Football Manager 2020 Feedback Thread

[Welshace]

2 minutes ago, CaptainPlanet said:

Oh the ME is a total **** show if you're trying to create an actual sensible tactic from scratch compared to previous versions. 100%

I'll verify with the typical SI forum thing of I've been playing for 20 years with 10s of thousands of hours sunk into betas, versions, editions and always building tactics from scratch and 2020 is me playing around to find what works, not what makes sense, which attributes are overpowered and which are pointless, which roles fit in with how the ME works out events and not which fits the players and the team.

See, for me it's not.. i create my tactics from scratch too .. create a basic shape, with little or no instructions and build slowly over several games or even a season or two ... the trouble begins when you try and build it on day one, in totality and expect it work from the first match onwards with very detailed instructions for each player... how are you meant to solve weaknesses top down? it's easier building bottom up dealing with issues as and when you see them one by one..

[RBKalle]

8 minuti fa, CaptainPlanet ha scritto:

I'm fine as long as I'm winning, and I am.

I am winning, but I'm not fine.

I'd rather lose a lot more because the AI is just better or because my tactical plan isn't good enough than winning because the AI is either spectacularly incompetent (and I can build up a top team by brute force) or because I'm playing the specific iteration's "Overpowered Tactics". Or, like last year, becuase I've stumbled across an exploit in a very basic formation.

FM20 is IMO among the WORST ME ever. Some tactics simply don't work the way they should, if at all. AT DEFAULT SETTINGS! (so it's a problem the AI faces too, and you can't just chalk it up to "it's your tactics" cop-out excuse, because if a TC-wizard formation is flawed and inconsistent, it's all downhill from there, no matter how competent/incompetent the human manager is in his tweaks).

Gegenpress 4-3-3 is supposed to be narrow, yet both RF and LF end up very wide, with the respective FBs overlapping or crossing themselves... Central play? What's that?

FM has always had a couple of "preferred" formations and more effective setups, while others were tougher to get to work or even to replicate properly. In FM20 it's just pointless trying.

So no, I don't care if I'm winning and having undefeated seasons if my top-level strikers still miss sitters from 3 yards out, if my world-class AMC is basically useless because he's playing in black hole as far as the ME is concerned, if my world-class defenders get caught napping by 50m hoofballs that wouldn't have worked in 1980s Third Division...

I want to LOSE if my narrow 4-1-2-1-2 gets torn apart by the opposition's 4-2-3-1 wide. Or the other way around. But because of tactics being well- or ill-suited to my players and to the opponnets. Not becuase "sorry, FM20 doesn't handle that".

[pheelf]

11 minutes ago, andysafc said:

But why would they 'do there jobs' when the game is telling me they are ineffective in those roles?

Because the game is only presenting to you what it THINKS about how effective a player will be in a given role. The problem is that it bases its recommendation on the attributes it considers to be needed for a role and nothing else meaning it lacks any form of context.

The Complete Forward role for example is one which has a CA requirement, so any player which doesn't meet that level will be considered ineffective but as I said that doesn't take into account the level of football he's playing at or the system he is playing in.

Edited January 31, 2020 by pheelf

[CaptainPlanet]

1 minute ago, RBKalle said:

I am winning, but I'm not fine.

I'd rather lose a lot more because the AI is just better or because my tactical plan isn't good enough than winning because the AI is either spectacularly incompetent (and I can build up a top team by brute force) or because I'm playing the specific iteration's "Overpowered Tactics". Or, like last year, becuase I've stumbled across an exploit in a very basic formation.

I used to be like that too, but I'm such a casual gamer now that I don't care about the realism aspect of the game as much and I just want to get my lil dopamine rushes from winning.

