Football Manager 2019 Official Feedback Thread

[forameuss]

1 hour ago, thejay said:

You dont think lack of movement from attacking players is a big issue, nothing 'major '? 

Whether he does or doesn't, does it really matter either way?  I never get the desperation for people to be agreed with on this kind of stuff.  I could tell you the game is perfect and has no bugs whatsoever (which wouldn't be true) or I could be told that there's 4 million game-breaking bugs (there isn't) but all that matters is what SI thinks.  If they believe there is a lack of movement from attacking players, then they'll do everything in their power to balance or ultimately fix it if it's at all possible.  If they don't believe there's a problem, there won't.  No amount of anyone agreeing or disagreeing will change that.

Get it raised with as many examples as possible, and then see what happens.

[bar333]

Another ultra realistic feature of FM19, by the way - players wanting new contracts every 6 months. Contracts aren't worth the paper they're written on in this game, been the same in FM18 and it's another issue that has simply carried over without any effort to address it. Every young player who hasn't been in utterly garbage form demands a new contract every 6 months to a year like absolute clockwork, every time with a 40-50 percent pay increase.

Edited December 20, 2018 by bar333

[Rashidi]

2 hours ago, thejay said:

You dont think lack of movement from attacking players is a big issue, nothing 'major '? 

Ok this is the fundamental issue i see that's a common theme. There are people here who expect to see the same kind of things that were on FM18 in terms of attacking movement, FM18 had no defensive shape settings. The only way to play narrow was to be defensive and that made teams even less dynamic going forward. Attacking systems carved sides out at will. I had so many videos showing how my 4312s danced their way through defences, without even trying very hard. I remember one video where they strung 5 passes centrally starting from the centre of midfield. 

Now sides can play balanced football with a narrow defensive width. You can even have sides that congest midfield with extra players then play with a narrow defensive width. 

Here is a real life example. 2015 Bayern Munich vs FC Ingolstadt 04.

Pep was in charge of Bayern, and had created a style of front foot attacking football that dominated sides in the Bundesliga, Ingolstadt came into this game and flooded the midfield. In fact their style of play proved problematic to Bayern forcing them into changing their style of play. They went into a 424 at the break and started playing long and direct balls down the line. The goal was simple, get around their midfield press.

The concept of playing with a narrow defensive width is not new, and sides have usually struggled to beat sides who set themselves up defensively. Man City's 5-0 win over Burnley in my honest opinion is another game full of quick transitional attacks. I don't remember one goal that came from them camping patiently against a stacked defence.  While I understand some people want to see the days of Juan Roman Riquelme and his exquisite defence splitting passes from the edge of the penalty box, unfortunately that was ages ago. Can i get central attacking play flowing against a stacked defence - that's very hard and I won't bother. I much rather create high percentage chances by creating overloads and hitting them with direct attacks. And i don't even play on deep defensive lines to do that, i just play on high lines, camp control midfield and then hit them when they lose the ball.

Are there issues, yes. I wish we had fewer SOT from outside the box, and wish that the AI would mark the far post at corners.

[Gegenklaus]

14 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

Ok this is the fundamental issue i see that's a common theme. There are people here who expect to see the same kind of things that were on FM18 in terms of attacking movement, FM18 had no defensive shape settings. The only way to play narrow was to be defensive and that made teams even less dynamic going forward. Attacking systems carved sides out at will. I had so many videos showing how my 4312s danced their way through defences, without even trying very hard. I remember one video where they strung 5 passes centrally starting from the centre of midfield. 

Now sides can play balanced football with a narrow defensive width. You can even have sides that congest midfield with extra players then play with a narrow defensive width. 

Here is a real life example. 2015 Bayern Munich vs FC Ingolstadt 04.

Pep was in charge of Bayern, and had created a style of front foot attacking football that dominated sides in the Bundesliga, Ingolstadt came into this game and flooded the midfield. In fact their style of play proved problematic to Bayern forcing them into changing their style of play. They went into a 424 at the break and started playing long and direct balls down the line. The goal was simple, get around their midfield press.

The concept of playing with a narrow defensive width is not new, and sides have usually struggled to beat sides who set themselves up defensively. Man City's 5-0 win over Burnley in my honest opinion is another game full of quick transitional attacks. I don't remember one goal that came from them camping patiently against a stacked defence.  While I understand some people want to see the days of Juan Roman Riquelme and his exquisite defence splitting passes from the edge of the penalty box, unfortunately that was ages ago. Can i get central attacking play flowing against a stacked defence - that's very hard and I won't bother. I much rather create high percentage chances by creating overloads and hitting them with direct attacks. And i don't even play on deep defensive lines to do that, i just play on high lines, camp control midfield and then hit them when they lose the ball.

Are there issues, yes. I wish we had fewer SOT from outside the box, and wish that the AI would mark the far post at corners.

Since when have people claimed that they want passes from the good ol’ Riquelme days????

That is not the point. The point is that you should be able to get a DLF to, you know, participate in open play because that’s what the roles supposed to do. Now there might not be space for him to operate and that’s okay if a team protects the center well. What a lot of people want is the DLF tries to drop back a bit and link play. That is just a rough example, as you probably know. I dont want each highlight to be a famous through pass that could go straight to YouTube, what I want is a lot more passes being tried played vertically, centrally - which happens all the time in real life. The success rate of that pass is down to a lot factors.

Edited December 20, 2018 by Gegenklaus

[Rashidi]

6 minutes ago, Gegenklaus said:

centrally - which happens all the time in real life

That is my point. It does not happen all the time in real life successfully. Well anyway, that's just a point of view, and like all points of view, this thread is meant to accept them all.

[Gegenklaus]

2 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

That is my point. It does not happen all the time in real life successfully.

And that’s not my point. But you do see teams try it all the time. 

Edit: Or that is somehow my point, if you get me. That it shouldnt partout be succesfully but you need to see teams try it. As they do in real life. 

Edited December 20, 2018 by Gegenklaus

[RobertPage]

I don't understand how Lukaku is still happy at United. They signed Icardi at the start of the second and Lukaku has never been a key player since. How on earth is he still at the club and happy? One of the best striker in the world happy with this game time?

[Novem9]

7 минут назад, RobertPage сказал:

One of the best striker in the world

Is he?

[RobertPage]

Just now, Novem9 said:

Is he?

in game, he's definitely up there. I'm a Liverpool fan so there's no bias here, just opinion.

[Novem9]

5 hours ago, RobertPage said:

in game, he's definitely up there. I'm a Liverpool fan so there's no bias here, just opinion.

I remember FM17 where players might have stayed for years, but Lukaku plays anyway.

I think his stats like 19/3 on your screenshot is very poor. And if he want to change club, its will be difficult to find the same in reputation and salary like he has in MU

 

Lets check the database. If we using filter of PA without old players like Zlatan, Forlan or Berbatov, Lukaku just 24 in the list:

Spoiler

In your save is 2022 year, so I change filter from 32 to 28 age and Lukaku just 16 position, without considering regens. We have just ~10 topclubs. So in my opinion this situation with Lukaku may be characterized differently.

