Will FM20 be reasonably challenging?

[johnsie]

Everyone knows SI's pretension with Football Manager is realism. Some people having persistent difficulties with the game notwithstanding it's no secret that the game is grossly unrealistic in how well people perform. This is not a matter of lacking cutting edge artificial intelligence in a computer game. I relatively quickly lose interest and will not stoop down to the level of picking one of the worst teams in the hierarchy just to accommodate poor development. On the other hand the concept appeals to me so I'm wondering whether this game is actually taking intelligent steps forward or if the yearly changes will continue to be borderline excuses to release a new product. I realize the moderators are sensitive but, frankly, this thread isn't for them. I'd like to know what the attitude of the actual developers is, whether they have a forward vision or whether they are constantly content with a product that isn't remotely realistic.

[CFuller]

What exactly is the point you are trying to make? Are you even trying to make a point, or are you just having a go at the developers?

[MrPompey]

57 minutes ago, johnsie said:

Everyone knows SI's pretension with Football Manager is realism. Some people having persistent difficulties with the game notwithstanding it's no secret that the game is grossly unrealistic in how well people perform. This is not a matter of lacking cutting edge artificial intelligence in a computer game. I relatively quickly lose interest and will not stoop down to the level of picking one of the worst teams in the hierarchy just to accommodate poor development. On the other hand the concept appeals to me so I'm wondering whether this game is actually taking intelligent steps forward or if the yearly changes will continue to be borderline excuses to release a new product. I realize the moderators are sensitive but, frankly, this thread isn't for them. I'd like to know what the attitude of the actual developers is, whether they have a forward vision or whether they are constantly content with a product that isn't remotely realistic.

Just like the chips advert of the past "you'll have to wait and see"

 

[FrazT]

Do you really expect anyone from SI to answer this type pf question?  As for FM 20, who knows?

[Svenc]

It's "grossly unrealistic" how People on average perform every Season tho. This is in parts because eventually somebody finds a flaw, sets out to game it and Shares it, where it's picked up by anyone. For instance: The current set piece exploits that let sides average up to a Corner Goal per match -- whilst the real football averages are About 1 corner Goal in ~16 Matches (even Pulis managed sides needed About 5 games to score a Corner one, Long-term).

There are likely no much plans to Change the "difficulty" as such, as Feedback suggest the game were a) too hard or b) too easy doesn't seem to be there -- which includes Sales Feedback, btw. What complicates matters is that from my experience every Player tends to have different yardsticks. Is it too easy to rise from Bottom of the league Tier to the top? To win the EPL with an established top Team? To generally better the AI? However, I think the game could do a bit to "balance" Things from both Ends. Firstly, by ensuring the AI only ever make "sensible" decisions (which is an UI/input as well as an AI Problem -- the tactical UI for instance alone allows myriads of contradictions and, sometimes, even nonsensicals). As SI more recent admitted themselves, in the current setup, one mischosen Player role can have unintended consequences. Secondly, by doing just the same for the Players. This would Level the playing field some for all parties involved.

I've recently seen somebody conceding an average of 3-4 Goals per match in his league. This is only ever technically possible with a competitive Squad if the Player would field no defense proper. Why does the game allow this so easily, given the subject matter it simulates? In real-world Terms, that's as if somebody never having had the most Basic Coaching Courses applied to Sunderland -- and were given the Job. From then on he's allowed to wreak havoc -- and does. Even if a Manager would do such in Football, the press, his assistants, the board, and fans, they'd ridicule him from day 1. Won't happen in-game. He simply will be a frustrated customer for which this will be he "last ever buy, I swear." That is, until the next release.  

Edited September 14, 2019 by Svenc

[Chinook2000]

It's a balance isn't it? You cannot have it as realistic as RL as it would be unplayable, you'd hardly ever get a job or progress as easily from top to bottom. If you failed spectacularly in the first job that would be it game over. 

The game isn't easy enough to be able to succeed with one tactic no matter what players you pick like it was before, I've gone many editions without ever winning a cup or league. The career stories on here are pretty alien to me since early Playstation versions when I was a kid and used cheats or go back to a save point to win.

Every edition since 2012 my career and results follow a far more authentic story if I just play to how I think a tactic should be and how I'd build a squad, not succeeding is part of the game for me.

 

[wearesporting]

I'd imagine some will say it's too hard and some will say it's too easy. As with every other release. 

[Heywood JaBlowme]

If I play FM 20  after 1,000 hours and still find it's not enough of a challenge, can I get a refund? 