[CaptainPlanet]

4 minutes ago, Welshace said:

the trouble begins when you try and build it on day one, in totality and expect it work from the first match onwards with very detailed instructions for each player

- Probs wouldn't word it quite to condescending as to suggest that everyone's problem is that they're playing the game wrong

- I've done exactly what you said, and it still boils down to what works within this version of the game, and not what should work based on real life, watching and reacting to the ME, and experience of previous games in the same series

- If you're taking over a big football club, you're expected to hit the ground running. You don't go into Liverpool and play a basic 4-4-2, hope for the best then gradually tweak over the course of two seasons.

 

[pheelf]

8 minutes ago, RBKalle said:

I am winning, but I'm not fine.

I'd rather lose a lot more because the AI is just better or because my tactical plan isn't good enough than winning because the AI is either spectacularly incompetent (and I can build up a top team by brute force) or because I'm playing the specific iteration's "Overpowered Tactics". Or, like last year, becuase I've stumbled across an exploit in a very basic formation.

FM20 is IMO among the WORST ME ever. Some tactics simply don't work the way they should, if at all. AT DEFAULT SETTINGS! (so it's a problem the AI faces too, and you can't just chalk it up to "it's your tactics" cop-out excuse, because if a TC-wizard formation is flawed and inconsistent, it's all downhill from there, no matter how competent/incompetent the human manager is in his tweaks).

Gegenpress 4-3-3 is supposed to be narrow, yet both RF and LF end up very wide, with the respective FBs overlapping or crossing themselves... Central play? What's that?

FM has always had a couple of "preferred" formations and more effective setups, while others were tougher to get to work or even to replicate properly. In FM20 it's just pointless trying.

So no, I don't care if I'm winning and having undefeated seasons if my top-level strikers still miss sitters from 3 yards out, if my world-class AMC is basically useless because he's playing in black hole as far as the ME is concerned, if my world-class defenders get caught napping by 50m hoofballs that wouldn't have worked in 1980s Third Division...

I want to LOSE if my narrow 4-1-2-1-2 gets torn apart by the opposition's 4-2-3-1 wide. Or the other way around. But because of tactics being well- or ill-suited to my players and to the opponnets. Not becuase "sorry, FM20 doesn't handle that".

If in your opinion it's the worst ME ever and you are getting no satisfaction from playing it then why are you still persisting with it? 

[Welshace]

1 minute ago, CaptainPlanet said:

- Probs wouldn't word it quite to condescending as to suggest that everyone's problem is that they're playing the game wrong

- I've done exactly what you said, and it still boils down to what works within this version of the game, and not what should work based on real life, watching and reacting to the ME, and experience of previous games in the same series

- If you're taking over a big football club, you're expected to hit the ground running. You don't go into Liverpool and play a basic 4-4-2, hope for the best then gradually tweak over the course of two seasons.

 

nowhere did i suggest that everyones problem is that they are playing the game wrong.. in fact i suggested the exact opposite in a post above.

It comes down to what you want from the game then i guess, I'm not happy just mindlessly winning if i know i'm only exploiting the ME and not playing to how I would like my team to play.. i'd rather struggle for wins and finally crack it and start winning after doing so...

Tactics don't equate to formation... i'd do into liverpool and play the basic liverpool shape with roles to match and tweak from there onwards.. simple really.

[Dicko1878]

13 minutes ago, Welshace said:

See, for me it's not.. i create my tactics from scratch too .. create a basic shape, with little or no instructions and build slowly over several games or even a season or two ... the trouble begins when you try and build it on day one, in totality and expect it work from the first match onwards with very detailed instructions for each player... how are you meant to solve weaknesses top down? it's easier building bottom up dealing with issues as and when you see them one by one..

Okay but what happens when you notice that your defenders get caught by a ball over the top, you tweak your tactic (lower the defensive line), and your team sti plays a high line and defenders don't react at all no matter what the attributes. That is an ME issue and not trying to rush into things

 

[fidelitywars]

2nd worst for me, narrow improvement on FM19 but both suffer enormously from a lack of central creativity/movement and the joyless uber-caution of the AI.