Btw, what is price of Lukaku in your 2022?

[BadanieLuck]

@RobertPage Remember Jack Rodwell? He was staying at Sunderland until recently (even though they dropped down to League 1) because his contract was so good (70k I think) and he wouldn't get a new one anywhere near that. This happens quite often.
 

Edited December 20, 2018 by BadanieLuck

[BigV]

4 hours ago, sedge11 said:

 

I couldn't disagree with you more. I'm also doing a man utd save and have no problem winning away games. Using the same tactic as fm18 and expecting to dominate is your problem, fm19 has had a tactics overhaul and the match engine is different, so not changing what your doing and using the usual match engine is broken, just because your losing is just rubbish.

I am also using my own created 4-2-31 formation and it works perfectly fine for me, yes I do lose games but that's football, I dominate games I'm supposed to and have no issues with away games.

Also just because its similar to the default tactics doesn't guarantee it's going to work and doesn't mean you tactics aren't a problem.

What are you tactics to suggest he was wrong? Although I play different to him the same results applies. 4-1-2-3/ 4-1-4-1 I have a deep lying in defence, a BBM and a playmaker. The BBM is literally a defensive and attacking player and the fact support is the only role for it suggests he is where you want him when you need him based on attributes and off ball movement. The roles for such players are hard to work with. Pogba for example is a primary example on a roaming playmaker/mezzala but it plays like a deep lying and barely attacks because it's restricted to go further up field but dominate the mid which he can do. Adv playmaker seems like just pass the ball to him and he'll recycle it and have a few goes at breaking the lines, attack role seems to be what you want from a 3 man mid except that it messes your whole attacking forward line because support inside forwards/wingers stay stuck as he goes forward so you switch to attack which leaves 4 attacking and 5 back regardless of the other role of the CM. Not to mention they'll go up but stick to narrow positions so you need overlaps by fullbacks/wingbacks which you barely get on support (for some reason) in which case you have to use attack which then leaves you completely blind to a counter. Personally I don't think the roles do what they say in this years FM19 especially with strikers, which lies their biggest problem.  

[nikolaMo]

Quite new here on the forum but I just have to express my opinion about the new ME (19.2) . I think it got quite undeserved criticism since the update first came out. I read all the critical comments on this thread on the ME and felt quite pessimistic about playing my save with this new ME. But , after I played one whole season I must mention that this is undoubtedly the most balanced and fun to play ME since a long time. Never had and seen any major issues and angry moments in this ME. In my saves conceeding from long shots and free k. is quite balanced , I haven't seen any poor movement from my striker ( although my striker has world class OTB and Mental attr.) . And through balls ,although I don't see them a lot (which i shouldn't in my opinion) , i see them enough and when I do , they're quite magnificent plays. Off course they are some issues which are kind of annoying like heading the ball when the player has the space and time to put the ball at feet (mentioned issue above) and some central movement issues. Heading and crossing isn't OP anymore which is excellent , long shots may be somewhat strong but just tweak your defence a bit and you'll tune it down. All in all , seeing a lot of variety of goals ,even in AI vs AI matches , lots of goals overall which I personally like and that's why I enjoy the current ME a lot.

[Totalfootballfan]

I find very often defenders show no intelligence at all when they handle high flying balls, they create scoring opportunities for the opposition attackers out of thin air

In the video below you can view a typical case which represent what I’m talking about

There are 3 simple and obvious options what Wendell(defender) could do after the ball was sent toward him:

 

1) He could allow the ball land on the pitch and then took control over it

2) He could take control over the ball with his chest

3) He could head it back to GK

 

Instead of those simple and obvious options from above, Wendell two times made an extremely weirdly looking decision to head it back into 50/50% challenge where his teammate and the opposition attacker should fight for the ball!

In every match I encounter countless amount of cases when defenders creates scoring chances for the opposition attackers by heading the ball toward them instead picking other simple and logic options from the list above, especially, when there’s no pressure at all.

 

There are many cases in every match where the balls trajectory allows defender to take control over it with their chests or they can let it land on the pitch and then take control over it but instead of that they head it toward the opposition attackers…

 

 

 

[fourfourtwo89]

Please raise this in the bug forum. The header problem is huge. A lot of balls are lost, because players head the ball instead of just control the ball with their feet.

[Dagenham_Dave]

3 hours ago, BadanieLuck said:

@RobertPage Remember Jack Rodwell? He was staying at Sunderland until recently (even though they dropped down to League 1) because his contract was so good (70k I think) 
 

I hate Jack Rodwell more than I hate the Tories. And that's a lot. 

[LukasZ_VCF]

Hi I have really important fast question (because I want to proceed with my game ;D)  I am wondering because in last season (it was my 1st season) I had holidays after almost end of June because my reserve team was playing playoffs to promote to Segunda Division in Spain, they are safe there 4th place I think, so now I can go on holidays like on 8th of June, but I can add training session and then it change to another week...

 

So can I train my players still without any problems later, or if the holidays will be too short I might have some problems later like players complaining, something bad with morale, stamina, jadeness or something?

 

How long it should be?

[joemez1193]

On 19/12/2018 at 17:10, iiMStevo said:

3. Away games are guaranteed losses or draws, so you need to win your entire season at home.

OK. 

[iiMStevo]

18 hours ago, Svenc said:

 

If you pair a box to box alongside to an advanced playmaker, you basically flush your entire midfield empty in Possession, leaving not merely yards of space behind, but also compress the space your side can operate in. The 4-2-3-1 in-game translates to something inherently top heavy as is visibly as of the game. If both the central midfield positions are encouraged Forward, you lose all protection to your backline, and also in tendency make Players virtually "sit atop of each other" in Terms of attack. Bluntly put, you don't have a defense anymore, and you cripple your attacks. Doesn't happen in football for prolonged minutes anywhere. This typically leads to added rushed/deflected shots, as well as tackles/deflections leadingn to additionally set pieces (and shots off them in crowded boxes by definition) -- as defenders have an easier time of getting a foot into the move and engage the ball carrier. It's harder to cover an area the size of a fully pitch than one the size of barely the final third. You will also find it far easier to Control Possession if at least one central midfielder also stays Deep -- he's going to be your Busqets.

Part of the issue is that 1) FM allows such and similar without much further ado (AI until more recent could sporadically do it too). Despite it not much happening in real football. And 2) perhaps that part of the feedback may encourage such, as you found -- you picked the most assistant recommended roles. Arguably there's also a third issue, which is that the AI isn't intelligent enough to systematically exploit such obvious "spaces". Results are further randomized by that. Some AI approaches completely exploit this (and defend it far better), others not so much. Nobody can guarantee that you like what you see if you fix a few things. The game after all tends to have issues. However, results would very likely improve.

What you describe btw has been a fairly popular mainstay of communities sharing tactics for many many years.

So if the roles are so important, why aren't they explained better in-game?
There's one screen you can hover your mouse over to find out what the role is and to get a brief description of what benefits it brings to the team, but it doesn't state any cons for choosing that role. What role midfielder matches with an AP that doesn't shoot your tactics down?

