Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
Sign in to follow this  
leeds united

scoring goals and game play

Recommended Posts

:mad: after all the updates since it as come out its lost its scoring goals and made it 10times harder, are you looking at this page SI come on the game play is getting worse. I want the game play to be more fluid and stop the players shooting from long range I can have over 20 shots and 10 on target and not score and the other team as 3 shots and beat me, I bet I am talking to deaf ears to the makers 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not very helpful at all and more suited to the feedback thread, if at all... If you have examples of issues, then post it in the bugs section with explanations of what you mean are wrong.

Looking at pure stats, a lot of shots does not equal goals. If most of the shots are from corners or long shots, then you are doing something wrong tactically. You either are lacking movement between the lines or struggle to create space. To illustrate, look at Liverpool a few years back before Klopp changed his approach. Example, the away loss to Swansea. They got shut out on a regular basis, even with massive amounts of shots and pretty much all the possession they lost to a poor Swansea side. Why? Because they were unable to break them down.

DnmWyX5.png

Klopp changed his approach to try to mend this. Are you doing anything to change it? Or are you stubbornly trying to make it work regardless?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, XaW said:

This is not very helpful at all and more suited to the feedback thread, if at all... If you have examples of issues, then post it in the bugs section with explanations of what you mean are wrong.

Looking at pure stats, a lot of shots does not equal goals. If most of the shots are from corners or long shots, then you are doing something wrong tactically. You either are lacking movement between the lines or struggle to create space. To illustrate, look at Liverpool a few years back before Klopp changed his approach. Example, the away loss to Swansea. They got shut out on a regular basis, even with massive amounts of shots and pretty much all the possession they lost to a poor Swansea side. Why? Because they were unable to break them down.

DnmWyX5.png

Klopp changed his approach to try to mend this. Are you doing anything to change it? Or are you stubbornly trying to make it work regardless?

I think what he is saying is that its NOT his tactics, but the ME. Long shots has been a prevalent issue, so changing tactics won't do anything to curb the problem

Edited by Preveza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Preveza said:

Long shots has been a prevalent issue, so changing tactics won't do anything to curb the problem

I haven't conceded a long shot in 20 games playing as the worst side in the premiership. Not from a corner and not from open play. And its definitely done via the tactical instructions and the specific formation you are playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Preveza said:

I think what he is saying is that its NOT his tactics, but the ME. Long shots has been a prevalent issue, so changing tactics won't do anything to curb the problem

I get what he is saying, expect I don't agree based on what he has presented. He has only stated that he thinks there are issues with the game because he is not winning when having more shots on goal than his opponent. And that is just plain wrong, as I have demonstrated. There COULD be issues, of course, but from what he has presented there are no grounds to say he has any point at all. I even stated that if he thinks he has issues, then he should report it as a bug. This thread should be a small complaint in the feedback thread, if that. It literally bring nothing into a good discussion about the state of the game. 

If he had brought a thought through post with examples of what he think was wrong, like this thread by @optimusprimal82 no one would argue. But the state of this post? What does it bring to the table?

For my own game I have had 4 long shots against me in 24 games:

KLHmnT8.png

Some of them aren't really what I would call long shots at all, from just outside the box. The same goes for my own goals. So, even if there is an issue with long shots, it's possible to do something to avoid it. Also look at the post above from @Rashidi, he is much better at tactics than me and he have even better results. So, yes, changing tactics will do a lot to "curb the problem". If you, or the OP, or anyone have issues with this, please report it in the bugs section, and do please use the example by @optimusprimal82 as an blueprint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, XaW said:

This is not very helpful at all and more suited to the feedback thread, if at all... If you have examples of issues, then post it in the bugs section with explanations of what you mean are wrong.

Looking at pure stats, a lot of shots does not equal goals. If most of the shots are from corners or long shots, then you are doing something wrong tactically. You either are lacking movement between the lines or struggle to create space. To illustrate, look at Liverpool a few years back before Klopp changed his approach. Example, the away loss to Swansea. They got shut out on a regular basis, even with massive amounts of shots and pretty much all the possession they lost to a poor Swansea side. Why? Because they were unable to break them down.

DnmWyX5.png

Klopp changed his approach to try to mend this. Are you doing anything to change it? Or are you stubbornly trying to make it work regardless?

Ironically that previous Klopp approach of extremely high pressing very quick style of play is one the most effective ways of consistently destroying teams on this FM so you haven’t picked the best example.