[Welshace]

Just now, Dicko1878 said:

Okay but what happens when you notice that your defenders get caught by a ball over the top, you tweak your tactic (lower the defensive line), and your team sti plays a high line and defenders don't react at all no matter what the attributes. That is an ME issue and not trying to rush into things

 

As i said above several times.. it can be either/or ...  once i'm happy with my tactic and the fact i'm pretty sure its sound and logical.. the only thing left to consider is either luck, bad form or as you suggest, a flaw in the game itself and i'll do whatever i can to solve all of the above, including downloading the beta update which fixed long balls for me completely....

[CaptainPlanet]

2 minutes ago, Welshace said:

Tactics don't equate to formation... i'd do into liverpool and play the basic liverpool shape with roles to match and tweak from there onwards.. simple really.

And what you'll likely end up with is a formation, playing style, and tactical instructions that are very different from what Liverpool actually play, and very different to what works in previous versions of the game, and what doesn't seem to make sense in your head based on player attributes and traits.

If you want to win and dominate consistently.

[Welshace]

2 minutes ago, fidelitywars said:

2nd worst for me, narrow improvement on FM19 but both suffer enormously from a lack of central creativity/movement and the joyless uber-caution of the AI.

See, finally an answer with some detail and one that gets to the root of the problem.. i agree completely, the final update of FM was very good in my opinio, but as you say, central play and movement off the ball still wasn't correct at all ... fm20 has improved in both areas, but still nowhere near what i expect to see in reality. 

[Welshace]

Just now, CaptainPlanet said:

And what you'll likely end up with is a formation, playing style, and tactical instructions that are very different from what Liverpool actually play, and very different to what works in previous versions of the game, and what doesn't seem to make sense in your head based on player attributes and traits.

If you want to win and dominate consistently.

It's sounding very much like this isn't the game for you if you just want to completely dominate from the get go and just win.. that's not meant to sound snappy or aggressive, it just sounds like you may be burned out on the concept of fm in general..

 

It sounds like a grand strategy player who just wants to immediately have a giant army and conquer everything in sight from turn one... not quite how the game is designed to work.

[pheelf]

6 minutes ago, CaptainPlanet said:

- Probs wouldn't word it quite to condescending as to suggest that everyone's problem is that they're playing the game wrong

- I've done exactly what you said, and it still boils down to what works within this version of the game, and not what should work based on real life, watching and reacting to the ME, and experience of previous games in the same series

- If you're taking over a big football club, you're expected to hit the ground running. You don't go into Liverpool and play a basic 4-4-2, hope for the best then gradually tweak over the course of two seasons.

 

I don't see how it's condescending to suggest that a player may need to work on their tactic when they are clearly struggling. How does telling them that it's all down to the ME help them in anyway?

[CaptainPlanet]

4 minutes ago, Welshace said:

It's sounding very much like this isn't the game for you if you just want to completely dominate from the get go and just win.. that's not meant to sound snappy or aggressive, it just sounds like you may be burned out on the concept of fm in general..

 

It sounds like a grand strategy player who just wants to immediately have a giant army and conquer everything in sight from turn one... not quite how the game is designed to work.

I'm enjoying the game though? I'm winning and am happy, I'm not burnt out at all.

But I can recognise that the ME interaction with tactics is poorer than previous versions of the game and have given examples of why.

Edited January 31, 2020 by CaptainPlanet

[Mitja]

Biggest problem FM has currently is it tries to replicate more football styles than real life. Attacking mentality, high pressing tactics are massivly OP. Change from positive to attacking and all players become supermans. But it has always been like that very few ME versions were good at displaying defensive low block football.  

[CaptainPlanet]

7 minutes ago, pheelf said:

I don't see how it's condescending to suggest that a player may need to work on their tactic when they are clearly struggling. How does telling them that it's all down to the ME help them in anyway?