It also doesn't really make much sense in that the team fail to play football entirely, simply because a midfielder is playing the wrong role. As I stated, before it was impossible to win away games and only narrowly win home games using a custom tactic (that happened to match Control Possession) against any level of opposition because the roles I assigned weren't compatible. If tactics are that irrelevant, surely there should be a way to manage the roles better and find out exactly how the roles interact with one another, rather than just having the assistant say "He's good at that, pick that one".

Edited December 20, 2018 by iiMStevo

[Neil Brock]

On 19/12/2018 at 17:10, iiMStevo said:

3. Away games are guaranteed losses or draws, so you need to win your entire season at home.

 

8 minutes ago, joemez1193 said:

OK. 



Wish someone had told my Karlsruhe side this. 

If i'd got as many points at home as I did away I could have finished top 4  

[sedge11]

5 hours ago, BigV said:

What are you tactics to suggest he was wrong? Although I play different to him the same results applies. 4-1-2-3/ 4-1-4-1 I have a deep lying in defence, a BBM and a playmaker. The BBM is literally a defensive and attacking player and the fact support is the only role for it suggests he is where you want him when you need him based on attributes and off ball movement. The roles for such players are hard to work with. Pogba for example is a primary example on a roaming playmaker/mezzala but it plays like a deep lying and barely attacks because it's restricted to go further up field but dominate the mid which he can do. Adv playmaker seems like just pass the ball to him and he'll recycle it and have a few goes at breaking the lines, attack role seems to be what you want from a 3 man mid except that it messes your whole attacking forward line because support inside forwards/wingers stay stuck as he goes forward so you switch to attack which leaves 4 attacking and 5 back regardless of the other role of the CM. Not to mention they'll go up but stick to narrow positions so you need overlaps by fullbacks/wingbacks which you barely get on support (for some reason) in which case you have to use attack which then leaves you completely blind to a counter. Personally I don't think the roles do what they say in this years FM19 especially with strikers, which lies their biggest problem.  

You don't need to tell me how the roles work, I know how they work.

Well as he said its impossible to win away, when its clearly not. Saying just because his set up is similar to the default tactics that its not his tactics and its the match engine, shows he's not willing to look at his tactics or change anything, just wants to blame the game for losing. When clearly his tactics aren't working, and maybe if he changes something, whether that's player roles, instructions or whatever, something could click and work, he clearly needs to actually look at his tactics instead of just blaming the game.

As you asked about my tactics, this is how I set up

Both my wing backs are on support and get forward often, so you don't have to use them on attack duty at all. My midfield 2, 3 if you include Pogba doesn't mess up my winger and inside forward, Bailey as the winger stays wide and does his job, Lingard as my back right winger did particularly well in my 1st season, and on the left Rashford/Martial as an inside forward does exactly what I would expect of the role, cutting inside and supporting the striker.

The roles are never going to work perfect on fm, because I.'m sure as you probably realise, it clearly isn't an easy job to get the balance of the ME right for everyone's liking, the strikers is a known issue, but it's not impossible to get a striker scoring plenty of goals.

 

[Svenc]

52 minutes ago, iiMStevo said:

It also doesn't really make much sense in that the team fail to play football entirely, simply because a midfielder is playing the wrong role. 

It's not so much that you "simply give a midfielder a wrong role". The combination of both the CMs within that inherently top heavy 4-2-3-1 formation basically means that you don't have a midfield anymore (to slightly exaggerate).  And the players follow suit. For as long as any AI Opposition doesn't do similar, they will find it far more easy to control the middle of the park, regardless of any player quality.

I agree on that feedback front. For instance, the tactical UI could show the attacking shape you genrally encourage if you fiddle with the roles. That should instantly make one question whether you simply pick what's recommended as any player's prefered role. This is hypothetical, but if you ever would take over a Squad of entirelly defenders, the assistant would all recommend them to field as a Defender in a role that purely may suit their Attributes best. Here it's more obvious, as if you would do that -- would you have a functional System/Team plaing exclusively defenders? No, you would compromise. Those guys may be learned defenders, but they are still footballers, and if you had no other choice, you'd field them as midfielders/forwards to have a functional team. 

With the difference in roles within a position (say CM), it's somewhat more subtle. Some central midfielder roles push forward, some additionally encourage players to roam from their position -- others encourage them to hold their position mainly. 

I generally would wish the game would move away from micro tweaking into such possibly "nonsensicals" and move the tactical side of the game towards more refined actual football tactical decisions and battles… not for me to decide though.  

 

 

[iiMStevo]

...

...clearly people don't understand what exaggerating, to emphasise a point, is on these forum boards.
+1 to the super-original guys posting evidence of winning away matches.

 

The problem still stands. Roles are far too important when constructing tactics, and there's nothing at all in-game that suggests that changing roles can have an adverse affect on the tactics themselves. My players have gone from standing still with the ball "searching for a pass" with blatant passing options available, and passing the ball straight to the opposition to passing the ball to players without even looking, whilst using the same tactics. So what are they being taught in training if not how to utilise the tactics with their given roles? Because your role dictates that you play 5 yards higher up the pitch, does that mean you're incapable of pressing the opposition now? Does it also mean that the guy who is now 5 yards closer to you, cannot be seen anymore?

It's clearly an issue in-game if the tactical system doesn't function unless it's perfectly assigned to the correct roles.
Also as someone said earlier that I'm supposed to be changing my tactics on the fly in games, and if that's also required, yet role assignments appear to break customised tactics, then surely that contradicts itself since changing tactics will mean the role assignments are no longer valid/suitable, and as a result means you get the 10000-1 odds of someone doing a backflip scissor kick from the centre circle, that lobs the keeper, twice!, all the while getting a red card. (In case the people return that don't understand emphasis, sarcasm, and other methods of point iteration... that doesn't really happen in game, but it wouldn't be such a farfetched scenario with some of the stuff that actually does happen in game...)

[BigV]

6 minutes ago, sedge11 said:

You don't need to tell me how the roles work, I know how they work.

Well as he said its impossible to win away, when its clearly not. Saying just because his set up is similar to the default tactics that its not his tactics and its the match engine, shows he's not willing to look at his tactics or change anything, just wants to blame the game for losing. When clearly his tactics aren't working, and maybe if he changes something, whether that's player roles, instructions or whatever, something could click and work, he clearly needs to actually look at his tactics instead of just blaming the game.

As you asked about my tactics, this is how I set up

Both my wing backs are on support and get forward often, so you don't have to use them on attack duty at all. My midfield 2, 3 if you include Pogba doesn't mess up my winger and inside forward, Bailey as the winger stays wide and does his job, Lingard as my back right winger did particularly well in my 1st season, and on the left Rashford/Martial as an inside forward does exactly what I would expect of the role, cutting inside and supporting the striker.

The roles are never going to work perfect on fm, because I.'m sure as you probably realise, it clearly isn't an easy job to get the balance of the ME right for everyone's liking, the strikers is a known issue, but it's not impossible to get a striker scoring plenty of goals.