 

 

 

Share this post


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

Ironically that previous Klopp approach of extremely high pressing very quick style of play is one the most effective ways of consistently destroying teams on this FM so you haven’t picked the best example.

Maybe in theory, but that season Liverpool really struggled with teams that parked the buss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, iMan said:

Ironically that previous Klopp approach of extremely high pressing very quick style of play is one the most effective ways of consistently destroying teams on this FM so you haven’t picked the best example.

Actually he has, not everyone in this version of FM is doing it correctly. They are basically what Klopp ends up with as a result when his sides lack the final third movement to unlock sides for all their 90 mins of pressure, hence their added emphasis on set pieces this season. You can camp for 90 mins and utterly destroy sides in this version of FM, but it takes awareness of the weakness of the opposite system. This season as well they abandoned the high press and went to a middle press to hit teams more during the transition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
59 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

Actually he has, not everyone in this version of FM is doing it correctly. They are basically what Klopp ends up with as a result when his sides lack the final third movement to unlock sides for all their 90 mins of pressure, hence their added emphasis on set pieces this season you can camp for 90 mins and utterly destroy sides in this version of FM, but it takes awareness of the weakness of the opposite system. this season as well they abandoned the high press and went to a middle press to hit teams more during the transition.

Unfortunately counter-press seems to be this years 'hotness' with a lot of people seeing Klopp's heavy metal football and wanting to recreate it, and i think it's leading to a lot of the frustration as the match stats/general numbers hide the underlying tactical flaws; as one example, I've mentioned in a few places how many fouls 'full- balls' counter pressing seems to concede in game, and a lot of people have made little correlation to the increased number of direct free kicks they concede as a result (which when analysed further is something i don't believe is an issue - at least any more).

Whilst i think players could definitely improve - certainly in the analysis of why they're failing - I think it's a teensy bit harsh though to criticise people for not doing it correctly when it's an area of the game (movement in the final third against packed defence) that is - at best - a little weak and at worst was/could still be (haven't tested 19.3 sufficiently) flawed and our generous game providers themselves have admitted needs work/will be a focus of FM20?

I've written in various places now how I feel that unfortunately the tactics creator/restrictions - as much as I understand why they were introduced - tie people's hands a little when it comes to creating their own solutions to the problems they face, and whilst you can circumvent the ultra defensive AI (most notable when playing as super high rep team), I believe it requires 'work' that a lot of players just aren't willing to undertake/accept which brings us back to that old conundrum of which audience the game should cater for; I think as the ME becomes more sophisticated, the days of the 1 stop plug and play tactic are becoming numbered which is great for you, me (so long as the fun isn't removed in a pure chase for realism) and a lot of players but not so good for the equally large portion of people who just want to buy the game, buy some superstars and score an insane amount of goals - but i digress, that's another chat entirely I guess and the amount I write FM20 may already be out by the time I finish writing/people finish reading! :) 

TL;DR;

Can you circumvent the issues? Yes, absolutely - games are still perfectly winnable but they're very stodgy.

Is/are there still (an) issue(s) with overly defensive AI tactics/movement in the final third? Almost certainly probably.

Will people use said issue(s)  to cover off any tactical shortfall? Unequivocally - but I sympathise; it can be infuriating trying to solve a problem when your little warriors won't do what you want them to do (wingers are my current fascination if not immediately clear!).

Are people repeatedly making the same mistakes/smacking their head against the same brick wall on purpose? Some will undoubtedly be, others more as a result of little direction as to how to overcome the problems; think some of us sometimes take for granted how well we know the game/where to look when we have issues (the amount of players who don't understand complacency or that their ass man gives/can give them detailed feedback - besides the dodgy green bar - during games is staggering!)

NB: That's not really all directed just at you Rashidi, more I picked up on the thread/some general themes around and tied it together!

EDIT: Just to prove it is still possible to score/win, this was last season, all done in the 19.3 beta patch which was - allegedly - more 'stodgy' defensively than the full 19.3 I believe? (predicted to finish 7th)

image.thumb.png.7d6337f4a998705598b6b3472144b296.png

Edited by optimusprimal82

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, optimusprimal82 said:

NB: That's not really all directed just at you Rashidi, more I picked up on the thread/some general themes around and tied it together!

No offence taken, I just get a lot of saves on game changer, where i see common themes. And the feedback i usually get is they don't know how to tell what change needs to be made, or why changes are even necessary. 