Edited September 14, 2019 by Heywood JaBlowme

[Bababui]

4 hours ago, FrazT said:

Do you really expect anyone from SI to answer this type pf question?  As for FM 20, who knows?

Respectfully, they should. SI do not hand out this game as a free gift. There is only one person at SI (as far as I know) who should answer the tough uncomfortable questions and his name is Miles. One question I would like him to answer is: Why cant we have a fun and deep game like 07 with all the current QoL improvements added? Press conferences, endless and repetitive multiple choice talk options are not fun. Why must they be in the game?

[CFuller]

14 minutes ago, Bababui said:

Respectfully, they should. SI do not hand out this game as a free gift. There is only one person at SI (as far as I know) who should answer the tough uncomfortable questions and his name is Miles. One question I would like him to answer is: Why cant we have a fun and deep game like 07 with all the current QoL improvements added? Press conferences, endless and repetitive multiple choice talk options are not fun. Why must they be in the game?

Miles Jacobson gets enough grief on social media as it is without having to answer self-entitled questions like these.

FM has a long-standing reputation as one of THE pre-eminent sports simulation games on the market. That's not because SI rest on their laurels for 10-15 years, but because they keep up with the times. Football management today is quite different to what it was a decade or two ago, so simply remaking FM07 with QoL improvements just won't cut it in 2019.

As much as you might hate attending boring press conferences and being asked repetitive questions, every top-level football manager in 2019 has to attend boring press conferences and be asked repetitive questions. In FM, you can always leave that to another member of staff if you want - the same with training, team talks, transfers, contract negotiation, whatever. That's the beauty of FM - you can control as much or as little as you want.

[phnompenhandy]

6 hours ago, johnsie said:

whether they are constantly content with a product that isn't remotely realistic

So you want a realistic product? You'll fork out money for that? One where you, sat in your parents' basement staring at a glowing monitor for 10 hours a day, apply to manage professional football clubs and never ever receive so much as a polite rejection letter? Mmkay.

[jwchriste]

If you want a more realistic, more challenging mode - play in a league with other like-minded human managers.  You can't game them.  They know all the tricks you're going to try. A programmed AI is always going to have weaknesses against human opponents, on and off the pitch.

I foresee the AI being  bolstered by some machine learning in the future so that the AI gets better as you play until it is eventually able to out-think your every move.  Then, I can pretend I'm Matthew Broderick in War Games.

[(sic)]

I wouldn't argue that it's easy. For some people it can be pretty hard.

It is pretty easy (imo) to take a mid/bottom table club and finish in top 6. Then the hard part comes after that. It needs some balancing maybe.

 

I still think match engine needs lots of improvement, I feel like it's kinda limited currently. Probably needs to be more realistic but not at the expense of making the game too hard.

[themadsheep2001]

This thread is for everyone, and if the OP cannot post without making digs at people it will simply be closed. Opinions are always welcome but rudeness will not be tolerated, please bear that in mind going forwards 

[themadsheep2001]

I've removed the last two posts. If people can't post politely with each other they won't be posting at all 

We'd rather not hand out infractions and bans, but this recent trend of people constantly having digs at each other in GD needs to stop otherwise we're left with little choice. 

[Stevicus]

Wonder if players who don't come on the forums or interact with the community at all find the game too easy though. 

 

Anyone who comes here or follows Twitter stuff cant escape from finding out which part of the ME is overpowered or what the latest tactical exploit is . 

[themadsheep2001]

18 minutes ago, Stevicus said:

Wonder if players who don't come on the forums or interact with the community at all find the game too easy though. 

 

Anyone who comes here or follows Twitter stuff cant escape from finding out which part of the ME is overpowered or what the latest tactical exploit is . 

Quite a few people in my office play it, and none of them come on the forums and so have no idea about 90% of the issues we talk about. 

I think we often overestimate the reach and impact of the forum. We're most certainly a minority of the fanbase 

[theonets]

There's a post barely a few posts below this thread alleging that SI deliberately code games so that you can't have long winning streaks, and this forum is littered with people complaining about how difficult the game is, and how ever with City/Arsenal/United/Chelsea/Barcelona/Madrid, they lose to relegation teams and THIS SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN.