 

I was referring to the role of the BBM and theoretical to the persons tactics, realistically it works but in game it doesn't. I think his frustration caused the wrong point in that the fact is it's harder to win away and regardless of what you're using you are going to struggle, seen it myself and many others have had the same. I even made an early post with several scrn shots and they toned it in the major update. It's still somewhat hard to win away but less frequent. Okay he maybe "mourinho esque" but if he's used the same tactics through several fm's surely its a fitting tactic unless the ME disallows it "breaking the ME". I was concluding in terms of a 3 man mid rather than a CAM, I think players should use their own tactics, if some don't work for top teams like united such as possession, quick play etc with fairly top players then is it really the user's fault? to me no but i understand the other side. 

As for the roles you're right but you'd expect them to be close to what you want or when/how to instruct them. 17 was perfect role uses as almost every role fit its purpose with fairly uses of stats/positioning/ movement being like that of the role, this ME tends to show wide players being narrow when wide tactics are used, striker movement hindering wing play and the fact that central play is real poor and flanks are used shows the ME is heavily one sided. If they perfected this ME it'd be the best by far, 17 is still ahead in terms of comparison. 

[booble]

hi everyone i have finished the first season with man utd. i thought i give my feedback.

Ai teams too defensive even when 10 mins to go and 2 nil down. Boring as well

Strikers miss too many 1 on 1

throw ins straight to opponent

defenders dont do well with long balls

Could not adjust budget when signing players even though I had enough money. bug?

Players complain too much about play time. eg Lindelof fellaini. Not realistic. havent complained in irl. mainly happened at the start of season

Rojo unhappy cant join cska. why join rubbish team for low wages?

At the end of season, players are available on the cheap. frenkie De jong 25 million, when in transfer window ajax wanted 100 million. Hugely annoying please fix!!!

At the end of seasons all teams should all get the transfer budgets updated as only English teams are buying everyone because the rest of the world has not had it transfer budgets updated.

Ai should reject lowest offer even if has accepted bid. In my save Liverpool bid first 25 million for frenkie De jong and accepted. Then arsenal bid 50 and man city bid 65. All accepted. I can reject the lowest offer even if accepted why cant ai?

Lots of newgens with dual nationality. Dunno if realistic or not

Wolves sack manager because they finished 17^th even though they won the fa cup. Seems harsh. pochettino also sacked and finished 5th

Far too many players are being transfer listed. Liverpool have listed oxo, lallana and Sturridge When was the last time a player was transfer-listed irl?

If player is unhappy after a while you can buy player for peanuts. Not realistic

so many transfer offers for my players that i have to pay wages. then just include clause to pay £1 and they accept. really irritating.

Edited December 20, 2018 by booble

[CFuller]

4 minutes ago, booble said:

Rojo unhappy cant join cska. why join rubbish team for low wages?

He wants first-team football, perhaps?

5 minutes ago, booble said:

Players complain too much about play time. eg Lindelof fellaini. Not realistic

How often are you playing them, and what are their squad statuses?

5 minutes ago, booble said:

Lots of newgens with dual nationality. Dunno if realistic or not

It's very realistic. Many, many players have multiple nationalities nowadays. Just look at the makeup of the France squad that won the World Cup.

[Novem9]

1 час назад, Neil Brock сказал:

If i'd got as many points at home as I did away I could have finished top 4  

Спойлер

 

[LukasZ_VCF]

1 hour ago, LukasZ_VCF said:

Hi I have really important fast question (because I want to proceed with my game ;D)  I am wondering because in last season (it was my 1st season) I had holidays after almost end of June because my reserve team was playing playoffs to promote to Segunda Division in Spain, they are safe there 4th place I think, so now I can go on holidays like on 8th of June, but I can add training session and then it change to another week...

 

So can I train my players still without any problems later, or if the holidays will be too short I might have some problems later like players complaining, something bad with morale, stamina, jadeness or something?

 

How long it should be?

Anyone?

[akkm]

On 04/12/2018 at 04:23, akkm said:

Where are you getting your one on one scoring probability from

attached is a counterpoint to above (big chances). Last season of premiership with big chances detailed for certain players...for 20 players attached...the average conversion rate of big chances is 51%...ranging from 70% to 37%...even the much maligned morata converted 37% of his big chances

The average of the top 5 is 63pc

 

I know you will say big chances can include tap ins but the vardy is top at 70%...impression wise at least he gets a fair amount of chances from balls over the top and running into space for one on ones rather than excess amounts of tap ins...other players on that list are not all about tap ins either and anyway average for 20 players over the course of the season is actually over 51% conversion rate of big chances is significantly higher than the base of 20% which I've seen in one calc for Xg layered on for a big chance.

In essence...big chances conversion rates can and do vary individual to individual...that's just simple math as well

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/11479251/premier-league-forwards-romelu-lukaku-harry-kane-mohamed-salah-and-more-compared

 

17 hours ago, Svenc said:

Just seen this, sorry late, busy month. Don't know how exactly Opta data constitue "Big Chances" these days, on their website it's become a little wooly. However, statistically, we are entering the topics of "small sample sizes" and "Regression to the mean" here. Not only do all of these numbers on the Big Chance list trigger that  potentially issue, as Players on that list average like 20 of such chances over the entire Season (which suggests the Definition is fairly strict and only the higher end of chances apply). If Vardy holds such an edge over the average, he won't keep it for Long. If he would he would be the most desired forward in world football. The smaller the sample size, the more significant the amount of chance. There are also a number of penalty takers in the modern game who have like a 100% record -- however, they all tend to have about 20 penalties or less. Eventually, they will not convert, or they'd be likely aliens.  That's also the reason why on every seasonal "top free kick taker in Europe" graphics published there tends to be a player or two who never appear again. Free kicks are additionally special, in that it only takes 2 or 3 Goals to score off them, and you may make it onto such a list.

Likewise to how Salah this term only just about "fulfills" his xG  (his about +7 overperformance was the highest he had in recent years). It's still "just" a suggested" added Goal roughly every 6th league match over what you would expect, that is based on the finishes he had. Some of his chances however may have been weaker ones, or not at all happened with a different Forward -- xG doesn't account for positioning skills, after all. It purely tries to gauge a difference in finishing ability. On FM likewise, the chance is far more important than the player.  My numbers ultimately don't matter at all. It's SI's numbers that matter. They may hugely contradict much what is broadcast on TV all the time, including many punditry cliches towards forwards/finishers and generally chance conversion. All the more reason to get some added valuable feedback in there...