At the moment, from what i have gathered on and off the forums, those who can see a transition failing and can spot why, are the ones who aren't struggling. For example the long shots issue, its entirely down to your settings. That is avoidable, but if someone comes up to me and says the engine is broken because they can't defend against the long shot then I will disagree. The game can definitely improve, there are some areas that could be better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, optimusprimal82 said:

certainly in the analysis of why they're failing

And here is something we can very clearly agree on, and one of the things I've criticised the game for the most; The lack of good contextual feedback when things are not going well. I've mentioned it in a lot of places as one of the things that would help out players. To explain why things are not working while at the same time allowing the user solve the issue by themselves is a hard thing to do. But I would like to see assistants comment things like "We are lacking runs between the lines, we might struggle against very defensive teams", or "We are too congested in the middle, players might get in each others way and we should look to stretch the play", or something along those lines.

At least as an option similar to the "introductions" we get in FM19.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, XaW said:

And here is something we can very clearly agree on, and one of the things I've criticised the game for the most; The lack of good contextual feedback when things are not going well. I've mentioned it in a lot of places as one of the things that would help out players. To explain why things are not working while at the same time allowing the user solve the issue by themselves is a hard thing to do. But I would like to see assistants comment things like "We are lacking runs between the lines, we might struggle against very defensive teams", or "We are too congested in the middle, players might get in each others way and we should look to stretch the play", or something along those lines.

At least as an option similar to the "introductions" we get in FM19.

I agree with what you're saying there, I mentioned context in one of my feature requests a few months back, specifically in regard to some of the pre-match advice. In some areas your staff will tell you the 'why' (i think we should play with 'cautious' mentality because...) whereas in others they'll just recommend a few things like 'drop deeper' and to a newer/less experienced player that suggestion is vague & changed in isolation could be suicidal!

One of my friends struggles a lot with the 'we should change to short passing/we should change to direct passing' in game suggestions from the ass man too - not sure if he took my advice and fired him! :D 

Has anyone noticed btw, the pre-match staff mentality suggestions all seem*/tend to be lower than they were in earlier patches? I very rarely get told to play attacking any more - obviously teams/squads change, but was chatting about it on Discord earlier and others agreed?

*regular readers of my 'novels' will know i hate that word as it's based on perception rather than fact!

Edited by optimusprimal82

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, optimusprimal82 said:

I agree with what you're saying there, I mentioned context in one of my feature requests a few months back, specifically in regard to some of the pre-match advice. In some areas your staff will tell you the 'why' (i think we should play with 'cautious' mentality because...) whereas in others they'll just recommend a few things like 'drop deeper' and to a newer/less experienced player that suggestion is vague & changed in isolation could be suicidal!

One of my friends struggles a lot with the 'we should change to short passing/we should change to direct passing' in game suggestions from the ass man too - not sure if he took my advice and fired him! :D 

Has anyone noticed btw, the pre-match staff mentality suggestions all seem*/tend to be lower than they were in earlier patches? I very rarely get told to play attacking any more - obviously teams/squads change, but was chatting about it on Discord earlier and others agreed?

*regular readers of my 'novels' will know i hate that word as it's based on perception rather than fact!

Feedback has always been an area nearly everyone will agree on. For example FM18 started featuring better feedback for your tactics. Its something we have been asking for years. Then we have the removal of shape, which was actually community driven more than anything else. Yes, there are some areas which have improved, the challenge about feedback is a very difficult thing to get right. For example:

Overlap - this instruction can both be a defensive and offensive instruction. I use it as a defensive option when i am playing on higher mentalities :-) with better teams. You can imagine the confusion we are going to get if i appeared as an ass man in the game, going. "We need to push the fullbacks even higher to keep the wingers occupied". That instruction will work only in certain situations, but how do you go into the game and program it to 

- look at opposite formation, analyse the opposite player, and then recommend the action.

And the choice of passing, ie, changing it to short, direct and mixed. Let's assume you have a defensive coach, he could recommend direct. A more possession orientated coach may tell you short.  Fact is both kinds of passing work with counter attacking systems, it depends on what kind of risk you are willing to accept with your choice. So SI are in a very very tough place. Even if they were to give you advice in the game, which one will they pick when both choices are viable. 