 

The issue is, it's a game. I'm very good at FIFA, and online games aside, the AI holds no challenge for me. FM is a game where you play against the AI. I am someone who doesn't win the league, unless I'm overwhelmingly favourite to do so. I don't overachieve a lot most of the time, I usually just about finish one or two places above where predicted. If the game is made harder, I won't enjoy it as much. Most people play this game casually. You can't make a game with the top players in mind only

[johnsie]

I rarely visit this forum, don't follow any social media, and don't read about exploits or tactics as that would defeat the point of playing the game. Excuses are easy to think of- the game is relatively successful, actual realism isn't desirable, many people are adequately challenged, etc. That's the difference between making money and having a passion for something. I can't convince anyone, especially not the average self-selected chronic forum poster of a game being criticized. The developers of this game either have it within them to see and want to address a problem and raise this game to a higher level or they don't. I'm wondering whether I should have hopes for FM20 or if in a few months I'll stop playing it in disgust of it and myself.

[theonets]

21 minutes ago, johnsie said:

I rarely visit this forum, don't follow any social media, and don't read about exploits or tactics as that would defeat the point of playing the game. Excuses are easy to think of- the game is relatively successful, actual realism isn't desirable, many people are adequately challenged, etc. That's the difference between making money and having a passion for something. I can't convince anyone, especially not the average self-selected chronic forum poster of a game being criticized. The developers of this game either have it within them to see and want to address a problem and raise this game to a higher level or they don't. I'm wondering whether I should have hopes for FM20 or if in a few months I'll stop playing it in disgust of it and myself.

k

[Sheriff7]

If you don't cheat and try to keep things as much realistic you can game is (at least) quite  competitive.

[Armistice]

The game is not easy lol. How about you play without a downloaded tactic, set pieces routine and buy every wonderkid you’ve seen on FMScout? How about that?

[GiorgosK96]

''I relatively quickly lose interest and will not stoop down to the level of picking one of the worst teams in the hierarchy just to accommodate poor development.''

I assume by this that you prefer to choose only big or relatively big teams to play. There is nothing wrong with that but it makes sense that the game becomes easier this way. I suggest you manage lower level teams or try lower divisions because you are seriously missing out. If you only want to manage big teams try to challenge yourself by setting some goals and limits, like for example to have at least 4 players from you academy in your starting 11 or something similar.

[Chinook2000]

If you want realism get out in the fresh air and become a coach, run a kids team or volunteer at low league club, If you're as amazing as you think you'll be snapped up earning  £10,000 a week you will have no time to play at pretending to be a manager and reading the internet.

[Svenc]

13 hours ago, theonets said:

There's a post barely a few posts below this thread alleging that SI deliberately code games so that you can't have long winning streaks

That thread was a bit tongue-in-cheekish. However, interestingly, it's actually coming from the other angle. See how the Player argues how in some releases, if he had the Squad and the "Right" tactics, he would win. However, in some Releases, this would not come to pass, supposedly because SI would Code an artificial leveler in - e.g. AI "cracking" and nullifying the super tactics to stop the endless Winning run.

So he's not coming from the "game is too difficult angle". He's actually coming from the game is too easy angle. And as SI would know this, and couldn't possibly Code competitive AI, they'd mess with their Players. It's not hard to take that Position btw. For a couple reasons, it's far harder to find Players actually underperforming than Players who overachieve in ways you'd never seen the respective Team in Football doing before. Therefore, SI must know that the game is far too easy, and as they advertise the game to remain somewhat "realistic", every once in a while that CA 1 Opposition Player must score with the first two shots on target to Keep Things "challenging". Basically, any random **** that occurs must be coded into the game to Keep the Player in check. That's a toughie given the inherent randomness and bonkerness of the subject matter simulated...

Interestingly, this level of relatively community-spread overachievement creates Frustration amongst Players who aren't doing nearly as well likewise. The tactics Forum for instance from my experience aren't actually riddled with Players struggling to get a side to perform. Actually, they're almost all making them overperform. It's more About addressing specific issues, like "why does my striker not score 1 in every third shot, like Cleons FFS" -- and why don't I thrash all those Relegation strugglers 5-0 as top Teams CLEAERLY DO IN FOOTBALL OR DON'T THEY (to slightly exaggerate). And the tactical parts are oft argued to be the most "tricky" in the game. Another sneeky argument in favor of levelling the Performance gap between all parties involved -- AI included. :P 

 

Edited September 15, 2019 by Svenc

[FlorianAlbert9]

2 ore fa, Armistice ha scritto:

The game is not easy lol. How about you play without a downloaded tactic, set pieces routine and buy every wonderkid you’ve seen on FMScout? How about that?

It takes 5 years with a mid table team becomes the best with no challenge at all.

 Said "then take a weaker team! Etc.." doesnt make sense cause the to be a top club manager have to be the hardest thing. 

