Jump to content

Football Manager 2020 Feedback Thread


Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, sverige91 said:

Can you Please give me some example, How did you get your forward to score 1v1 by making a tweak, there is no option to tell your striker to how to shoot more accuralty, not even in the pre-match breifing. 

If I knew how to post my tactic I’d be more than happy to show you it. What I will say is that in my 4123 everyone bar my back 4 has no personal instructions. I use a CF(s), IW(a), W(a). My midfield are 2 CM(auto) and a CDM(s) so that they have no imbedded instructions. My FB’s are on WB(auto) and I use 2 BPD’s(d). I play between cautious and positive mentality with a standard defensive line but a lower line of engagement. Extreme pressing when in this area. Various other bits and bobs but that’s the jist of it.

The key for me was to take away as many Pi’s as possible. The 4 roles I have on auto also drive my mentality. I set up the formation and mentality and then let my players and their traits shape the game.

I just tried to make a simple tactic, after hours of bogging down my tactics with ticking anything that could be ticked. And it’s worked.

I also use an AF in the ST role and he’s scoring 1v1’s too.

As previously stated, I’m no wizard, but simplifying my tactic has worked out well.

Edited by sidslayer
Player role edits after memory jog
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 8.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

5 minutes ago, Martini1991 said:

 

You've been talking in absolutes, now you're saying in your opinion.

In *my* opinion, if what you're suggesting is true, then that to me is a broken simulation game as it fails to portray things anywhere close to accurate.

I however don't think you're correct which is why SI are saying they're improving conversion rates still.

Of course it’s my opinion, based on the fact I’ve changed my tactic and my ST’s are scoring 1v1’s. 

Broken means not working. It is working. Just not how you and others would like.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sidslayer said:

It’s relevant in a discussion that is so very one sided.

My point is that it’s not impossible, or simply the ME being “broken”. I’ve already stated the ME has it in for ST’s and 1v1’s. But I thought I should also point out that tactical tweaks can mitigate this issue.

Ofc the ME has issues (it always has and probably always will) But tactics, I’ve noticed, have a huge baring on how the ME presents itself to you.

I agree that tactical changes helps one create better and perhaps more chances, maybe even help create such sort of chances that could lead to better conversion rate upto some extent... But saying that bad finishing could be because ME is trying to tell you there's something wrong with tactics is whole different thing. It borders on conspiracy theory imo, would be highly illogical thing to add by SI to begin with. That's all i have to add so i will leave this discussion here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sidslayer said:

Of course it’s my opinion, based on the fact I’ve changed my tactic and my ST’s are scoring 1v1’s. 

Broken means not working. It is working. Just not how you and others would like.

If a striker is missing a one on one because I've got 3 CM's rather than 2, would you consider that a working simulation?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Martini1991 said:

If a striker is missing a one on one because I've got 3 CM's rather than 2, would you consider that a working simulation?

It depends on the bigger picture, doesn’t it? The game is massive. Managing a football team is massive. Anything can throw it all out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, witchplease said:

I agree that tactical changes helps one create better and perhaps more chances, maybe even help create such sort of chances that could lead to better conversion rate upto some extent... But saying that bad finishing could be because ME is trying to tell you there's something wrong with tactics is whole different thing. It borders on conspiracy theory imo, would be highly illogical thing to add by SI to begin with. That's all i have to add so i will leave this discussion here.

I’m literally only passing on what I’ve noticed. That is all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To me it really 'feels like' the ME is actually working backwards. It first and foremost calculates the score. THEN it calculates what 'could have happened' to reach that score. So, if you create a tactic that exploits the ME and creates a lot of 1on1's, you miss most of them. With my tactical setup my 1on1 and ccc conversion rate is so high, actually higher than any real life statistics. Go figure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sidslayer said:

It’s how the game deals with a tactical issue. It looks awful, your world class ST missing 1v1’s, but it’s how the game deals with your tactic not being right.

In my experience. In my view. My opinion. I altered my tactic. My ST started scoring more 1v1’s.

Again it’s not pretty. It’s just a fact from my reality of FM20.