If this game came out with a perfect template for helping people understand how different combinations work in the game, then this game would become the perfect platform for coaches who want to become professional managers in the game. They could use FM as a learning tool, so they can apply their new found knowledge into the real world. SI won't do that, this game then enters spoon feeding territory. I am sure they are trying to make thing easier for people to master the game, and this will take time, i am just glad the tactical UI got a big overhaul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, leeds united said:

:mad: after all the updates since it as come out its lost its scoring goals and made it 10times harder, are you looking at this page SI come on the game play is getting worse. I want the game play to be more fluid and stop the players shooting from long range I can have over 20 shots and 10 on target and not score and the other team as 3 shots and beat me, I bet I am talking to deaf ears to the makers 

You may feel like you are talking to a wall, because it is not the game's fault. It is your fault. The issues you describe are tactical (and described eloquently as always by Rashidi). If you are seeing lots of long shots, and dominate without winning, you have some issue with how you are set up in an attacking manner. If you want to get past this, you should have a look at getting some advice on the tactical forum. I know this is not the reply you want, but it is the reply that will help you.

For instance, I am having no problem scoring goals in the new patch. Indeed, I find it significantly easier because attacker movement has been made significantly better, allowing to do many different things. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, sporadicsmiles said:

You may feel like you are talking to a wall, because it is not the game's fault. It is your fault. The issues you describe are tactical (and described eloquently as always by Rashidi). If you are seeing lots of long shots, and dominate without winning, you have some issue with how you are set up in an attacking manner. If you want to get past this, you should have a look at getting some advice on the tactical forum. I know this is not the reply you want, but it is the reply that will help you.

For instance, I am having no problem scoring goals in the new patch. Indeed, I find it significantly easier because attacker movement has been made significantly better, allowing to do many different things. 

Interesting that you say this, but how do you explain a league season completely AI controlled where this happens after 38 games.  Looking at the top 4 spots.  Can you tell me when two teams finished in the top 4 with less than 60 goals in the Premier League.  The closest season with a goals scored column like this was the 2015/2016 which was acknowledged as one of the worst Premier League seasons ever....Man City just about made top 4, United finished 5th thanks to throwing away a 2-1 lead against West Ham with a few games to go (last ever match at Upton Park), Liverpool finished 8th and Chelsea finished 10th, and neither Arsenal or Tottenham managed to mount a serious title challenge to Leicester (not trying to sell Leicester short but this was a poor EPL season with the big clubs struggling). 

The other seasons have featured much higher scoring leagues, with the lowest goals scored out of the top 4 teams being equal or greater than the highest scored in the 2015/16 freak season, I believe 2005 was the last time a team managed to finish top 4 with less than 60 goals.  

image.thumb.png.2c5bff81bd0fed123595d7be45e4d442.png

The top scorers in the League in this save is even more damning:

image.thumb.png.2ba8acbedef42b8bef7bde746899a20e.png

Top goal scorer with 16 goals in the Premier League is such an obvious issue I'm not even going to comment on it, what I will comment on is this.

image.thumb.png.1eec95bf5c50134890eab6b196eb3162.png

One of the deadliest strikers in the Premier League manages 4 goals?  

Edited by Conor O'Hare

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My bigger annoyance is that putting a striker through on goal is still a ridiculously ineffective way of scoring goals in this ME.  The conversion rate on 1-on-1s is minuscule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Conor O'Hare said:

image.thumb.png.1eec95bf5c50134890eab6b196eb3162.png

One of the deadliest strikers in the Premier League manages 4 goals?  

That's downright crazy. Was he injured/came back from a bad injury? Because if not there's very much an issue here which needs to be addressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, rjferguson90 said:

Because if not there's very much an issue here which needs to be addressed.

Is there?  Aguero bagged 16 goals in 26 matches in my current save (I'm not managing Man City).  The following season City bought Icardi and he helped himself to 18 goals in 28 matches.

But this is the problem of reacting to such a small sample size - there will always be something odd which gets thrown out.  4 goals in 23 league matches for Aguero is a very poor return, but is it typical of what happens in game?  My equally small sample size shows otherwise.  This is why large soak tests across many matches and different saves can be more revealing as that should even out these anomalies.  Perhaps my small sample size is the oddity here and across a large soak test 4 in 23 is the typical return.  On the other hand perhaps it's the other way around.  Or something else completely.

By all means upload a game save to the Bugs forum for the devs to look at, all I'm saying is we can't draw any conclusions such as "obvious issue" or "something needs to be addressed" because it's just a reaction to a really small sample :thup:.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, sporadicsmiles said:

You may feel like you are talking to a wall, because it is not the game's fault. It is your fault. The issues you describe are tactical (and described eloquently as always by Rashidi). If you are seeing lots of long shots, and dominate without winning, you have some issue with how you are set up in an attacking manner. If you want to get past this, you should have a look at getting some advice on the tactical forum. I know this is not the reply you want, but it is the reply that will help you.