My point wasn't about vardy tho. There was the quote that big chances start as probability of being scored at 20pc but average of top twenty players over course of a season is significantly higher than that. I cited vardy more as an example of one on ones which see repeatedly quoted as 1 in 3 chances are scored from but cannot see that anywhere on the net lol. Absoutely he will more than likely revert to the mean but his average conversion of 3 seasons before this is 53% so again that is significantly better than 20pc or 1 in 3 one on ones...interestingly last two seasons is 66pc...so is he improving. Also his ability beyond conversion rate of big chances would be factored into being the most desired forward in world football...after all whilst big teams create big chances a forwards ability to operate in tight spaces to link, move and finish would be more important factors to consider...no point signing a vardy no matter how high his conversion of big chances is if his other attributes don't contribute against deeper lying defences which they would be required to...big teams are not assessing a forward exclusively for their big chance conversion rate so wouldn't make him the most desired forward in the world especially as big teams aren't hanging around waiting for an opportunity to play a player with brilliant big chance conversion a la vardy over the top just to utilise that conversion rate...going down that road would mean they wouldn't be very successful at the top level and no longer a big team 

the average for the 20 players over the course of the season was 51% which is significantly higher than but I read on squawka average big chance conversion rate for premier league is 43.4pc so again that's a far cry from the base 20pc. Also the 43pc is an average so you would actually have players achieving rates north of that and some may consistently do so. 

Saw another thing where teams top ten wise with most big chances missed (in absolute numbers) was quoted for last 5 years (cant find article since but I had copied the table over, may have been 3 years but think 5)...the average conversion rate for them was 44%...so that's team wide for 5 years so takes the anomalous elements out of it and is sufficient sample size to start framing expectations from...at least ballpark wise

You can't start to compare deviations with free kicks to pens either as you say...the percentage conversion of free kicks lends itself to random spikes either way but conversion of big chances is far higher than free kicks so it's a redundant comparison to make.

Bottom line is the big chances ARE scored at higher rates than so they stand alone so when one expects these chances to be converted at higher rates than normal chances in FM there is real world statistical justification for this premise. Some may well have expectations higher than real world but suggesting a 20pc base for big chances it's misleading and underestimating how these chances are scored and again as an average with poor chance conversion dragging it down instances/runs of these chances being converted at higher rates will also occur...I havent seen many on these forums talk of their strikers converting 60/70pc of their one on ones even in the short term !!!!

[Svenc]

4 hours ago, akkm said:

 suggesting a 20pc base for big chances it's misleading and underestimating how these chances are scored and again as an average with poor chance conversion dragging it down instances/runs of these chances being converted at higher rates will also occur...I havent seen many on these forums talk of their strikers converting 60/70pc of their one on ones even in the short term !!!!

The average shot conversion in Football is About 10%. Therefore, anything significantly higher tends to be considered a "big/ger Chance". This used to apply for Opta also (https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2013/feb/24/football-numbers-game-gary-neville).  You can check that matchs highlhights still on Youtube, btw. Naturally, the gap between a "17% Chance" and a " 67% chance" is huge, which is why these "big Chance" stats are so wooly.  I've never been a fan of the in-game CCC stat, but it shares the same weakness. It lumps all Kinds of stuff together. The Overall figures look somewhat comparable to Opta Big Chance numbers. In this case, it was 63% of "CCCs" converted (own Team) vs 41% for the Opposition (average therefore About 50%).

As to one on ones, there should be a significant Variation at play. Inevitably, there are going to be more difficult one on ones and easier ones. Generally as Simon Gleave on Twitter more recent also put it for the average, open nets are simply better chances, and generally one on ones are rated as they are for reason. Let's go with Gleave's numbers, which is the ~40%. Missing a couple of those in sequence still is probable, as a 40% Chance of scoring means a 60% chance of not converting. My 20% "calculation" was meant to represent a possible scenario where the one on ones would be all of a more difficult ilk. Which is possible in particular considering how oftenly AI tends to extremely "park that bus" to spoil.  As an example of this, seethis one off an older release (<- Video linked inside). I don't consider the Forward scoring 1 in 5 of those averageto be outrageous for a couple reasons. I also don't think many would report if they had an "above average" conversion of one on ones for the same reasons that "too few" injuries would be never reported: Frustration triggers response. However, for the sake of it, I could. I could show one on ones scored in sequence on FM19. However, my test if you have seen it was deeply flawed as I nuked one teams defense -- and those one on ones are certainly easier scenarios than the one in the FM15 Video. Like, this (Team red are the attacking side). If there is a singificant issue with a specific type of on one one (which there could), this likely wouldn't Show much of it. The player missing all six in a match may upload the match to SI so that they have a check -- and SI may provide benchmarks to their players WHAT THEY aim for in Terms of one on ones -- whilst at the same time ensuring that misses/saves as well as Goals tend to look "plausible". Given that they have been teamed up with the former Prozoners for so Long (STATS nowadays), it seems unlikely that they have access to numbers that are completely off.



 

 

Edited December 21, 2018 by Svenc

[Rashidi]

@Svenc @akkm I am just going to be happy with my big chance conversion numbers.  The term Big Chance, i think really took off with xG analysis, from situations where sides were not scoring enough from their big chances alludes to not creating enough quality chances.  That term started getting used quite a lot.

There  are some good site out there with a fair amount of analysis like this one.  I like his analysis of how he breaks down Chelsea's performances using a variety of tools on his blog.

https://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation.com/2018/5/9/17335666/chelsea-create-the-fewest-good-chances-in-the-league-and-are-third-worst-at-finishing-them

Jamie Vardy for instance this season, has a big chance conversion of only 20%, Richarlison has something closer to 85%. As a league premiership clubs on average have a 53.7% on target conversion rate for big chances, with Crystal having the worst efficiency rating at .4 and Fulham being the best at 1.49. If Fulham can produce more quality chances they probably wouldn't be faring so poorly, City which has a big chance efficiency rate of 1.01 has created more chances than any other team, and has a big chance on target conversion rate of around 56.8%.  Raheem Sterling, in that team,  has a big chance on target conversion rate of 100% has scored 8 goals from his 7 big chances.

This kinda information is available, and it does suggest very strongly that one needs to understand how this can be applied to Football Manager, i have a video coming along where I do a Big Chance Analysis in Football Manager. The issue I have with the way data is handled is that this is never objective. xG analysis by some sites works on the basis of defining big chances and they use various metrics to do this. Even headers are notorious for being misinterpreted as clear cut chances by many people. I have never believed one minute that a header is a clear cut chance, so when we go into the game we need to do a rigorous analysis ourselves as to what constitutes a big chance.

Even recently I had an episode go out where a through ball from the attacking middle of the pitch put through a player for a one on one with a keeper. The game didn't consider it as a CCC probably because of the time between controlling the ball and executing the shot. That does make some sense, but someone insisted that it was a CCC or a Big Chance. Last year i went through 100 games and had a 12% deviation between what the game constitutes a big chance and what I think a big chance is.  Not everyone is going to agree what a big chance is, but what we can all agree on is how important crafting good chances are in the game.

Data from the league suggests that sides like Fulham who have such a high big chance conversion rate, need to actually increase the number and quality of chances that fall within the danger zone so that they can move up from the bottom of the table. The danger zone is a notoriously small area. 

With Stalybridge late last season i actually sat through a host of my games to do my own SIBOT analysis. (Shots inside the box on target), i found that my winning streak was actually an anomaly. I was dumb lucking my way to survival and i had to change my system so that i could get more goals from inside the danger zone. We improved our cutbacks and increased how we got our through balls into the final third. The system was modified and we actually turned a corner. With Liverpool, I compared an old favorite tactic of mine to a current 4231, and discovered that my old favourite of mine had a similar SIBOT for opposition sides as well. So while i had a big chance conversion of 60%, so did the opposition. So we switched to the 4231.