It's condescending to assume they haven't worked on their tactics in the right way in defence of multiple people over multiple threads saying that there's a noticeable issue with the ME and how it interacts with tactics that make sense to them, that would have made sense in previous versions of the game, and make sense based on how those players play in real life.  

Might as well just respond to 100% of threads with ME feedback with "It's your tactics"

Edited January 31, 2020 by CaptainPlanet

[likesiamesefish]

2 minutes ago, Mitja said:

Change from positive to attacking and all players become supermans.

Weird. I've wanted to move to an attacking mentality but haven't been able to implement it and have been stuck with positive.

[Mitja]

7 minutes ago, CaptainPlanet said:

But I can recognise that the ME interaction with tactics is poorer than previous versions of the game and have given examples of why.

Of course it happens all the time that given tactic plays totally different than what it's supposed to  and what it claims in game description.

[pheelf]

1 minute ago, CaptainPlanet said:

It's condescending to assume they haven't worked on their tactics in the right way in defence of multiple people over multiple threads saying that there's a noticeable issue with the ME and how it interacts with tactics that make sense to them, that would have made sense in previous versions of the game, and make sense based on how those players play in real life.

Just so I'm understanding you correctly. In your view, the tactic that I quoted which was posted in this thread would make sense in a previous versions ME and is how a manager would set a team up to play in real life? Therefore the fact that it doesn't work is solely down to the ME in FM20 and has nothing to do with the tactic itself.

I'm not denying there are issues with the ME but to suggest that you can't translate your ideas at all into the game as a result of those issues hasn't been my experience with the game perhaps it has been yours.

[ferrarinseb]

Is this the worst No. i believe FM 19 is worst of my FM game time. FM 20 improved on the beta patch but still not enough on the level we generally expect in particular cases of Central Attacking Passing and The Forwards lack of movement as well forcing the greater wide play preferences.  For me the question is "Is FM 20 good enough for fun to maintain a long term save" i can say No (so far given we don't know how much the new updates might change the ME).

 

[andysafc]

1 hour ago, pheelf said:

It comes as no surprise to me that you are struggling playing a tactic like that. You state that the only way to play the game is to play the ME and that you can't control what happens in a game unless you instruct the team to play in a prescribed way but what are your ideas for how you would like the team to play?

It's very difficult to decipher that based on your tactic that's filled with so many different instructions and contradictions. Trying to fix issues with it when it's going wrong would be a nightmare given that there are so many variables that would need to be taken into account.

As for why your two best performers were Leadbitter and Grigg. Well, they done the job you expected them to do and thus individually they performed well even if the team collectively was poor. Leadbitter provided the most key passes in the game which is his job as a Regista and Grigg scored which is his job as your only striker which is reflected in both of their ratings.

I think you are putting too much stock into the in-game advice which is rather surprising coming from a player who has played this series of games extensively over a number of years given that you should know that the in-game advice is poor at best.

You state that you have read a lot of guides and taken a lot of advice, well if that's the case, how did you come up with a tactic as unbalanced as this one? I think maybe you've become overloaded with information and are struggling to assimilate it into a coherent whole. I don't know why you have ignored @Welshace comment about keeping things simple and watching your games as I feel that is the key to making improvements. 

There are issues with the ME which have been repeated ad nauseam on this forum but what players aren't taking into account is that the AI will also suffer from the same issues given that the ME can't distinguish between the human player and the AI.

I think the reason why the cycle of ME development isn't in line with the release dates of the game is because they continue to make considerable changes to the ME all the way up to March. Therefore I think they can only really start to focus solely on the next version after the final patch which means that unlike other components of the game the ME doesn't get as much development time before release.  

Firstly that tactic was advice by @Hasbro but it is similar to what i have/would use. But who said i was struggling with a tactic like that? I was referring to tactics i had previously tried. So far i have only lost one League game with that tactic, won Manager of the Month and only got knocked out the Carabao Cup away to Leicester on Pens after i more than matched them in the game. Like i said i am not sure it should work because i don't have the right players in what i see are important roles, of course i could train or buy them but i was just making the point that the game was telling me against it however it seemed to work against what they advised. 