For instance, I am having no problem scoring goals in the new patch. Indeed, I find it significantly easier because attacker movement has been made significantly better, allowing to do many different things. 

I - and i suspect others - don't find sweeping "I'm fine, it's you" statements like this any more helpful than the 'original post-rant' to be honest and will likely come across as equally antagonistic to some (and there's no doubt some irony here too from your perspective as you read this, but I assure you it's nothing personal!). The patch has been out for just a few days so dismissing others concerns/opinions/frustrations as simply their tactics when it's likely they're experiencing situations you're yet to isn't great form or particularly constructive, especially when tensions here are high and posts are already emotive.

A lot of people are having issues scoring goals/with poor attacking play with the new patch, enough that suggests it's not all down to tactics so let's be wary of dismissing genuine (albeit not great quality in this example) feedback lest we miss something that could be used to improve on the game's 'wobbly bits' - I can still win and win well, but it doesn't mean the stuff I'm seeing on-screen is vintage or that what John/Sue/Kieran/Kathy see isn't also valid?

I'm still forming my own full opinion but even from early impressions it's clear that whilst it may well have improved, there are still further improvements needed to address issues already raised (such as wide play) and these issues are exacerbated when playing at the top level/as an ultra high rep team as it can still be very difficult to break some systems down with the tools at our disposal and with attacking movement that suffers against such defensive walls (& waits patiently for FM20's enhancements).

I alluded to it in an earlier post but FM - like so many games - has such broad appeal that finding the sweet spot between fun, realism & difficulty will always be a thankless task as ask ten people where that sweet spot is and you'll likely get ten different answers; people have argued for years over whether FIFA or PES is the better football game (and admittedly some enjoy both), but better is subjective & fans of both series play FM which means you're immediately catering to two audiences who clearly expect different things from their football game, let alone all of the rest of the player base;

A 'plug and play' tactic is not how a lot of people want to play the game and they'd be glad to see those type of overpowered/potentially exploitative tactics gone as it means the ME is approaching a truer sense of realism, but at the same time it also is how a lot of people want to play the game (and in many cases have been doing so for a long time) with other tranches of people - who are I suspect the majority as games now largely target the broadest audience - falling into the middle ground between these extremes. Which type of player is more legitimate? None in my eyes, surely we are all paying the same money and thus have the same right to enjoy/voice our opinion on where we'd like the game to go (so long as it's respectful, courteous and constructive)?

I actually thought the introduction of Touch would organically solve some of this issue, perhaps with different ME's that lean towards Arcade (Touch/Mobile) - scratching the itch for players with less time/who like the instant gratification from buying the latest wonderkid & torching teams 5-0 with - and Full Simulation (Classic) - for more grizzled veterans or strategy lovers who like puzzling over opposition reports and gauging tempo vs width etc; for whatever reason it was decided they'd go in a slightly different direction & share the same ME with the off-field stuff being the differentiation point. I'm curious whether it will stay as it is going forward or change to cater for the audience diversity; as phones get ever more powerful - longer term - will the lines maybe blur between Touch and Mobile and the mobile ME expanded to be usable in Touch instead of/as well as the core ME? Will Touch maybe (doubt it) become a modular experience so you can play full classic off-field with 'Mobile' ME or with 'Mobile' off-field and full ME (as Touch is now)? 

Even as a huge fan of the main classic series, I can't deny that at times I get the poo's with the main ME and wish there was a way I could play through a season using an old ultra simplified CM01/02 esque engine with all the lovely FM19 trimmings on top (and i don't mean on my phone!)? I'll always come back to classic as it's where my heart lies, but sometimes time and opportunity mean we can't spend 20 minutes per match watching for things & tinkering away (and no, instant result is not a compromise I can make), but being able to brute force our way to success would be a way to at least scratch the itch until you can get back to the main event.

All conjecture anyway & this is the post I said last night I wouldn't write but hey, it's done now so it's time to climb back out of this rabbit hole, but I'll leave it by saying i'm not naive or arrogant enough to think that 20+ people at SI haven't already thought about stuff like this so it'll be fun seeing where they take the series and how they solve some of these problems!

Edited by optimusprimal82

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, optimusprimal82 said:

I - and i suspect others - don't find sweeping "I'm fine, it's you" statements like this any more helpful than the 'original post-rant' to be honest

OK, but equally why couldn't it 'be you'? I'm as guilty of 'confirmation bias' as the next person but, honestly, the majority of complaints on the forum come from the same 12-15 people. Same complaints, same people.

