly gain by writing code that scripts matches? If ever it came out that this was the case then that would be the immediate end of the series. Seems a big risk to do something which ultimately would only be designed to annoy their current base!!

Im not saying they have to gain anything from it. You could say that about any game. What does any games company have to gain from crafting parts of their extensive storyline/ narrative in any particular way once the consumer has purchased it? It may not script specific matches but it looks like it picks up on certain situations in the game and produces the same outcome. In the same way I have scored 4 or more goals in every home game regardless of the tactic or opposition. It may be unintentional. 

The match engine is so complex I don’t think we’ll ever know how everything ties together 

[HUNT3R]

48 minutes ago, cjhill44 said:

 All games do it. FIFA does it in abundance, FPS games do it

Just with fm the way some events occur means it cannot be pure coincidence every time. Something in the game has to be pre-determined before the matches start 

Some things are set, yes. Morale etc. Results and how the matches unfold, isn't. When you press start match for the first time and the players kick off, the ME doesn't even yet know the final score. You can't compare an arcade game like Fifa to FM. Very different type of game.

[forameuss]

 

37 minutes ago, cjhill44 said:

The match engine is so complex I don’t think we’ll ever know how everything ties together 

And he sticks the landing!  Just call it complex, and that no-one knows for sure, that way you can say anything outlandishly false and it doesn't matter.

...except, there's a group that do know how everything ties together, and they've said - repeatedly - that posts like this are completely and demonstrably false. 

But aye, we'll never know. 

[Jack Joyce]

FM has never and will never be 'scripted', there'd be no reason for us to do it. I've never seen any actual evidence that other multiplayer games do it either. Sometimes when people lose in games it's easier to blame their teammates, the game etc, we're all guilty of it at some point... 

[cjhill44]

I love the game don’t get me wrong and I fully accept that you can make wrong team choices or tactical decisions that’s the beauty of it. Been playing since fm2008, it’s just the certain things that unfold over a season seem to happen repeatedly. Every season in the PL for instance  that I have played there will be a team ( Watford this season, Bournemouth last) that will punch well above their expectations and run in the top 4 for most of the season only to drop out of it with around 4 games to go, next season I find they will always be down around 15th-18th fighting to stay in the league. 

[XaW]

38 minutes ago, cjhill44 said:

I love the game don’t get me wrong and I fully accept that you can make wrong team choices or tactical decisions that’s the beauty of it. Been playing since fm2008, it’s just the certain things that unfold over a season seem to happen repeatedly. Every season in the PL for instance  that I have played there will be a team ( Watford this season, Bournemouth last) that will punch well above their expectations and run in the top 4 for most of the season only to drop out of it with around 4 games to go, next season I find they will always be down around 15th-18th fighting to stay in the league. 

Burnley says hi.

It is really hard to establish at the top in England. Burnley did great last season and got into Europe, this season? Right now, they are two points off relegation. Mirrors real life pretty good to me.

What I dont' know if we are all talking about the same kind of "pre-determined". If you mean that Man Utd, Man City, Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal and Tottenham are the best teams in England most of the 10 first season in each game you play, then yes, that's pre-determined since they have better players, staff, facilities and financials than most of the other teams in England. Yes, it's pre-determined that the best players will play better than poorer ones in most cases.

But SI have said flat out, plainly and clear, that there are no pre-determined matches, outcomes of league table, transfers, or anything like that. This doesn't mean there will be situations that are more likely to happen than not. Man Utd buying central defenders will most likely happen every game since most will see that it's a spot they need strengthening. In many cases the player will be similar since there is only so few players of the quality they want and are possible to recruit. That is not pre-determined, just "likely to happen" because of how the game it set up. Would you say that a random pub team playing against Real Madrid is pre-determined to lose? No, but it's still very likely they will lose! As close to guaranteed as possible, but still not pre-determined. But not because of fate, a deity or, in FM's case, developer decisions, but because of the quality of the players in this case. In other cases it can be form, injuries, internal issues (see Man Utd the last month under Mourinho), or a number of other reasons that stack the odds against them.

The initial post of this thread stated that some matches were impossible to win because it was decided before the match. SI have confirmed that is wrong. However, that doesn't mean that it is unlikely to win that match because a lot of important factors are pointing towards a loss even before the match started.

