Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
Neil Brock

Football Manager 2020 Feedback Thread

Recommended Posts

Hello! 

Like everywhere negativity from a few beats the people who are satisfied and therefore more silent. a long time FM-player here but have had a few years off, due to many things. Have bought this years version of the game. My question is simple and hopefully someone with a balanced view can give me an honest answer. Because I don't really believe the game is that bad some people say on this forum. Is the game with the current patch balanced enough for starting a long term save or should I wait for the Christmas update? 

Don't have the energy to search for this answers myself. If someone with some hours playing this game have some time over to answer I would be very happy. 

Many thanks in advance! 😊

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Mitja said:

Look at the amount of people who care a little more about the game in this thread, how many people are not satisfied? I've seen many.

Curiously, has this ever been overly much different? The GD big thread in particular plays roughly the same every Season to me, give or take. (I have been "guilty" of focusing exclusively on the negative Things in the past myself). You can switch the hot Topics accordingly to any release's perceived issues, but in my mind it's all a blur by now. :D I'm involved with quite a few gaming communities (I've even made a couple Posts on the notoriously toxic / pessimistic RPG Codex). However FM's seems quite Special. May be the emotional Attachement involved, some of the inherent randomness, how the subject matter simulated isn't an exact science (and such up for debate and opinion) and lots more. Curiously, it's all a part of what keeps me coming back though. :D FM isn't merely a game, if successful, it is also an interesting crowd experiment and look into a player's Psyche. And sometimes, on the odd Occasion it's successfully art bits and bytes imitating life, as not every single issue perceived throughout the years may have been a game issue.

 

Football Manager, bloody hell.

 

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


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

Just won 1-0, my tactic now is simply to push my side as high up the park as possible and press teams back.

Scored through a long shot as my midfielders are so high up the park, gave away 7 instances of the opposition being clean through as the simply knocked it over my defence, every single one saved by my keeper.

Feels pretty poor you can exploit it that easily, was a genuine challenge in previous patches to find a tactic that worked for me.

Are you still Saints? I've found a similar thing in the lower leagues where it becomes about exploiting tendencies from the ME rather than trying to get a realistic style, but not sure if this more for the Scottish leagues or similar in all of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Just won 1-0, my tactic now is simply to push my side as high up the park as possible and press teams back.

Scored through a long shot as my midfielders are so high up the park, gave away 7 instances of the opposition being clean through as the simply knocked it over my defence, every single one saved by my keeper.

Feels pretty poor you can exploit it that easily, was a genuine challenge in previous patches to find a tactic that worked for me.

With the current 1v1 conversion rate that would have resulted in three goals against me, so I guess there are some limitations on who can actually exploit that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm seeing two frustrating bits of striker movement from a DLF/S;

 

Scenario 1: Counter attack is triggered. Wide players surge forward, but the DLF holds his run or lazily jogs forward with no urgency. - It doesn't matter who is in that position, I see it frequently, although once in a while they will get the burners on and get into the box. It's annoying because the wide players only have the option to shoot, whereas if the striker surges forward we could have a one-two or a cutback option on. The movement is very choreographed, it looks terrible, so this is either an ME issue or a graphical issue, much like how everyone sits about waiting on a fart whilst only one player approaches a loose ball. It comes across as too artificial when that sort of thing happens.

 

Scenario 2: Throw-ins.

Holy hell do they take a while to move for throw-ins? They come short, even when I tell them not to, but I had a peach earlier; Throw in on the left side outside the box. Thrown in, and the ball ends up on the right wing. My Inside forward gets into the box ready to attack. My DLF sits by the corner flag, lazily walking about. He should be busting a gut to get in to the box for the eventual cross. I scored off this chance, by the IF, but I'm just saying the movement is lacking and that shouldn't be the case, even support duty strikers should be aware of the goalscoring opportunities available to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, isignedupfornorealreason said:

I'm seeing two frustrating bits of striker movement from a DLF/S;

 

Scenario 1: Counter attack is triggered. Wide players surge forward, but the DLF holds his run or lazily jogs forward with no urgency. - It doesn't matter who is in that position, I see it frequently, although once in a while they will get the burners on and get into the box. It's annoying because the wide players only have the option to shoot, whereas if the striker surges forward we could have a one-two or a cutback option on. The movement is very choreographed, it looks terrible, so this is either an ME issue or a graphical issue, much like how everyone sits about waiting on a fart whilst only one player approaches a loose ball. It comes across as too artificial when that sort of thing happens.