 

1 hour ago, sidslayer said:

If I knew how to post my tactic I’d be more than happy to show you it. What I will say is that in my 4123 everyone bar my back 4 has no personal instructions. I use a CF(s), IW(a), W(a). My midfield are 2 CM(auto) and a CDM(s) so that they have no imbedded instructions. My FB’s are on WB(auto) and I use 2 BPD’s(d). I play between cautious and positive mentality with a standard defensive line but a lower line of engagement. Extreme pressing when in this area. Various other bits and bobs but that’s the jist of it.

The key for me was to take away as many Pi’s as possible. The 4 roles I have on auto also drive my mentality. I set up the formation and mentality and then let my players and their traits shape the game.

I just tried to make a simple tactic, after hours of bogging down my tactics with ticking anything that could be ticked. And it’s worked.

I also use an AF in the ST role and he’s scoring 1v1’s too.

As previously stated, I’m no wizard, but simplifying my tactic has worked out well.

Similar experience to yourself too. 

I stripped back my 4123 into a 4411 and play on balanced instead of positive. Removed almost all of the PIs and cut down on one or two TIs. Changed my striker from a DLF-s to an AF and the same striker has gone from scoring 12 in 31 games (all comps) to scoring 24 goals in 33 games. 

The idea of how we play has remained the same but I've changed the formation to give my players more space to attack into both centrally and on the wings and the difference coupled with some other tweaks has been clear to see. 

Edited by craigcwwe
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, craigcwwe said:

 

Similar experience to yourself too. 

I stripped back my 4123 into a 4411 and play on balanced instead of positive. Removed almost all of the PIs and cut down on one or two TIs. Changed my striker from a DLF-s to an AF and the same striker has gone from scoring 12 in 31 games (all comps) to scoring 24 goals in 33 games. 

The idea of how we play has remained the same but I've changed the formation to give my players more space to attack into both centrally and on the wings and the difference coupled with some other tweaks has been clear to see. 

Going to try this out.... i'll report back if successful... if I don't i'll have switched to space invaders

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

Of course it’s my opinion, based on the fact I’ve changed my tactic and my ST’s are scoring 1v1’s. 

Broken means not working. It is working. Just not how you and others would like.

If a product does not work as intended it is defective, therefore broken in any common sense.

Anything lower than a standard mentality doesn't work. Counter doesn't work. Defensive doesn't work. If anyone can show otherwise then I would look at it. But for me, as I want to play a counter system, the game is broken. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, davehanson said:

If a product does not work as intended it is defective, therefore broken in any common sense.

Anything lower than a standard mentality doesn't work. Counter doesn't work. Defensive doesn't work. If anyone can show otherwise then I would look at it. But for me, as I want to play a counter system, the game is broken. 

My tactic is predominantly cautious. If you look at basics to my current tactic above you will see it is a counter tactic, but i am using a custom tactical style. It is fluid. I'm winning games. In fact I'm in a brilliant dog fight as Napoli against Inter this season. Pellegri 22 goals in 26 games. Scoring 1v1's.

I think it's been mentioned recently in this thread that part of the key to the 1v1 "issue" is to minimise them. If you're creating multiple 1v1's in a game, the chances are, you're not going to score many of them. This is a ME issue, with certain tactics, that spawn 1v1's like sweets. These chances just wouldn't happen, over and over again in a match - at any level in reality. But hey, it's a game. My tactic, although creating a fair few 1v1's also has other attacking threats, through build up. I like the natural balance of this tactic, but i would still say counter attacks that start from deep are my main goal threat.

I would also say that defective is more aligned to faulty in this instance. Works fine but has issues. Not broken.

 

Edited by sidslayer
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, sidslayer said:

My tactic is predominantly cautious. If you look at basics to my current tactic above you will see it is a counter tactic, but i am using a custom tactical style. It is fluid. I'm winning games. In fact I'm in a brilliant dog fight as Napoli against Inter this season. Pellegri 22 goals in 26 games. Scoring 1v1's.

I think it's been mentioned recently in this thread that part of the key to the 1v1 "issue" is to minimise them. If you're creating multiple 1v1's in a game, the chances are, you're not going to score many of them. This is a ME issue, with certain tactics, that spawn 1v1's like sweets. These chances just wouldn't happen, over and over again in a match - at any level in reality. But hey, it's a game. My tactic, although creating a fair few 1v1's also has other attacking threats, through build up. I like the natural balance of this tactic, but i would still say counter attacks that start from deep are my main goal threat.