I've had to replay matches before because of crashes. Some happen in a very similar fashion while others are completely different. If it were completely random each and every time, then why bother trying to do anything at all? If it's totally random then your actions don't matter. What we do in the game, and what managers do in real life, is trying to sway the odds as much as possible in our favor. Nothing more.

[jjglvz]

Try using a 0-5-5 formation and play everyone out of position. Guaranteed win every time.

[Smurf]

On 04/02/2019 at 13:43, Seb Wassell said:

I would argue that this is the sticking point. Man U are not playing Juventus 30 separate times, they are playing them once over and over.

They might be playing them over and over - so the same result would occur if the same set of conditions happen each time. 

However, in the unlikely event of an injury - the game is re-evaluated and the ending is different - is this correct?

Each time the game is played, each player shouldn't really be making the same decisions, if decision making is randomised in the game, perhaps there's a 50/50 decision to pass or cross, and the algorithim goes for a pass 29 out of 30 times, but on the 30th go they go for a cross, and then this causes a clash of heads, a player has to be replaced, and the outcome of the game should be different. 

Exacuse my ignorance on this - it's more of a query than a statement.

 

[rp1966]

3 hours ago, Smurf said:

They might be playing them over and over - so the same result would occur if the same set of conditions happen each time. 

However, in the unlikely event of an injury - the game is re-evaluated and the ending is different - is this correct?

Each time the game is played, each player shouldn't really be making the same decisions, if decision making is randomised in the game, perhaps there's a 50/50 decision to pass or cross, and the algorithim goes for a pass 29 out of 30 times, but on the 30th go they go for a cross, and then this causes a clash of heads, a player has to be replaced, and the outcome of the game should be different. 

Exacuse my ignorance on this - it's more of a query than a statement.

 

From a game POV what is true is that the starting conditions are the same each time. So anything coming from the man-management side will be fixed. However, decisions within the ME should be probabilistic, so in that sense it isn't the same game over and over as each game will develop differently. In games with a clear favourite you would expect the same outcome most times. In a game of close odds it should be much more random.

That is unless the pre-game factors carry too much weight compared to the action within the ME.

An interesting experiment might be for someone with the in-game editor to take a lost game with a middling side and replay it, gradually upping the attributes of players on the losing side. 

 

[peter.1986]

On 26/01/2019 at 00:01, TheOriginalJimiVegas said:

I've just finished playing through the same game 63 times. I lost every single one.

Morale of all starting players is Very good or excellent. All players are match sharp and fit. I'm West Ham, 5th in the league, vs Wolves, 15th. At home. I've tried probably 15 different formations and set ups. I've thought through each one - trying to combat Wolves's set up.

Yet - all of them - I've lost. 

I don't care what anybody says, this is not realistic. 36 games in a season - no team wins every single one. By definition, nothing I've done has influenced the outcome of this match.

So - it follows that something about the game algorithm allows situations where there are games you cannot win, for whatever reason. Which kind of makes it a bit pointless.

It’s very possible you had the strongest squad and formation you could have the first time and that the other team hasn’t more going for them in terms of fitness, team cohesion, their players being suited against yours, by changing the formation you are pretty much saying before the game ‘lads I know we’ve worked on that formation for a long time and all week in training, but I’m going to play something we’ve not practiced’

 

There are games that you lose and it’s probably a 1/10 of you losing, they’re the sickening ones in real life also, but that’s life, in real life every single action of every person involved has an effect on life. 

 

Fortunately for you, you just figured out that the game you lost wasn’t one of those 1/10 you should be happy with the fact that you couldn’t win the game 66 times, so you losing it wasn’t down to bad luck. 

 

[Guest]

On 02/02/2019 at 13:04, Seb Wassell said:

This is getting out of hand.

To return to the OP, what would FM gain from predetermining results? 

 

I don't think they gain anything - I just think there are weaknesses in how it's all coded to make some games very difficult to win and it's unrealistic.

In some of those matches, my team were 2-0 up at the end of the first half. In some replays I was pretty harsh 'don't get complacent' at half time (either assertive or aggressive). In some I was calm and encouraging. IN some I changed tactics, attitude, passing distance and tempo. All of those we lost the 2-0 lead? Every one? We're talking my team 4th in the league and all high morale, the other team 16th or 17th, on a run of losses (yes they could be complacent).