 

 

[johnsie]

2 hours ago, GiorgosK96 said:

''I relatively quickly lose interest and will not stoop down to the level of picking one of the worst teams in the hierarchy just to accommodate poor development.''

I assume by this that you prefer to choose only big or relatively big teams to play. There is nothing wrong with that but it makes sense that the game becomes easier this way. I suggest you manage lower level teams or try lower divisions because you are seriously missing out. If you only want to manage big teams try to challenge yourself by setting some goals and limits, like for example to have at least 4 players from you academy in your starting 11 or something similar.

A big team domestically (not the biggest anymore either, say third in the league), not internationally. Internationally the league stacks quite poorly. Except I immediately got to the Champions League group stage, winning my first one or two matches against better clubs with my B team including a few youth players and domestically I was destroying even the few bigger opponents, namely the biggest club in the country. Thus I stopped playing FM19 barely into my second season. I've played a few other FMs prior, I know how things go. When I was discussing this several months ago there were other players writing how inevitably easy the game was and how quickly it became so, for instance getting a mid-table team to the top or a Dutch team that isn't Ajax to dominate Europe. And you just get cemented. I've been meaning to do cash infusions for other teams and improve their facilities through the editor but never looked for these features as I questioned how effective these measures would be, if they were at all possible, and my entire perception of the game just crumbled like a house of cards. It's also apparently not hard to get teams from a lower division to the top, it just takes more time, say several seasons.

This doesn't make sense, not in how quick, easy, and cemented it becomes. Like I stated, I'm not going to play with teams I have no interest in playing because the game is poorly designed. I'm certainly not going to set arbitrary asinine handicaps on myself either just because for whatever reason I have to play the game. The depth isn't there for that either. Once you get used to the game there isn't actually that much to do and change. I think it's even written in the game you're not supposed to be constantly trying to micro-manage a match as your players will react adversely, and tactical familiarity is a factor as well as positional familiarity for the footballers.

The point is I'm unable to play this game long term even though I want to. The broad nebulous problem is pretty clear- the game is very unrealistic in challenging managers, particularly in the long term. If SI's philosophy for FM is indeed realism then they have a major failing.

3 hours ago, Armistice said:

The game is not easy lol. How about you play without a downloaded tactic, set pieces routine and buy every wonderkid you’ve seen on FMScout? How about that?

How about you follow the thread, in particular three posts above yours. You might be looking at FMScout, I have never even heard of such a thing nor would I insult my intelligence by resorting to downloading tactics for Football Manager.

2 hours ago, Chinook2000 said:

If you want realism get out in the fresh air and become a coach, run a kids team or volunteer at low league club, If you're as amazing as you think you'll be snapped up earning  £10,000 a week you will have no time to play at pretending to be a manager and reading the internet.

SI claim to want realism too but their product is a computer game, to which this forum is dedicated. I'm interested in the computer game hence why I'm posting here. What you're on about is an entirely different topic.

[bigmattb28]

On 14/09/2019 at 12:05, MrPompey said:

Just like the chips advert of the past "you'll have to wait and see"

 

Wow I remember them. Christ I'm old

[Armistice]

I haven’t played the game in ages but I have heard some people say it’s easy, some say it’s hard.

I think aside from awful AI squad building the game is even harder than FM18 because of various tools added in FM19 such as Defensive Width.

[SideLineBiscuit]

To say the game is easy, you must compare it to other games. sure it`s easy compared to be a real life manager, but nobody would ever play this game if it was that realistic. What makes FM a great game is that you can actually take over a small club, and if youre good enough you can take them to CL glory. I would say that FM is one of the more harder games out there, and actually require real commitment

[GreenTriangle]

2 hours ago, johnsie said:

I immediately got to the Champions League group stage, winning my first one or two matches against better clubs with my B team including a few youth players and domestically I was destroying even the few bigger opponents, namely the biggest club in the country.

OK. How did you do that, exactly? Some details would be interesting  to know

[Kazza]

Unlike many other games these days, SI offer a demo that last 6 months and gets updates where necessary. Surely that is enough time to judge the game, albeit unless glaring errors are found. I find the demo really useful in giving me an insight into how I feel that iteration of the game is playing. I also, like others, believe that SI do their best year on year; it not an exact science but neither is football!

So not quite sure what the OP is getting at. Real is real, games are games and one person's reality is another's unreality and so on.

[Svenc]

2 hours ago, Armistice said:

I think aside from awful AI squad building the game is even harder than FM18 because of various tools added in FM19 such as Defensive Width.