I know I need to generate at least 20 shots in a game to win matches now with Liverpool. And I know that i can do it using different mentalities without changing my tactic very much. There are players in my side who have a better Key Pass completion ratio than others and they are the ones who usually play. 

Is there enough variety in big chances? This is a funny question. If you had asked me at the start of the season with 5 matches played I would have said no. Now with nearly half the season gone, I am seeing a variety of goals. Some have come from back heels played in the box. others have come from tight through balls played in cramped spaces in the penalty box. Others have come from defence splitting passes started from midfield. Others have predictably come from wide players doing those curly through balls that are now commonplace.

I am really going off tangent, but this discussion of big chances really got me interested. Yeah that video on big chance analysis will be coming soon, where i share what i think are the 4 common areas these will come from. At the moment, I expect my big chance conversion with a good side to be around 60%, that would be the minimum acceptable level. Now I also notice that i usually only create 1-2 CCC's per game. That is inline with my expectation and which would suggest that at 60% i would be scoring 1 goal every game or at least every 2 games. And that is simply following the CCC metric thats already in the game without us having to go and making a new statistical category that can be notoriously difficult to define. (Anyone still agree headers are ccc?, not me).

 

 

 

 

[westy8chimp]

1 hour ago, Rashidi said:

. (Anyone still agree headers are ccc?, not me).

 

As you say, completely subjective.

I like playing a target man so will go out of my way to sign someone like Matt Smith and put a system in place to get good crosses into the box. If my wb/winger puts one on or around the penalty spot... And Matt Smith can run onto it... That's how I score my goals so would consider that a big chance. 

But then in fairness I don't consider a one on one a big chance for Smith if he obtains the ball outside the box... I know his touch and acceleration and finishing isn't good enough for me to get excited. 

Should big chance calculation be dynamic to consider the player? 

[thejay]

vor 20 Stunden schrieb Gegenklaus:

Since when have people claimed that they want passes from the good ol’ Riquelme days????

That is not the point. The point is that you should be able to get a DLF to, you know, participate in open play because that’s what the roles supposed to do. Now there might not be space for him to operate and that’s okay if a team protects the center well. What a lot of people want is the DLF tries to drop back a bit and link play. That is just a rough example, as you probably know. I dont want each highlight to be a famous through pass that could go straight to YouTube, what I want is a lot more passes being tried played vertically, centrally - which happens all the time in real life. The success rate of that pass is down to a lot factors.

Exactly, I don't expect to play 90s footbal.

 

 

The point is the new defensive shapes have killed attacking movement , maybe it was never great in the first place and combinations were only possible because of the bad defensive shapes. 

 

 

But in fm 19 the lack of movement of attacking players is fully exposed, together with the new defensive shapes makes it a cross and set piece fest. 

 

If that is intended what is the point of the tactics creator with different styles like tiki taka which is not possible in the match engine? Or why is ai Guardiola playing nothing like real life and is almost always sacked in my saves? 

 

 

The issue is also acknowledged

here by si staff:

Zitat

Thanks for all your feedback guys, this issue is under review, I feel that a large part of the lack of through balls in the final third is down to poor attacking movement, but we'll see!

The nature of this kind of issue is very tricky, since there's the potential of all kinds of knock-ons. That means that we can't give a timeframe on any fixes, however it's one of the key areas we will be looking to improve in the future.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 21, 2018 by thejay

[rdbayly]

2 hours ago, thejay said:

Exactly, I don't expect to play 90s footbal.

 

 

The point is the new defensive shapes have killed attacking movement , maybe it was never great in the first place and combinations were only possible because of the bad defensive shapes. 

 

 

But in fm 19 the lack of movement of attacking players is fully exposed, together with the new defensive shapes makes it a cross and set piece fest. 

 

If that is intended what is the point of the tactics creator with different styles like tiki taka which is not possible in the match engine? Or why is ai Guardiola playing nothing like real life and is almost always sacked in my saves? 

 

 

The issue is also acknowledged

here by si staff:

 

 

 

 

The algorithm used to determine how defensive an AI team sets up against you is producing dire spectacles. I've just played Burton Albion, who are expected to secure a play-off spot (above me) in the first season. They elect to play a flat back 5 and 2 DMs, which results in them having zero attempts on goal. Obviously I find it hard to break them down as my players lack the quality to unlock static defences. The end result? I score a couple of goals (of course) from the endless set pieces they concede from a billion blocked crosses / shots.

They switch to a gung-ho 343 in the 85th minute, which is too extreme and too late to change the outcome of the match. For me, this has been the blueprint for countless matches over a number of saves. I can't recall an FM I've enjoyed less, which is remarkable given I'm consistently exceeding expectations. 

Edited December 21, 2018 by rdbayly

[bar333]

It really is absurd, the AI's insistence on parking the bus has got to be toned down massively. I do think the ME has improved with the patches but this is just dragging the game down. Teams that aren't **** shouldn't be so fearful, and there has to be context - I'm so sick of seeing teams parking the bus in cup games where nothing is gained from it.

As @rdbayly says it's often even detrimental to their own chances. I repeatedly see the AI being say 2-0 down after 60 minutes but still persisting with the park the bus tactic up until the 80th minute, they simply don't try to attack before the 80th minute no matter what.

The truly infuriating thing is that these tactics are far more effective than they are IRL due to the strength of set pieces. It's not even playing for draws - you can quite easily and reliably get 1-0's from a free kick or a corner.

[robot_skeleton]

45 minutes ago, bar333 said:

It really is absurd, the AI's insistence on parking the bus has got to be toned down massively. I do think the ME has improved with the patches but this is just dragging the game down. Teams that aren't **** shouldn't be so fearful, and there has to be context - I'm so sick of seeing teams parking the bus in cup games where nothing is gained from it.

As @rdbayly says it's often even detrimental to their own chances. I repeatedly see the AI being say 2-0 down after 60 minutes but still persisting with the park the bus tactic up until the 80th minute, they simply don't try to attack before the 80th minute no matter what.

The truly infuriating thing is that these tactics are far more effective than they are IRL due to the strength of set pieces. It's not even playing for draws - you can quite easily and reliably get 1-0's from a free kick or a corner.

There's so much wrong with my tactics or FM19 that I can't even start to count it. Decision making (long shots, long balls, lack of through balls, crosses vs dribbles, way too many set-pieces and blocks from wide defenders), positioning (both defensively and in attacking phase: central players on top of each other, strikers not dropping, lack of movement, overpowered set-pieces). Started over so many times, that I just realized, I'm either not good enough to play this or there is something seriously wrong with the game. Never really had problems with losing, but in this year's FM nothing makes sense and when players stop doing what I ask them to do or ignore everything I can't learn from it, even when I win it just feels wrong. There is no "continuity" from my players, in that if I set up to achieve certain types of movements and score certain types of goals I would expect them to do it - and succeed at doing so or fail because of problems but the "trying part" is simply not there, I see hardly any of that, players try exactly the opposite of what I want them, regardless of how low/high the mentality is, how many teammates are available.