I would also say that defective is more aligned to faulty in this instance. Works fine but has issues. Not broken.

 

faulty
/ˈfɔːlti,ˈfɒlti/
adjective
 
  1. not working or made correctly; having defects.
Link to post
Share on other sites

So, we had another 2 or 3 pages with tactical and ME discussions. Give it a rest and please let this thread go back to general feedback about the game. 

Tactical discussions are welcome in the tactic forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 16 Minuten schrieb davehanson:

Hold on. Neil merged the 'Is this the worse ME ever' thread into here, which is where all the discussion began. A little unfair to merge a thread and then go and tell us we can't carry on discussing what we were discussing in the original thread.

These kind of discussions always going in circles, as people want to convince other people. 

I think all had time to post their points and now it would be nice to read more feedback from other people.

Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 1 Stunde schrieb davehanson:

If a product does not work as intended it is defective, therefore broken in any common sense.

Anything lower than a standard mentality doesn't work. Counter doesn't work. Defensive doesn't work. If anyone can show otherwise then I would look at it. But for me, as I want to play a counter system, the game is broken. 

Did we cencorship your view or post? No. But we would like to read as many views as possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sidslayer said:

Oh come on!

Let's keep things on topic and giving feedback about the game or we will have to restrict people from posting in the thread. 

If there's insights into the match engine to share with regards to feedback, then more than happy to hear that here. 

If "discussion" is simply arguing with other posters on your points of view then that derails the purpose of the thread (and the thread that was merged into this one). 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, bleventozturk said:

This is what is terribly wrong with the ME, ever since FM 19. Look how the blue team is defending. Who in the world defends like that, completely ignoring the wider players? And really no need to add one more pkm at the moment, because these are not anomalies, this is not a bug. SI needs to make a fundamental change to the defensive side, and that change is 1 whole year late by now and counting.

image.thumb.png.6e869a60deba261db5e13c2842d86881.png


Man Utd? :D

690.jpg

Edited by roykela
Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually saw a clip on MOTD, maybe two weeks ago, i think it was Watford, where their winger dribbled from the halfway line to the near post and then shot tamely at the keeper. Was hilarious.

Edited by sidslayer
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a cracking 0-0 draw at home to panderborn.

My striker missed 7 one on ones and a penalty.

I used to think this ME was a tragedy but now I realise it’s a comedy.

Edited by iMan
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, KUBI said:

Did we cencorship your view or post? No. But we would like to read as many views as possible.

Some of the more recent post aren't views -- but factually incorrect stuff about how the ME works (and the tactical parts of the game too). In the past this used to be moderated. It still spreads wrong notions about how to learn to play the game. At the Risk of dragging this off-topic or for repeating already expressed sentiments, I'm putting the following in a spoiler, and then I'm done (not getting into discussions).

 

For instance, forwards don't just arbitrarily score more 1vs1s just because you'd made some random switch. The game likewise doesn't arbitrarily show you your tactics is wrong by making forwards miss over and over. It also doesn't work backwards from a scoreline. LIkewise, chances needn't be minimized. If he's de facto scoring more over a reasonable sample size, he will typically have different one one ones, from different angles, distances, distance to the next defender near, angle of assist, keeper positioning, footedness, pace and so on typically. Naturally, this is influenced by tactics -- including the opposition's.

They may look exactly the same to whoever. However, upon Closer examination, they typically won't be though. Indeed, Picking that difference up can be a challenge. I'd personally heavily encourage players to make that distinction, as some 1vs1 may be to be watched more, some less. I'Ve shown that some of them right on FM20 are/used to be converted at actually 50/50 ratios for 30-0 scorelines if they repeat in dozens per match via "unrealistic" tactics, whilst others may be much less so. At least one older edition had issues with specific type of one on ones in the past. They could only get fixed by making distinctions in the first place. By far more observant players than me.

Edited by Svenc
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Who is the one delete my message? I was once moderator myself in my gaming forums. Who is the police?.  Tell me in PM what is the problem. Thanks. Otherwise very impudent guys.

Edited by baris28
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, baris28 said:

Hi,

Who is the one delete my message? I was once moderator myself in my gaming forums. Who is the police?.  Tell me in PM what is the problem. Thanks. Otherwise very impudent guys.