26 minutes ago, optimusprimal82 said:

A lot of people are having issues scoring goals/with poor attacking play with the new patch, enough that suggests it's not all down to tactics

Need to see more evidence to make a decision. My own experience since the launch of the original beta (back in October) is that it *might* be all down to tactics. I've never had any problem with attacking play this year, and every year I find that the more time I spend in the tactics creator, the fewer issues I have. Since October I've had no problems with scoring, strikers being idiots, wingers and fullbacks either crossing too much or not crossing enough, defenders not reacting quickly enough to the ball over the top, and on, and on. Or, to put it another way, I've had problems with all of those things and then I watch real football and think yes, that's just how FM looks.

28 minutes ago, optimusprimal82 said:

even from early impressions it's clear that whilst it may well have improved, there are still further improvements needed to address issues already raised

Begs the question. FM is a game... some of us don't expect it to perfectly mirror reality, we're happy if it 'more or less' creates a reasonable facsimile. Your argument suggests that the game needs, indeed must, meet the demands of the 'perfectly reflects reality' crowd.

Beyond that, there are - at least - two kinds of players: those who want 'FOOTBALL manager', and those who are happy with 'football MANAGER' - ie, there's a large group of players who want that perfect reproduction of football on the pitch, and an even larger group who want a more-or-less perfect reproduction of the management side of the game. And before you argue the opposite, consider the forums - there's a huge group who are happy to install an instant-result skin and play for 10 or 20 years without ever seeing *anything* that happens on the pitch - just read the threads in the 'career' forum.

And I'm not suggesting that the latter group is deserving of more consideration; I'm only suggesting that the demands of the first group are much more difficult to satisfy. When CM/FM was little more than a glorified spreadsheet with text-only commentary it was easy to create an impression of realism. As soon as they introduced a graphical element it became much harder; when they switched to a 3d view it became infinitely harder still. I was  much happier with the 3d element when I accepted that it didn't - and couldn't - reproduce exactly what the ME was generating 'under the hood'.

1 hour ago, optimusprimal82 said:

A 'plug and play' tactic is not how a lot of people want to play the game

But equally - perhaps, more than equally - that's precisely how a great many people want to play the game. You only have to look at the tactics/download forum to realise that (and, even more so, look at other FM forums and see they're literally nothing but insta-win download communities!)

I'm not arguing with anything you've said; but I do think you've fallen on the side of the argument that says FM should be a perfect (or nearly perfect) reproduction of football on the pitch, regardless of all the other aspects of football - amateur, semi-professional, and professional. And many of us - perhaps, even the majority - think the on-pitch reproduction is important but certainly not the be-all of football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, optimusprimal82 said:

A lot of people are having issues scoring goals/with poor attacking play with the new patch, enough that suggests it's not all down to tactics so let's be wary of dismissing genuine (albeit not great quality in this example) feedback lest we miss something that could be used to improve on the game's 'wobbly bits' - I can still win and win well, but it doesn't mean the stuff I'm seeing on-screen is vintage or that what John/Sue/Kieran/Kathy see isn't also valid?

 

41 minutes ago, warlock said:

Need to see more evidence to make a decision. My own experience since the launch of the original beta (back in October) is that it *might* be all down to tactics. I've never had any problem with attacking play this year, and every year I find that the more time I spend in the tactics creator, the fewer issues I have. Since October I've had no problems with scoring, strikers being idiots, wingers and fullbacks either crossing too much or not crossing enough, defenders not reacting quickly enough to the ball over the top, and on, and on. Or, to put it another way, I've had problems with all of those things and then I watch real football and think yes, that's just how FM looks.

Haven't got time to reply to your whole post now I'm afraid having spent far too long on these forums the last few weeks as it is; with regard to this bit though, please don't freely dismiss it as yet another lazy "game is broken because I can't score goals" type criticism; I am loathe to make grandiose sweeping statements or speak for the masses when our perception is largely clouded by our own experience and the narrow view we get of others opinions; I'd stopped linking as I expected people were getting tired of it, this is based on hours spent playing the game and breaking it down as I did here (amongst other places) throughout the previous patches and more importantly during the recent beta. I'll stress - as I do throughout the thread - that even with all that, the whole thread is based around one persons interpretation of a 3d engines interpretation of an underlying match engine, so there is bound to be things people agree/disagree with. Still assessing how 19.3 has addressed/improved/changed some of that feedback, but some of the fundamental issues still exist (as SI suggested they would when they explained that attacking will get a big overhaul for FM20)

 

41 minutes ago, warlock said:

But equally - perhaps, more than equally - that's precisely how a great many people want to play the game. You only have to look at the tactics/download forum to realise that (and, even more so, look at other FM forums and see they're literally nothing but insta-win download communities!)