I don't actually mean 'scripted' - but I do mean deterministic. i.e. the outcomes of matches are largely set by parameters & factors defined before the players take the field. And actually - Determinism is basically what it feels like. Doesn't matter what the heck you do in the match, the result will be the result because it was always going to happen.

 

[Guest]

Here's another question. 

If due to the vagaries of the fixture list, 17th in the prem played 4th 3 weeks in a row with the same players starting each one. Who thinks the weaker team would win every one, with a 2-0 turnover in the scoreline? Who even thinks the 4th placed team would win all 3?

On a related note - when was the last 7-0 in the NHL Stanley Cup play offs (they're played over 7 games, in quick succession, aren't they?).

The engine is overly deterministic, in my view.

[CFuller]

56 minutes ago, TheOriginalJimiVegas said:

If due to the vagaries of the fixture list, 17th in the prem played 4th 3 weeks in a row with the same players starting each one. Who thinks the weaker team would win every one, with a 2-0 turnover in the scoreline? Who even thinks the 4th placed team would win all 3?

I still don't know what the point you are trying to make is. With your Wolves scenario, you're not playing three games in a row; you're replaying one match three times.

Your claims of matches being "scripted" or "deterministic" (as you now put it) could have easily been debunked by many other users if you'd uploaded the save when you were first asked to.

56 minutes ago, TheOriginalJimiVegas said:

On a related note - when was the last 7-0 in the NHL Stanley Cup play offs (they're played over 7 games, in quick succession, aren't they?).

That has never happened, because when a team wins four matches in a best-of-seven contest, any remaining matches are cancelled.

[XaW]

36 minutes ago, TheOriginalJimiVegas said:

Here's another question. 

If due to the vagaries of the fixture list, 17th in the prem played 4th 3 weeks in a row with the same players starting each one. Who thinks the weaker team would win every one, with a 2-0 turnover in the scoreline? Who even thinks the 4th placed team would win all 3?

On a related note - when was the last 7-0 in the NHL Stanley Cup play offs (they're played over 7 games, in quick succession, aren't they?).

The engine is overly deterministic, in my view.

Have you uploaded the game yet?

[sporadicsmiles]

54 minutes ago, TheOriginalJimiVegas said:

The engine is overly deterministic, in my view.

Do you have some magical quantum computer we all have yet to access? How could it be anything other than deterministic? It is inputs filtering through lines of code, where any randomness is programmed somehow. 

I assume this thread has degraded entirely into an "I want to have a moan that I am not good at the game" at this point, rather than any kind of constructive discussion about how to improve the game, or how we can help you win tough matches. 

[peter.1986]

If you had a completely different result ranging from 6-0 wins, draws to 6-0 losses the n wouldn’t the complaint be that the games are completely random?

 

There are some games in real life a team takes an early lead and has a comfortable win and you think if they didn’t get that early goal it could have been different.

 

but in reality a lack of concentration in defence that caused that early goal may have actually still come later at 0-0

there are so many variables that have an effect on the games trying to reflect real life, that you will find some games almost unwinna le, and in real life if you had a save and replay button, the same would happen. 

 

Im just glad you proved the matches aren’t random

[peter.1986]

1 hour ago, TheOriginalJimiVegas said:

Here's another question. 

If due to the vagaries of the fixture list, 17th in the prem played 4th 3 weeks in a row with the same players starting each one. Who thinks the weaker team would win every one, with a 2-0 turnover in the scoreline? Who even thinks the 4th placed team would win all 3?

On a related note - when was the last 7-0 in the NHL Stanley Cup play offs (they're played over 7 games, in quick succession, aren't they?).

The engine is overly deterministic, in my view.

Your game wasn’t one after an other. It was the same game at the same time, meaning anything that affects it before that point had already happened, the players are at the same level fitness, mentality wise etc  everytime you run the match. 

 

If the 7 matches were different dates, each match and things happening inbetween would change the next games outcome. 