That's Kinda like saying this Starcraft Expansion pack got harder than the base game because they've added an altogether new unit into the mix. It may depend on how that unit is used by all parties involved. Since FM is set up in a way that makes Players figure out the "Basics" for themselves, which is not what would happen in actual Management (defensive width is part and parcel of any most Basic Coaching Programme, not something you may first hear About the first day on an actual JOB), naturally, er, results may vary). See my Posts About the gap in Performances between a) top echelon Players b) average AI c) lower echelon Players (in particular if the latter refuse to let their ass man handle this part of the game)…. That gap has arguably Always been too big for a Variety of reasons -- we're Talking Players arguably stopping the game from being like Football overly much (unlike any AI in the game no much sacking ever, no bad spell of bad luck, no much Point Drops) -- to those who could Pretty much crash and burn on every Job. That gap could likely be reduced in a variety of ways, which may Benefit both camps. FM too as such isn't primarily set up as a competitive multiplayer game, after all.

Edited September 15, 2019 by Svenc

[Chinook2000]

I was wondering what Jose was up to now, you'd think with his money there would be better things to do than spending your days playing computer games. 

[Tony Wright 747]

3 hours ago, Kazza said:

Unlike many other games these days, SI offer a demo that last 6 months and gets updates where necessary. Surely that is enough time to judge the game, albeit unless glaring errors are found. I find the demo really useful in giving me an insight into how I feel that iteration of the game is playing. I also, like others, believe that SI do their best year on year; it not an exact science but neither is football!

So not quite sure what the OP is getting at. Real is real, games are games and one person's reality is another's unreality and so on.

The demo is very useful in giving you an idea of what the game is like and what is better or worse in the first instance, however some of the issues don't become noticable until the second or third season.

[johnsie]

6 hours ago, GreenTriangle said:

OK. How did you do that, exactly? Some details would be interesting  to know

Nothing fancy. I take my time at first looking at what players I have and what formations they would fit. Given the team's lack of money I get an opportunity to add a little depth (a playable side defender for instance) and wait to see if something random drops into my lap mostly through my inbox. During the first season I don't have enough quality for heavy rotation with two games a week (in following seasons I prefer having two starting elevens basically) but with qualification for European group stages being unlikely I don't have to worry too much. This is something the AI seems to have trouble with and AI teams seem to be penalized in performance as well as incurring some injuries. I'm quick with the trigger finger to respond to injuries in deciding whether I have to resort to having a mandatory rest day after every game as opposed to resting on per play basis and I also rest those who play in both a games a week an extra day between Wednesday and Saturday. Same applies to training intensity.

At first I tend to watch full matches to see what I could do, though I've stopped doing this much in the preseason. I'll watch full matches or at least significant portions in full match until I'm content I'm not missing on too much. I don't put stock in statistics and don't find much significance to particular player match-ups. Sometimes I end up winning the league title in the first season, once very dramatically, and sometimes I don't. There is one team that is quite a bit better than mine every FM edition but it may be that the AI's poor handling of two matches a week hampers them enough for me to sneak through. In FM19 I won the league, subsequently got into the Champions League group stage with the critical money award, and by this time I was just whooping ass domestically, beating that other team as well as other contenders by big margins. Once I got into the Champions League group stage I played younger players for a development benefit there as I wouldn't be able to compete anyway. It was at this point, with three essentially youth players and others who weren't my top players, that I nonetheless won my first one or two matches in the Champions League. So I was kicking ass domestically and had already reached the point where I was likely untouchable and somehow with my B team I was winning matches in the Champions League. I stopped playing as this was ridiculous and the point diminished. I don't consider this game deep, tactics are relatively simple, I wasn't doing magic. I was just winning. I had started a thread on the topic and others had ridiculous experiences too that revealed a long term inevitability and pointlessness. As much as I like to waste my life FM had become too much of a waste.

[sporadicsmiles]

So you are complaining that you are good at a game? Do you download tactics that exploit the ME? If the answer is yes, you would probably find the game more challenging if you build your own. Otherwise yeah, there is not much else to say. There are places the AI can improve, especially around their squad building.

[forameuss]

3 hours ago, sporadicsmiles said:

Do you download tactics that exploit the ME?

You don't have to download tactics that exploit the ME.  It's more difficult, but it's certainly possible.

This situation seems one of two things, either the OP is genuinely much, much better at the game than most others, and has an answer to anything the AI throws through genuine, sound methods, or they're exploiting something in the game - either on purpose or unwittingly.  Don't see any other case.