Is this not exactly what I said? I totally support however people want to play their game and have been spending an awful lot of time helping plug & players this year, the mentality masterplan and associated waffle was borne precisely because of this? I'm actually a big advocate of plug and players because it gets more people interested in the game who bring in more revenue for more improvements & will often then go onto become the tactic guru's of tomorrow;

1 hour ago, optimusprimal82 said:

A 'plug and play' tactic is not how a lot of people want to play the game and they'd be glad to see those type of overpowered/potentially exploitative tactics gone as it means the ME is approaching a truer sense of realism, but at the same time it also is how a lot of people want to play the game (and in many cases have been doing so for a long time) with other tranches of people - who are I suspect the majority as games now largely target the broadest audience - falling into the middle ground between these extremes. Which type of player is more legitimate? None in my eyes, surely we are all paying the same money and thus have the same right to enjoy/voice our opinion on where we'd like the game to go (so long as it's respectful, courteous and constructive)?

 

As for the last part  I think you've incorrectly pigeon-holed me which is fair enough, I'm not precious and it matters little in the whole scheme and may be down to me hurriedly typing the last couple of paragraphs! I wasn't explicitly talking about me at any point really, just trying to highlight that there are some very disparate groups playing the game whose needs SI have to balance between and they'll never please everybody; With regard to me personally & what I want from the game you've got me wrong; I don't want a full simulation, never have, never will - I think the ME is trying too hard to be a perfect recreation and suffers for it, if it's going for realism though, I'm going to analyse it as such & it needs to give us realistic ways to fight back. I've written in several places my preference for FM12/FM17's ME over 19's as they're far more fun/light-hearted (albeit flawed) approaches in general which I think coupled with FM19's generally great off-field stuff would give me the perfect balance.

image.thumb.png.0d12e9b5337221ba275c1e0c072531f7.png

Edited by optimusprimal82

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@optimusprimal82: I don't think anyone in here is advocating that FM is flawless and the shining light of a game without any issues, faults or features of balance. However, what I and, it seems, quite a lot of others are reacting to is the manner of which it is communicated.

You have brought in a lot of well presented and detailed reports of you own issues or problems, complete with saves or examples. I haven't seen any, and I hope you haven't gotten any ill comments regarding that. That is exactly what is needed to help the game improve. Bug reports, feature requests and tests are the best way we, as customers, can influence the way the game is changing. I've reported a lot of bugs through the years and posted a few suggestions and criticized the game when I felt like it. However, if one doesn't do that in a constructive manner, it just sounds like... well, moaning on the internet, and quite frankly who wants to listen to that?

That is especially a standout point when, at least some of, the issue can be fixed by the users themselves. Or the fault of the issue lies with the user. A lot of people in here have again and again pointed out ways to help users who struggle with this, but most times guidance isn't what the complainer is after. It's complaining for the sake of complaining. I get that it is annoying to fail, I get that the frustration can get the better of you. I've thrown my mouse across the room before when I concede in overtime in a final myself, but I don't go online and claim the game is cheating, scripted and/or otherwise stacked against me. You have no idea how many cases of tinfoil hats I've seen in here...

Is there an issue with the game in regards to scoring? Perhaps, I've not played enough on the new patch yet, but so far I've noticed a bit too few goals in AI vs AI games. I'll report it later on when I have played more. Is there an issue with long shots? Perhaps, but I'm not affected in that case. Neither for or against me, I've noticed much more than before the patch. Are there issues with strikers missing to many chances? Perhaps, but I also haven't noticed anything about that in my game so far. Neither for or against me. I'm also using the exact same tactic I used before the patch and I haven't changed anything in how I approach matches. Do I win every match? Not at all, but I'm achieving a bit better than expected before the season, and I can't ask for much more than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally and 100% understand that, but seems my point is being lost  - this isn't a new thing; the back and forth between "the game is terrible" and "nope, it's you and your tactics" has been going on for as long as I can remember, and it will continue to do so whilst people perpetuate the cycle.