 

You simply cant compare saving and reloading to games happening over a future period of dates

[enigmatic]

Last time I replayed a game it was because my computer bricked shortly afterwards. Lost the original against a bigger side inexplicably parking the bus in hilariously unfortunate fashion (even more so than earlier in the season when they'd got a 94th winner against my 10 men who'd been leading 2-0). My shots not going in, them scoring due to non-marking at set pieces, the works

Won the second attempt on a different machine in an embarrassingly one sided 5-0 including a debut goal for one of my youngsters (would still prefer to have kept the original result and not have to buy a new laptop tbh)

So obviously the secret to preventing SI scripters from cheating is to replay games on 63 different computers  

[gossy7]

On 05/02/2019 at 00:47, cjhill44 said:

A perfect example is I have noticed my title rivals Liverpool have been matching or beating my results regardless who they are playing nearly every week. If I get a 4-0 win, they win 5-0. Next week I win 3-0, they win 4-0.

Would you be willing to post yours and Liverpool's fixture list side by side? I have a feeling a large amount of confirmation bias comes into these things. Everything that fits the theory is pounced on, but all the matches where it doesn't fit just get ignored.

Also, across every person playing, the premier league is being simulated 1000's, maybe 1,000,000's of times! Unusual things that are 1,000,000-1 will sometimes happen, and when something unusual happens people are far more likely to post about it than if a season is roughly as expected. If I'd bought the game a few years ago and Leicester won the league, I'd have probably posted a bug report! 

[XaW]

1 hour ago, gossy7 said:

across every person playing, the premier league is being simulated 1000's, maybe 1,000,000's of times! Unusual things that are 1,000,000-1 will sometimes happen

The problem is that people mistake improbable with impossible. And, since this game is played a lot by many people, things that happen in only 1‰ of times still happen 1,000 times in 1 million seasons.

So if Leicester winning the title was one in a thousand, then it happens thousand times in a million tries.

[Snorks]

1 hour ago, gossy7 said:

If I'd bought the game a few years ago and Leicester won the league, I'd have probably posted a bug report! 

People did post plenty of bug reports when it happened. Both the Premier League, PGMOL and the FA issued a press release saying "It's your tactics mate!"

[Snorks]

16 minutes ago, XaW said:

 

So if Leicester winning the title was one in a thousand, then it happens thousand times in a million tries.

I think the odds were longer than that at start of season.

[DP]

24 minutes ago, XaW said:

The problem is that people mistake improbable with impossible. And, since this game is played a lot by many people, things that happen in only 1‰ of times still happen 1,000 times in 1 million seasons.

So if Leicester winning the title was one in a thousand, then it happens thousand times in a million tries.

Bad example. Have you ever seen a team in the first season of FM that is expecting to be relegated win the league? I’d go as far to say you could have 10 million saves and wouldn’t see it happen once. 

[Guest]

I'm not stupid. I get that it's the same game over and over. Yes, the conditions upon starting the match are the same.

Re 'not good at the game post'. Seriously mate, it's clear the post isn't about that. It's about the degree to which match outcomes are pre-determined. and the point I'm making is - they seem to be. Which, to me, goes against what i see when watching live football. But even this is hard to pinpoint. Because a team that is doing badly - yes, their results are determined - you could say. We all know having watched it - the manager is doomed and it's not going to get any better. Just like teams on a roll or high flying teams, we know they will always hae a chance.

My point is that what you don't get often is 4th playing 17th and it's a pre-determined 17th place win. convince me you get that often. Cos you damn well don't. When Huddersfield beat Man City/Liverpool/Tottenham/etc nobody goes 'well that was always going to happen - those players and the way they're set up and the better team's low morale going in - it was always going to happen'.

They go "WOW City had an off day". Which means, play it again, City win. Maybe City have another off day, but PLAY IT AGAIN, City WIN. maybe 10 times, but 20? 30? 40? 

So - the game engine doesn't reflect reality.

[themadsheep2001]

 

On 05/02/2019 at 11:08, Jack Joyce said:

FM has never and will never be 'scripted', there'd be no reason for us to do it. I've never seen any actual evidence that other multiplayer games do it either. Sometimes when people lose in games it's easier to blame their teammates, the game etc, we're all guilty of it at some point... 

This has already been answered and the thread is going round in circles so closing it