[pheelf]

25 minutes ago, Mitja said:

Biggest problem FM has currently is it tries to replicate more football styles than real life. Attacking mentality, high pressing tactics are massivly OP. Change from positive to attacking and all players become supermans. But it has always been like that very few ME versions were good at displaying defensive low block football.  

Is that so? I guess that's why in the game he posted against Ipswich where he used the attacking mentality and high pressing he lost because it's so OP.

[CaptainPlanet]

7 minutes ago, pheelf said:

Just so I'm understanding you correctly. In your view, the tactic that I quoted which was posted in this thread would make sense in a previous versions ME and is how a manager would set a team up to play in real life? Therefore the fact that it doesn't work is solely down to the ME in FM20 and has nothing to do with the tactic itself.

I'm not denying there are issues with the ME but to suggest that you can't translate your ideas at all into the game as a result of those issues hasn't been my experience with the game perhaps it has been yours.

I mean, anything I'm saying at this point is just saying the same things I've already said again.

People either think there are major problems with the ME or they don't. And the responses either agree that there are problems (either because people can't win or can't win in the 'right way') or are "It's your tactics" and "git gud" from people who think the ME is fine and it's a user problem.

Edited January 31, 2020 by CaptainPlanet

[RBKalle]

7 minuti fa, CaptainPlanet ha scritto:

I used to be like that too, but I'm such a casual gamer now that I don't care about the realism aspect of the game as much and I just want to get my lil dopamine rushes from winning.

To an extent I wouldn't care too either, but then again you slaughter PSG 4-0 in a CL match and then you go on to concede 2 in 15mins to Brighton in the league and suddenly your players can't seem to be able to string two passes together or to hit a hangar door... And no matter what you ask them to do, they just keep on doing their thing, which

a) doesn't work for some reason
b) is NOT what you asked them
c) is most definitely NOT what the basic tactical setup/instructions would suggest

Basically, as long as you click "Play Match", casually watches Key Highlights while multitasking, make some subs and give the right teamtalks, and you WIN, it's fine. The moment things start to unravel, completely at random, you're indeed at the ME's mercy.

We are not playing against the AI team, we're playing along with/against the ME's specific quirks and issues. Which is way less fun.

[Mitja]

1 minute ago, pheelf said:

Is that so? I guess that's why in the game he posted against Ipswich where he used the attacking mentality and high pressing he lost because it's so OP.

You win some you loose some that's not a problem. How football style is displayed is a problem because many times it won't be what it is supposed to be. PLayers shouldn't behave that differently because of mentality change, now it seems it has much more effect vs player ability. As for attacking mentality high press tactics being OP is known fact.

[bitzu_rock]

20 hours ago, CFuller said:

No, it isn't. Just because teams dominate certain statistics doesn't mean they should win. You can hog possession as much as you like and pepper your opponent with dozens of shots, but the only statistic that ultimately matters is the final score.

Take the last two Manchester derbies at the Etihad. In December, City had 72% possession and 23 shots to United's 11. And just last night in the EFL Cup, City had 13 shots (4 on target) compared to just 6 (2) for United. Which team won both those games? United.

In fact, results that belie the statistics happen several times every week - at all levels of football. That's why I always say there's no such thing as being "FMed" (or "FIFAed", if you play that).

One or two of these results going against you could be down to luck... but if you're consistently 'dominating' matches and failing to win, you're maybe doing something wrong tactically. I'd suggest going to the tactics forum and posting up your system. Maybe you're being too aggressive and leaving your defence horribly exposed to counter-attacks? We can't know for sure unless you help us out here.

Don't blame the game for your own failures.

"Don't blame the game for your own failures." ?????????????????????????????

That we are many who suck at tactics because it also happens to me. Having better stats and loosing or drawing....often....oh man...read the comments on the posts...