51 minutes ago, XaW said:

@optimusprimal82: I don't think anyone in here is advocating that FM is flawless and the shining light of a game without any issues, faults or features of balance. However, what I and, it seems, quite a lot of others are reacting to is the manner of which it is communicated.

This bit is the essential part for me because it works both ways - I think the way you initially responded was perfectly valid/helpful so not picking you out over that - but it degenerated (slightly) into a Tactics vs ME debate and the way it was suggested to be the OP's own tactics - "ït is not the game's fault. It is your fault" - is just as bad/as unhelpful without context as saying "the game's rubbish because I don't score enough goals"; long story short if each side ends up entrenched & pointing fingers then nobody wins? Completely agree that it's often not the what that's said, rather the how.

Do I think I can stop it with a few words? No, and largely I don't care about any of that anyway - we have moderators here to sort out that type of stuff so we get to sit around and talk about the fun stuff; what I do care about is that a lot of decent people used to post here, still play the game, are active in the community elsewhere but don't come here any longer - I myself was a good example of this until a few weeks ago? A lot of newer players/people I speak to in other locations (namely Discord and a few sister sites) are loathe/intimidated at the very idea of coming here to discuss tactical problems or report issues, yet are pefectly open to suggestions and assistance away from the spotlight that's shone on them all too often here. I was never a huge poster way back when, but still spent many a day (and night) reading - and occasionally discussing - tactical nuances/anomalies and learnt a lot - as have so many - from people like wwfan and Cleon in what I'd consider the forums heyday? There are still some super helpful threads & chats going on over in tactics now (herne's possession/tiki-taka one is a good read for example) but we've lost a lot of people that used to light up that particular area and if we're so quick to jump on people - and I totally get it's tiring seeing this stuff - rather than help them then what's really the point?

Like footballers are only as good as their last match, any of us are only as good as our last post and whilst continual & seemingly never ending posts bashing a game we love are absolutely a colossal pain in the bottom, falling into the same trap of throwing out judgment without requisite evidence helps no-one. Yes in this OP's case it's far from what I'd class as good quality, constructive feedback, but fighting fire with fire just leads to... more fire? Hmm, that sounded better in my head, but I digress - this is boring now anyway, would much rather be playing/testing/talking about the game/tactics so I'm going to return to doing that - hopefully you all feel the same, if not have a virtual pint on me and shudder at the thought that FM05 released nearly 15 years ago (only really thought about it whilst writing this and thinking back to ye olde forum days!)

Share this post


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

Is there?  Aguero bagged 16 goals in 26 matches in my current save (I'm not managing Man City).  The following season City bought Icardi and he helped himself to 18 goals in 28 matches.

But this is the problem of reacting to such a small sample size - there will always be something odd which gets thrown out.  4 goals in 23 league matches for Aguero is a very poor return, but is it typical of what happens in game?  My equally small sample size shows otherwise.  This is why large soak tests across many matches and different saves can be more revealing as that should even out these anomalies.  Perhaps my small sample size is the oddity here and across a large soak test 4 in 23 is the typical return.  On the other hand perhaps it's the other way around.  Or something else completely.

By all means upload a game save to the Bugs forum for the devs to look at, all I'm saying is we can't draw any conclusions such as "obvious issue" or "something needs to be addressed" because it's just a reaction to a really small sample :thup:.

I think this is also somewhat supporting there is an issue.  How many players in your games are hitting the 30 goal mark....Or even the 20?  

I'm aware that one test is not enough to provide evidence, which is why I'm running multiple tests to get a more clearer picture.  In both games no player has managed to score 20 goals in a league season.  The Premier League has only ever had 3 seasons where the top scorer has scored less than 20 for context.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, optimusprimal82 said:

Is this not exactly what I said?

Yes, it is - apologies! I lost track of the last part of the paragraph you quoted.

Also, apologies if my post sounded like having a go at you, which wasn't my intention. More that your - lengthy and considered - post was a pretty good touchstone for a lot of issues/ideas I've been thinking about for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, warlock said:

Yes, it is - apologies! I lost track of the last part of the paragraph you quoted.

Also, apologies if my post sounded like having a go at you, which wasn't my intention. More that your - lengthy and considered - post was a pretty good touchstone for a lot of issues/ideas I've been thinking about for a while.

All good, I didn't think you were having a go, was just concerned that I'd misrepresented myself through my inability to write less than five thousand words! :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, optimusprimal82 said:

my inability to write less than five thousand words! :)

Infinitely better than the 'ME sucks!' posts!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...