[fidelitywars]

14 minutes ago, robot_skeleton said:

There's so much wrong with my tactics or FM19 that I can't even start to count it. Decision making (long shots, long balls, lack of through balls, crosses vs dribbles, way too many set-pieces and blocks from wide defenders), positioning (both defensively and in attacking phase: central players on top of each other, strikers not dropping, lack of movement, overpowered set-pieces). Started over so many times, that I just realized, I'm either not good enough to play this or there is something seriously wrong with the game. Never really had problems with losing, but in this year's FM nothing makes sense and when players stop doing what I ask them to do or ignore everything I can't learn from it, even when I win it just feels wrong. There is no "continuity" from my players, in that if I set up to achieve certain types of movements and score certain types of goals I would expect them to do it - and succeed at doing so or fail because of problems but the "trying part" is simply not there, I see hardly any of that, players try exactly the opposite of what I want them, regardless of how low/high the mentality is, how many teammates are available.

Exactly how I feel. Pretty much just waiting hopefully for the next public beta update now; have played CM/FM since CM3 and this is the first version i've completely downed tools with. I find that my teams win but by means entirely opposed to those by which i've set them to up to do so and as such, it all just seems so hollow and joyless. Real shame as everything outside of the ME is astonishing good. Weird one - I don't regret buying it but as it is currently, can't play it.

[robot_skeleton]

6 minutes ago, fidelitywars said:

Exactly how I feel. Pretty much just waiting hopefully for the next public beta update now; have played CM/FM since CM3 and this is the first version i've completely downed tools with. I find that my teams win but by means entirely opposed to those by which i've set them to up to do so and as such, it all just seems so hollow and joyless. Real shame as everything outside of the ME is astonishing good. Weird one - I don't regret buying it but as it is currently, can't play it.

I feel the same about purchasing, this is a very good game, developed in so many areas compared to previous versions, it's just that I don't enjoy it at all.

Another thing is that I did try the custom made tactics that are available in game, and they were quite successful, so in that sense the problem lies in me, but for me the game loses its appeal if I don't use my own ideas, go through my thought process in building a tactic. Using one that is ready made is just not at all enjoyable.

[Piperita]

Now that I have finally finished my half season of testing and actually played a bit again, a few more points:

---Interviews for counter-based teams. My two main systems are based on solid defenses and quick transitions. I regularly have only around 40% possession or less but in every game am the clearly better team: My opponents mostly only get shots from standards or from the distance; in the current season I only conceded 5 ccc in 21 games while producing 29 myself. Yet almost every game the media comes and goes how I was outplayed and lucky and so on. I lead the table by ten points! While I am glad my assistant finally shuts up about possession, the media is getting even worse!

---Long shots and direct free kicks. Sure, I invite my opponents to try them but when even my DM with five long shots scores from the distance every third game on average, something feels off. (But weirdly enough his replacement does not have this 'problem' with an 11). 

---Woodwork and what counts as ccc weird me out! 

---Training: Some players are never happy, are they? First those weirdos cry for more physical training. After one extra session, the same cry it is too much. My star striker demands to improve his penalties but the second I add it in, he cries he feels overworked.

(But I feel bad for giving my players two endurance and one quickness unit on Christmas Eve. But that is what happens when they are outrun in the 80s on the 23rd.)

---The game feels a lot more balanced by the score. In the beta I regularly had games with five goals plus as normal state. In the early release my defense was almost incapable of conceding. Now it is a lot harder to wall oneself and I get some odd goals here and there. While long shots are a bit too strong in my opinion, I like how opponents try them when walled off .

---Counter attacks feel really rewarding because they are just played out so well and realistically. 

---Header clearances too often go into bad spaces

---Is it just me or are matches a lot slower now? Even with no highlights at all, it is faster to close the game and restart everything than to let a half play through. 

---edit: My Target man. Down at 80% fitness, having played three English weeks in a row. I want him to rest a game. He says he's fine. I ask him if he can live with coming in as sub. Nope. I play him because I want to soften him up for a new contract. Five minutes in, injured while sprinting. 

Some players are naturally inclined to give it their all and have these demands, I get that. But he is set as rotation and literally played the most out of my team. Just why? I was almost tempted tongive him a bad conduct warning afterwards...

Edited December 21, 2018 by Piperita

[Rashidi]

On 20/12/2018 at 08:20, Svenc said:

Additioinally, don't make AI pick extremely spoil tactics purely geared towards squeezing space in their final third that oftenly.  Spoilsports are a part of footie, but things don't tend to be that one-dimensional for sides at the top as oft as in the game. A section of players still haven't realized that they are going to dominate all those simple stats come the end of the match by definition then. Nothing at all awesome about it. Dominating shots isn't dominating (Germany at the WC anyone).

I just read this, this is funny cos I just played a game where the AI was set up with 10 players behind the halfway line and only 1 striker. 

“Here we go time to break the wall down”. We finally won late in the game, it was a case of being patient and trying to draw them left, right, round and round. I have to admit I was laughing for most of the game realising that I would probably do the same thing against a side out for their 18th straight win in all competitions. 

I eventually resorted to telling my players to just plaster the goal with shots from anywhere. With so many players in the box, any kind of a deflection would be a good one.

[booble]

the ai transfer logic, ai contract negotiations and ai squad building seriously needs a revamp. its been a long time coming. really think this will transform the game and make the game more challenging. too easy to sign the best players.

2 teams bid 34, 54 and me bid 60 for de ligt. yet ajax accepted all 3 offers despite me offering the highest bid.

bought skrinar for 70 million. transfer list bailly has 1 year left on contract. get 50 million from inter despite napoli having already had a bid accepted for 36.5. why not offer the same amount as napoli or slightly more?

4 teams are in contract negotiations for frenkie de jong. i offered 100pw. signs for man city for 120pw. after an 1 hour of reloading the save file and making an improved offer he finally signs for me with significant improved wages and bonuses. instead of me reloading the file why not give the agent the ability to renegotiate the contract with other teams even if contract offered. for example agent can come back and say i will sign for you tomorrow if you give me x amount wages and bonuses.

liverpool sold mane to barce for 73. bought carrasco for 78. mane clearly the better player and has higher ca and pa

[Piperita]

4 minutes ago, booble said:

liverpool sold mane to barce for 73. bought carrasco for 78. mane clearly the better player and has higher ca and pa

It appears the AI values reputation and season results a lot more than pure stats. 

I remember back in 17 when poor Xhaka essentially transfered every year between Wolfsburg and Arsenal for a few seasons. With me making between 30 and 50 million each round. 

He was unwanted and listed for cheap, I took him and build him up, Arsenal became interested and bid twice the value, he became unwanted as he couldn't deliver there, rinse and repeat. 