[CFuller]

1 minute ago, bitzu_rock said:

"Don't blame the game for your own failures." ?????????????????????????????

That we are many who suck at tactics because it also happens to me. Having better stats and loosing or drawing....often....oh man...read the comments on the posts...

Just because your team has better attributes than the other team does not mean they should win.

But sure, it's entirely the game's fault that you're not very good...

[Tyburn]

So you create a tactic, you start training the players to play the roles you’ve decided on, set up training etc and start to play some games.

In the first few games, I nearly always find, my tactic looks roughly how I want it to. Then I hit a lull, where everyone looks like strangers and we’re not playing how I’d imagine. Might make a few little tweaks and then at some point, around 10 games in, the tactic starts to click.

If it doesn’t then the concept plus the players are not right. This happens in reality. Watford this year for example. Awful until the managerial change. Same players, different system. Now they look good.

Lots or stars need to align for it all to click. You simply can’t just set up a tactic and expect it to work as you’d wish. It needs to be cultivated. And you need some luck. As in reality. I’ve played multiple styles and tactics and all have had some success and some failure. But I don’t think it’s just down to the ME alone.

It would be seriously boring imo if you could just create a style, tactic, formation that always played as you’ve instructed it to. The game tries to replicate the human nature to football. Players have off days, refuse to implement the managers vision, have poor morale, poor relationships on and off the pitch, need time to settle at a new club etc. They all influence matchday. Players aren’t robots.

I think on the whole fm20 handles this well.

I’ve managed 3 teams in my 6 year journeyman career. Played various formations and tactical instructions. Each club has had varied levels of player ability, varied expectations, varied club dna. And the performances and styles on the pitch have also varied. What worked for Villa has not worked for Napoli. I’ve adapted my style for Napoli based on the players and what I’ve been seeing.

Im playing a 2 player network game. My brother on the other hand, who has managed 4 clubs has taken a different approach. He’s played the exact same tactic the whole save. Had brilliant success with it at his first two clubs but is finding it more of a challenge since he’s moved to his last two. I mention it to highlight how different leagues, clubs, players are just that, different.

Again I feel the game handles this very well. Please don’t ask for everything to become uniform. It’ll be boring.

Every tactic has some merit. It just needs some perseverance, a bit of luck and a full understanding of how the game handles everything as a whole. The AI is also supposed to adapt to your tactics. Throw that in and it’s a total organic mess. As it should be.

If it’s not working, change it. But it’s not to say it wouldn’t work at a different club.

[Jimmious7]

Definitely not the worst ever. There have been so many implementations and the current version is ages ahead of old versions. It's certainly one of the buggiest in the recent years though, that's a given

[RBKalle]

50 minuti fa, pheelf ha scritto:

If in your opinion it's the worst ME ever and you are getting no satisfaction from playing it then why are you still persisting with it? 

For starters, becuase I've PAID MONEY for it and I'm trying to get as much value/fun out of it as I can. Unfortunately, when a supposedly fun game makes you wanna punch the monitor and throw it out of the window, it's not a good sign.

Then because despite the godawful and inconsistent ME, the rest of the game is actually fun and feels more organic than ever. And it makes the ME ****show even more frustrating and annoying...

[Tyburn]

10 minutes ago, Mitja said:

You win some you loose some that's not a problem. How football style is displayed is a problem because many times it won't be what it is supposed to be. PLayers shouldn't behave that differently because of mentality change, now it seems it has much more effect vs player ability. As for attacking mentality high press tactics being OP is known fact.

I’ve actually had my worse times playing that strategy. High press, yes, that seems OP because players don’t get tired quick enough. But attacking? I seem to always get done with that mentality.

[pheelf]

7 minutes ago, CaptainPlanet said:

I mean, anything I'm saying at this point is just saying the same things I've already said again.

People either think there are major problems with the ME or they don't. And the responses either agree that there are problems (either because people can't win or can't win in the 'right way') or are "It's your tactics" and "git gud" from people who think the ME is fine and it's a user problem.