That post was totally unrelated to this thread, if you have a bug to report it belongs in the bugs forum. As a moderator yourself you should know that posting in multiple places in the forum is not advisable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are players who are out with long-term injury supposed to pick up mentoring traits? I started a Chelsea save and Loftus-Cheek is out injured yet somehow managed to develop the comes deep to get ball trait. Is this normal? Seems like it should not be a thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another day and there's still no hope of an update. :(

I also read earlier that SI don't have any plans to update the public beta at this point. I should think that it means they want to release something to us. We're literally one month away from the .3 update. I would rather they release a few fixes before that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like stadium's roof still have no sence in FM. This is actually a very expensive pleasure for clubs and this feature available to play in +20*C when outside weather could be -5*C and even lower.
Since a weather is one of the factors in the calculation of ME, and logically, it reduces the number of injuries + improves the quality of the lawn, I really want to see the positive effect of the roof in a cold months.
Also it will be cool for rich clubs from regions with cold winters were interested in building of roofs in own stadiums or new.

Edited by Novem9
Link to post
Share on other sites

I lose one more point because of an 85th minute, 25 yard volley from a dogsh*t Vanarama Regional player, and I'm done

 

edit: 2 minutes later my poacher got a through ball, and hit the post, but the ball bounced back to him, so he hit the same post again :D

this game is borderline a joke

 

edit 2: oooh, and also, it's another occasion where some shots don't register, so they don't appear in the analysis view. those 2 woodworks are nowhere to be found.

when so many tiny things are not working, across so many areas, it ends up making every effort pointless. why should I bother with analysis if events are randomly omitted?

Edited by Glen_Runciter
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, iMan said:

Just had a cracking 0-0 draw at home to panderborn.

My striker missed 7 one on ones and a penalty.

I used to think this ME was a tragedy but now I realise it’s a comedy.

Nice quote from Joker! 😂😂😂

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

Are players who are out with long-term injury supposed to pick up mentoring traits? I started a Chelsea save and Loftus-Cheek is out injured yet somehow managed to develop the comes deep to get ball trait. Is this normal? Seems like it should not be a thing.

I raised something similar in the bug forum. Not related to injuries, admittedly, but to do with picking up traits unintentionally. 

I got an initial reply, but then I found some conflicting information and I'm still awaiting a response.

This was my original post:

And this was the conflicting information:

On 08/01/2020 at 19:38, Sebastian Szlenkier said:

This is a player who has picked up a new trait outside of mentoring.

On 17/12/2018 at 22:32, Seb Wassell said:

Outside of Mentoring and Coaching players should not pick up traits.

 

Edited by Bry
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, danstam said:

Are players who are out with long-term injury supposed to pick up mentoring traits? I started a Chelsea save and Loftus-Cheek is out injured yet somehow managed to develop the comes deep to get ball trait. Is this normal? Seems like it should not be a thing.

Could post this in our bugs area please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

playing the public beta. scored 97 goals in the league. about 85 came from a cross.

i doubt ME will get fixed but this is at least playable. no more 1v1, no more ball over the top. but also still no chance created from central area no matter what formation or tactic. yet somehow every game produced 30+ shots.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Sanel said:

 

Hahahahaha what? :lol: I've read this 3 times to actually believe you just typed this.

Find me a match where one team has 8 clear 1v1’s ... 

The game doesn’t represent the reality in this regard.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Svenc said:

Some of the more recent post aren't views -- but factually incorrect stuff about how the ME works (and the tactical parts of the game too). In the past this used to be moderated. It still spreads wrong notions about how to learn to play the game. At the Risk of dragging this off-topic or for repeating already expressed sentiments, I'm putting the following in a spoiler, and then I'm done (not getting into discussions).

  Hide contents

For instance, forwards don't just arbitrarily score more 1vs1s just because you'd made some random switch. The game likewise doesn't arbitrarily show you your tactics is wrong by making forwards miss over and over. It also doesn't work backwards from a scoreline. LIkewise, chances needn't be minimized. If he's de facto scoring more over a reasonable sample size, he will typically have different one one ones, from different angles, distances, distance to the next defender near, angle of assist, keeper positioning, footedness, pace and so on typically. Naturally, this is influenced by tactics -- including the opposition's.