Something similar happenes with Paul Seguin: I played him a few high profile games for two years and he did well. Not great but good. Suddenly Tottenham bid nearly 30 million and I could not refuse that. All in all the poor guy made four games there and essentially spend the next years touring Europe as loanee who still struggled to play as Tottenham only attracted other bigger clubs. 

When his contract expired I took him back because I like him and I needed a backup. Two years later, who made an offer? Tottenham for 30 again. But with nearly a billion in transfer founds I could ignore that offer and give Paul a good career as glorified sub with a big paycheck.

(When I checked the editor, his PA was only like 130 so he really overperformed!)

[Svenc]

10 hours ago, Rashidi said:

xG analysis by some sites works on the basis of defining big chances and they use various metrics to do this. Even headers are notorious for being misinterpreted as clear cut chances by many people. I have never believed one minute that a header is a clear cut chance, so when we go into the game we need to do a rigorous analysis ourselves as to what constitutes a big Chance.

Not sure if there is many an xG model out there that doesn't consider if a Chance was off a Header or shot. As Ted Knudson put it in his Epic rant: 

 

Quote

We have commentary on football that doesn’t understand how the game actually works. I have heard commentators say goals should be scored off headers 12 yards away from goal. They must watch most of their football on some other planet, because that’s not how football here on Earth actually works.

It's the Opta "Big Chance" that would gloss over this. An example would be this weekend's BL match between Bremen and Hoffenheim. At 46 minutes Gebre Selassie had a Header centrally in front of the box, from open Play, barely outside the six Yards area. Opta defined this as a "Big Chance" -- whoscored.com seemeto get their data from this and rate it "big Chance" accordingly. xG Ratings such as this hover around the 20%. As argued, that is where "bigger/above average chances" in Football Analysis Always used to start, given that the average conversion is 10%. However, there's a significant gap between basically 1 in 5 chances and 1 in 2 or better -- which "big Chance!" categories all just lump together as if they were roughly equal opportunity.

 

As far as I remember, whether a Header at all should be a "big Chance /CCC" as to FM used to be a wholly semantic debate. As in: Should a Header ever be considered a decent Chance? Also interesting Observation as to your in-game one on one off the centrally through ball. There realistically is another factor here at Play, which is the angle. Angled passes from wider positions tend to Play into a Forwards running path, making life far easier to his. Such a centrally through ball is in tendency played in his back, which not only gives him less time, but also oft forces him to turn and shoot. From experience, the game has Always considered such. That's the reason why I argued the FM15 one on one from my video to be a roughly 1 in 5 Chance, give or take. Roughly the same type you describe. I would never expect the Forward to finish them at much more consistent rates. The keeper is also already far out his goal, making the target to hit real small -- something also oft not considered.

The Question is: Should this be such a semantical debate? Needs it be? The game under the Hood is Maths. Unless SI virtually just roll a dice when settling for Goals/misses/saves (which from my experience they don't, or I would do worse in the game and also wouldn't win Matches in sequence on any release where the Opposition has X moar shots -- I deny them to lesser ones though), there must be some numbers here to go by. Otherwise, the AI logics in tactics also wouldn't make sense. In particular the defensive ones have never been fussed about shot volumes -- similar to teams playing Football in realz. They have been fussed about reducing the space, and with it the better scoring opportunities. For a host of reasons (including bad TV punditry, limited animations and non-sensical in-game final match Reports based on shot volumes) -- some People have struggled to cope with this, some less. Naturally, you wouldn't want to give away the entire Maths. In real Football, there is subjectivity at Play. Likewise, every mainly statistical chance model also has weakness. I think the more important Thing to take is that actual Managers tend to roughly understand the roughly General ball parks a Chance may fall into. 

I'd be very interested in your own model. Back then wwfan used to to provide Videos/screen shots as to what he considered truly superior chances, and less so. However, I think he was eventually drown by the "cheating AI" Brigade.  

Edited December 21, 2018 by Svenc

[BadanieLuck]

The amount of long range goals is just ridiculous. Every average Joe just whoops out 2 30-yarders every game. Almost no point in setting up any tactic.

Also a GK with 1s for every stat and David DeGea ... wouldn't be able to tell a difference.

[johnhughthom]

On the AI parking the bus, as League One Sunderland I've just had Premier League Brighton come to me and play 4-4-1-1, defensive football almost all game. 5 minutes before full time I saw the message 'Brighton are playing a little less defensively now'. I had been thinking as I go up the leagues teams may open up a bit, now I'm not so sure...

[rp1966]

23 minutes ago, BadanieLuck said:

The amount of long range goals is just ridiculous. Every average Joe just whoops out 2 30-yarders every game. Almost no point in setting up any tactic.

Also a GK with 1s for every stat and David DeGea ... wouldn't be able to tell a difference.

There's definitely more unstoppable long range shots happening, but I'm not seeing the overall balance of goals in matches changing from what I'd expect just that more of them are long shots. Maybe the fact that I play a half-back shuts some of the opportunities down.

 

[Piperita]

1 minute ago, rp1966 said:

There's definitely more unstoppable long range shots happening, but I'm not seeing the overall balance of goals in matches changing from what I'd expect just that more of them are long shots. Maybe the fact that I play a half-back shuts some of the opportunities down.

 

This.

The current version has the best and most logical results from the versions I played this year. It is only frustrating to see them happen. I too play pretty defensively and expect my opponents to shoot from afar but seeing every random guy hit goal of the year contenders just feels wrong. 

[Phil Dunphy]

save after he 19.2 update:

saves before:

 

same tactic same everything, including the team levels. The game is unplayable with the unreal long shot goals. Pls correct it.   never a me bug made me quit playing like this

and this only shows the last 50 games of those saves

 

[Novem9]

I creare topic about awful deep strikers movement. Guys create topics too, for technical support is rule - no ticket, no problem. 

DLF (s) even no tried to play deeper or find empty space without marking. Are you kidding me? Its totally unplayable! And I can win anyway, but it's boring absolutely.

My first 'long' achieve in FM19? Best Defense!

IRLis attacking football in trend, but ME looks like season 15/16 where for example Real and Man City have ~3 shots together in two semifinals of ChL 

 

P.s. Till what date are Christmas vacation in UK?

Edited December 22, 2018 by Novem9

[westy8chimp]

3 minutes ago, Novem9 said:

I creare topic about awful deep strikers movement. Guys create topics too, for technical support is rule - no ticket, no problem. 

DLF (s) even no tried to play deeper or find empty space without marking. Are you kidding me? Its totally unplayable! And I can win anyway, but it's boring absolutely.

My first 'long' achieve in FM19? Best Defense!

IRLis attacking football in trend, but ME looks like season 15/16 where for example Real and Man City have ~3 shots together in two semifinals of ChL 

 

 

Thats a bad example because all the space is in the channels on the shoulder of the defenders. Perfect chance for Sensi to play a through ball (curl or over the top) to either striker to exploit the high defence and tight marking. 

Regardless of role I still expect a striker to play with football intelligence and find the right space and movement. 

That said... Its just not the best example... There is absolutely no movement from strikers who are supposed to run deep. They all play kinda like a poacher should.