[Pav_Makarov]

1 час назад, forameuss сказал:

This situation seems one of two things, either the OP is genuinely much, much better at the game than most others, and has an answer to anything the AI throws through genuine, sound methods, or they're exploiting something in the game - either on purpose or unwittingly.  Don't see any other case.

Or, OP just enjoys his high horse view

[forameuss]

16 minutes ago, PaulfromSCB said:

Or, OP just enjoys his high horse view

Well, I'd say that's pretty obvious from the passive aggressiveness already shown, but that eventuality could fit into column A or B for me. 

[johnsie]

3 hours ago, PaulfromSCB said:

Or, OP just enjoys his high horse view

OR *drum roll* OP wants to enjoy the game.

8 hours ago, sporadicsmiles said:

So you are complaining that you are good at a game? Do you download tactics that exploit the ME? If the answer is yes, you would probably find the game more challenging if you build your own. Otherwise yeah, there is not much else to say. There are places the AI can improve, especially around their squad building.

lol

This is why I was wondering what the attitude of the developers is.

5 hours ago, forameuss said:

has an answer to anything the AI throws through genuine, sound methods

Here's some more passive aggression- this is gobbledegook. This game isn't a science. Neither does the AI throw anything nor do I have an assortment of "genuine, sound methods" I devised in my mind's lab. All I was doing was just playing the game, and I'm not the only one. I don't know what people struggle with, maybe it's different circumstances, early expectations, and ultimately perhaps just a lack of patience. Maybe some people are just bone-headed, buy the game, download a tactic (ironically), plug their players in, put on limited highlights, and press the continue button. These are not the only people who play this game and pretending like they are is awfully strange.

It's not even much of a secret that there are big flaws with the "AI", which could conceivably swing the game the other way. I just don't understand how year after year this game changes so little considering how far away it is from resembling reality. At least articulate a different vision for it, a humbler one, one more corresponding to its reality. I don't get the progress of this game.

[forameuss]

10 minutes ago, johnsie said:

Here's some more passive aggression- this is gobbledegook. This game isn't a science. Neither does the AI throw anything nor do I have an assortment of "genuine, sound methods" I devised in my mind's lab. All I was doing was just playing the game, and I'm not the only one. I don't know what people struggle with, maybe it's different circumstances, early expectations, and ultimately perhaps just a lack of patience. Maybe some people are just bone-headed, buy the game, download a tactic (ironically), plug their players in, put on limited highlights, and press the continue button. These are not the only people who play this game and pretending like they are is awfully strange.

It's not even much of a secret that there are big flaws with the "AI", which could conceivably swing the game the other way. I just don't understand how year after year this game changes so little considering how far away it is from resembling reality. At least articulate a different vision for it, a humbler one, one more corresponding to its reality. I don't get the progress of this game.

Ooft, someone woke up on the wrong side of the pram this morning.

Ironic that it's "gobbledegook", when you then go on to spend an entire five lines saying...what?  That the game is so easy that I don't even have to try?  That everyone else is just a moron?  That you've continued to buy a game that stays largely the same "year after after" despite clearly having no real enjoyment in it?  Seems odd to attack the strategy of the developers when your strategy seems to be actively pursuing something you're not enjoying.  You say you *want* to enjoy the game, and that's fine, but it really doesn't sound like it.  Someone who wants to enjoy the game would probably offer some kind of constructive feedback, rather than come in trying oh so desperately hard to be so passive aggressive and basically say what a terrible job the developers are doing.  By all means, if that's the attitude you want to have, fire in.  I just wouldn't expect anyone to agree that much with you.

Edited September 16, 2019 by forameuss

[themadsheep2001]

OK, from start to finish this thread has been nothing but passive aggressive digs from too many participants, driven by the OP, and then returned by others despite requests to stay civil. Additionally the aim of the OP seems to be have a pop at developers, moderators, and various other users. As a result I'm closing this thread for now, pending review by moderators

[Neil Brock]

Just in addition - if anyone finds any specific area where they feel the AI is failing or can be exploited which could be construed as a bug, please do feel free to raise it in our bugs forum ideally with a save game example, that way we can investigate it further.

The AI in FM, much like AI in every other walk of life is limited. Within the framework of the game, we have to choose between ramping up the AI intelligence at the cost of having code which would process considerably slower. Every time the game advances just from a transfer perspective, every single AI team has to look at their squad, finances and determine how they can strengthen. Every year we are making improvements but we have to find the balance between speed/playability and the challenge of the game.