Then there are others like me who think there are issues with the ME while also holding the view that user input can be a cause of why certain things happen in the ME, the two are not incompatible.

[bitzu_rock]

13 minutes ago, CFuller said:

Just because your team has better attributes than the other team does not mean they should win.

But sure, it's entirely the game's fault that you're not very good...

@CFuller

i am saying it happens to lots of people and too often. I also see many football games and i know there is no perfect tactic for most of the teams, but it happens often and from what i see not only for me. 

Also to mention that the wingers are always shooting from close angle (also on support with shoot less option selected) instead of passing to the center, to unmarked players....this is not a tactic issue i think.

Edited January 31, 2020 by bitzu_rock

[CaptainPlanet]

Just now, pheelf said:

Then there are others like me who think there are issues with the ME while also holding the view that user input can be a cause of why certain things happen in the ME, the two are not incompatible.

And I'd suggest the posts I was quoting weren't worded in that way and instead only focused on the user input as the likely main cause.

"It could be your tactics" vs "It is your tactics" are two very different responses.

[pheelf]

5 minutes ago, RBKalle said:

For starters, becuase I've PAID MONEY for it and I'm trying to get as much value/fun out of it as I can. Unfortunately, when a supposedly fun game makes you wanna punch the monitor and throw it out of the window, it's not a good sign.

Then because despite the godawful and inconsistent ME, the rest of the game is actually fun and feels more organic than ever. And it makes the ME ****show even more frustrating and annoying...

I paid my money as well, doesn't mean that I'm guaranteed to enjoy the product and that SI somehow owe me something. Neither does it mean that it has to live up to all of my expectations. If a game is getting you like that then I think you really should take a break. Unless of course you're just saying that for dramatic effect.

[pheelf]

3 minutes ago, CaptainPlanet said:

And I'd suggest the posts I was quoting weren't worded in that way and instead only focused on the user input as the likely main cause.

"It could be your tactics" vs "It is your tactics" are two very different responses.

Fair enough, point taken.

[bitzu_rock]

1 minute ago, pheelf said:

I paid my money as well, doesn't mean that I'm guaranteed to enjoy the product and that SI somehow owe me something. Neither does it mean that it has to live up to all of my expectations. If a game is getting you like that then I think you really should take a break. Unless of course you're just saying that for dramatic effect.

@pheelf

So..basically..he is not allowed to complain ?

[Major Raver]

12 hours ago, Welshace said:

Which is why @CFuller is suggesting OP shouldn't blame the game.... if the AI is scoring fine, then the user should be able to aswell.. it's that simple...

But the problem so many are having, is world class forwards playing for you miss sitters regularly, and then the opposition hits you with a 35yard wonder freekick.  That happens far to often.  A couple of times a season yes, but regular in defeats, no.  Whether that is an issue between how the match engine represents the result, it is the reason people are struggling.  They are being shown that they are building tactics that the match engine is showing are successful for creating clear cut chances, and is defensively sound bar for the wonder free kicks.

 

Telling people to slightly change a player role is silly, but only not silly if the ME is broken and using this to show flaws in your setup.  Which then begs the question, why have an ME in the first place, we should just go back to the old commentary only.

[Jimmious7]

If I could rank my wishes for an upcoming patch, I think I would put "display how the foul was committed before displaying the actual free kick" as number 1. 

It's extremely annoying to randomly see free kicks that lead to chances without any context at all. Who is committing these fouls? Why? I can't even see the basic information I need to maybe change something. 

[pheelf]

4 minutes ago, bitzu_rock said:

@pheelf

So..basically..he is not allowed to complain ?

He's perfectly entitled to complain but what I can't get my head around is why anybody would force themselves to play a game which they see as the worst ever (ME).