They may look exactly the same to whoever. However, upon Closer examination, they typically won't be though. Indeed, Picking that difference up can be a challenge. I'd personally heavily encourage players to make that distinction, as some 1vs1 may be to be watched more, some less. I'Ve shown that some of them right on FM20 are/used to be converted at actually 50/50 ratios for 30-0 scorelines if they repeat in dozens per match via "unrealistic" tactics, whilst others may be much less so. At least one older edition had issues with specific type of one on ones in the past. They could only get fixed by making distinctions in the first place. By far more observant players than me.

So not necessarily creating LESS 1v1’s, just creating the RIGHT 1v1’s, will have an impact. Is this correct?

I’m obviously creating both. Hadn’t noticed I must be creating the RIGHT 1v1’s, just that I was having LESS.

Interesting. Seems like a tactical issue then. If this information is to be taken as true, right, making any sense.

I’m not looking for an argument. I think this is some interesting feedback about an issue that is very prevalent in this ME.

I get it’s boring to keep going on about it... but it is a topic it seems a fair few of us want to discuss. 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 31/01/2020 at 08:17, andysafc said:

test.thumb.png.3f5f9c82a5566422dbb4c04092e91220.pngtest2.thumb.png.0453b9cdd63eeadaad396de73205c207.png

 

Using @Hasbro advice, here is an example of my concerns with the ME. In this example the score does not matter (you can't judge a tactic on one performance).

My two best performers in that game were LEADBITTER and GRIGG. Leadbitter was deployed as a RIGISTA and Grigg as a CF. Neither player is really suitable for those roles so if i was making that tactic i would look at that and say no that is not suitable for my players. Then the ME shows different and they preform fairly  good in those roles, better than players playing in their natural roles. See the confusion?

I didn't mean that you should play that way. that was my team. These are the formations I generally play.

The instructions suit my players not yours. Why play grigg as a cf ?

 

Football Manager 2020 01_02_2020 16_35_20.png

Football Manager 2020 01_02_2020 16_35_40.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

This ME code seems to be so outdated that it can't keep up with the ever increasing number of tactical options SI keeps adding to the game. There is just so much room for improvement, and to be honest some of them are so obviously and desperately needed, and they should be implemented before they add even more tactical options. Such as:

1) Defenders actually tracking opponent player movement. Not sure why this can't be coded. Just like the ball, players are also an object in the game. If they can track the ball, they should be able to track the players without the ball. They say every player makes like 16 decisions every second of the ME, so some of those decisions should be affected by the positions of opponent players. Sure it will make the code fatter, but do it already, it's been years. 

2) AI's choice of formation and mentality being dependent on the score only. Again, I don't see why you can't add to the code that for example if the opponent has more players than AI team at the central areas, then defend narrow. If they have more players at wider areas, defend wider. This can be easily hard coded, without analysing what is happening in the match. It looks so unrealistic that they keep leaving the wider areas open by default when they go defensive. Central areas were being exploited in FM 17 by adding a 3rd MC? What does SI do, pack the middle, no matter what. What kind of a solution is that? Now you have the wider areas exposed. Make it dynamic, at least based on opponent's formation.

3) If you want to proceed further from #2 and make it even more sophisticated: match analysis tool is already available.  No reason why AI can't check it out every few minutes and see how you are actually attacking, and adjust defensive width based on that.

These are some REAL improvements to the ME, that I would like to see in future versions. The ME has been crawling in terms of improvements for so long.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hazpro said:

The instructions suit my players not yours. Why play grigg as a cf ?

 

Football Manager 2020 01_02_2020 16_35_20.png

 

See that 4231 shouldn't work, you have nobody protecting your defence and are using aggressive wing backs. I am using aggressive wing backs in my 4231 but I'm using a CM (D) and a CAR (S) as the '2', which are both very much defensive roles. You're using two box to box midfielders. 

Edited by Gee_Simpson
Link to post
Share on other sites

Far too many set piece goals. Started a new season and a full half of the goals in my games so far have been from set pieces. Just tonked Liverpool 6-1 which I'd normally be delighted with as it shows I know what I'm doing and have built a great tactic but 4 of the goals were from corners. It cheapens it.

Capture.thumb.PNG.5b7e1336c142fd3045533936e5a3dd42.PNG

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...