Edited January 31, 2020 by pheelf

[andysafc]

I think if we are supposed to play a certain way to achieve success then the game should provide the correct tools. For example.... it is widely regarded that the in match advice is wrong. Whether people use it or not is not the issue, the issue is the tools they are trying to give you is wrong. Player roles, what is the point of the traffic light system if it means nothing. As I showed a player who is ineffective had a good game. The traffic light system shows Will Grigg’s best position is a Poacher but I have never been able to get him to be successful as a poacher yet. So it it better to ignore what they are saying is advised because it means nothing in the match engine anyway?

[bitzu_rock]

1 minute ago, pheelf said:

He's perfectly entitled to complain but what I can't get my head around is why anybody would force themselves to play a game which they see as the worst ever (ME).

Maybe because they want to point out it is worst ever (this is not my opinion entirely but i somehow agree that is worst) ?

 

[Tyburn]

5 minutes ago, Major Raver said:

But the problem so many are having, is world class forwards playing for you miss sitters regularly, and then the opposition hits you with a 35yard wonder freekick.  That happens far to often.  A couple of times a season yes, but regular in defeats, no.  Whether that is an issue between how the match engine represents the result, it is the reason people are struggling.  They are being shown that they are building tactics that the match engine is showing are successful for creating clear cut chances, and is defensively sound bar for the wonder free kicks.

 

Telling people to slightly change a player role is silly, but only not silly if the ME is broken and using this to show flaws in your setup.  Which then begs the question, why have an ME in the first place, we should just go back to the old commentary only.

This is showing that your tactic is off. Yes it looks wonky, bad even, and is very frustrating. But it’s the games way of telling you that your tactic is off. It’s not pretty. But that is what’s happening.

[andysafc]

7 minutes ago, pheelf said:

He's perfectly entitled to complain but what I can't get my head around is why anybody would force themselves to play a game which they see as the worst ever (ME).

Maybe in the hope it may actually get addressed and fixed? Isn’t that what we all want? If you say nowt it is no good complaining that nowt gets done.

not hard to get my head around that.

Edited January 31, 2020 by andysafc

[Tyburn]

For something to be fixed it needs to be broken. The ME is not broken. Wonky. But not unplayable. Simply do not understand the hyperbole of “broken”. It’s what FM has always been. Striving for perfection and having issues. 

Just hope all the moaning doesn’t result in a non organic snooze fest of a ME.

[bitzu_rock]

And when someone says it is the tactic that is wrong....why not asking if the game itself forces you to use a specific tactic to get better result or not so many annoying in match situations..is that right ?

[Jimmious7]

1 minute ago, bitzu_rock said:

And when someone says it is the tactic that is wrong....why not asking if the game itself forces you to use a specific tactic to get better result or not so many annoying in match situations..is that right ?

To be honest, in every version of FM and CM that has ever been, there were always tactics that performed better than others due to the ME. It's the nature of the beast

[Tyburn]

2 minutes ago, bitzu_rock said:

And when someone says it is the tactic that is wrong....why not asking if the game itself forces you to use a specific tactic to get better result or not so many annoying in match situations..is that right ?

Yeah. Watford played a 5 at the back tactic predominantly start of season in reality. Now they play 4 at the back. Results? Much improved.

[pheelf]

3 minutes ago, bitzu_rock said:

Maybe because they want to point out it is worst ever (this is not my opinion entirely but i somehow agree that is worst) ?

That has been done to death already (just look in the feedback thread). If SI aren't aware of the issues in the ME by now considering that there has been constant daily reminders for months now then I don't know what to say. Keep repeating the same things over and over isn't going to make any difference.

4 minutes ago, andysafc said:

Maybe in the hope it may actually get addressed and fixed? Isn’t that what we all want?

not hard to get my head around that.

Yes, ultimately improving the ME and addressing bugs is what we all want to see but what's the point in playing it in its current state which he states he's not happy with and then complaining about it, it's a waste of time in my view. Just don't play it until your happy with it and if that time never comes then don't buy it anymore especially if getting value for money is a consideration.