If you want the movement you're clearly after from this role then you want the DLF-A not support. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, isignedupfornorealreason said:

lazily jogs forward with no urgency

following craigs comment, have you looked at his workrate or lead up to the counter? what his fitness and match fintess is? natural fitness and stamina too? decision making, concerntration and off the ball are v important aswell. 

I'd also watch the game in 2d and you can specifically if the movement is good or bad, 3d gives some uses but 2D really shines for tactical ways, you can see differences clearer. Give it a go or watch the compre highlights. 

I'd also argue your mentality and TI'S/PI'S have a big influence on it too- Line of engagment, DLF tend to hold the ball so usually want it short towards them rather than beyond them (that's the AF/PF role) also if you're attacking they tend to be more rilled up to work but if on counter/defensive then they usually wait for the given moments. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think that this year’s game is harder, in some aspects, mainly against big teams. The difficult part is figuring out what tweaks need to be made regarding tactics. I’ve had success in just shutting down wing-play, sitting in a low block, and absorbing pressure, because it seems that the first goal is the most difficult for the AI to score. One game that I played like this resulted in a 2-0 win, which were also my only 2 shots on target, and I believe the AI had close to 10. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, steviemay17 said:

Are you still Saints? I've found a similar thing in the lower leagues where it becomes about exploiting tendencies from the ME rather than trying to get a realistic style, but not sure if this more for the Scottish leagues or similar in all of them.

Aye...

65503688_DanielBegg_Inbox-3.thumb.png.f9ea44eb6e58010631dbcc016c9b40ef.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anybody find Liverpool to be near invincible this Season? They seem to win Matches in sequence despite barely having any shot Advantage. With one of the best Squads in the DB I'm currently trailing them by 14 Points. It appears the Season is truly over. In particular if you consider how much better a shot Advantage we seem to Need to beat opponents. Some of my losses, and draws so far:


2-2 Draw against Tottenham (22 vs 3 shots) 

0-2 loss against Wolves (18 vs 7 shots)
2-3 loss against Norwich (25 vs 7 shots)
2-2 draw against Newcastle (25 vs 6 shots)
1-2 loss against Man United ( 22 vs 11 shots, with Rashford "suddenly" scoring a Penalty, what coincidence)

Lost the match against Liverpool despite having 18 shots vs 12 Advantage too. Lots of CCCs too in General.

Surely can't be Right?!

 

 

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


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

Surely can't be Right?!

Time to pull out your stats :D

Like I said yesterday with that PKM I posted on here, it's incredibly easy to pull off 20-25 shots a game without even trying. Defensive AI, overly negative, producing a boat load of set-pieces massively inflates it 

I don't even know how you can report that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its just me or its a lot harder this year to win away games?

I knows away games are always diffuclt, but in FM 20 any team that i playing away from home just in a magic way start playing like all stars 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

Like I said yesterday with that PKM I posted on here, it's incredibly easy to pull off 20-25 shots a game without even trying. Defensive AI, overly negative, producing a boat load of set-pieces massively inflates it 

Off which it may or may not be too easy to get a shot off in the first place. This needed to be checked in future iterations too. There's two Kinds of defending in this game likewise -- it even has ist own tactics screen. Namely positional defending, and then the static set piece defending…..

 

@JEinchy Great post.

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


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

After some initial grumblings with the game, I've found something that works for me and can't quite pull myself away. That's Football Manager for you. Just one more game...

Having played nearly two seasons with a myriad of different tactics, I feel confident in saying that this year's FM has made playing a high risk approach tricky. A few pages back, I posted the stats from a match I played that ended with nearly 30 shots a side, with about 15 CCCs between both teams. I kept the same tactic from that game and although I was winning, I was conceding about 20 shots a game, whether it was against a good side or a struggling team down at the bottom of the table. Obviously, this couldn't continue, so I thought about why this was happening and how we could tighten up and concluded my team were taking far too many risks and getting hurt far too often in transition. I made some tweaks, reduced the amount of risk my team was taking, and now have a team which creates chances without conceding a bunch. I have hit that "FM sweet spot" of around 15-20 shots and 55-60% possession per game. 

This isn't a revelation, but it turns out, playing with a high defensive line, high line of engagement, counter-press, counter, mixed passing and a fairly high tempo, all on a positive mentality, creates a lot of turnovers and leaves my team out-of-shape and exploitable. I'm not saying this approach can't work, but in my experience, it's been one of the most punished set-ups in this year's FM and the number of players using it and struggling seems to support that. There are some ME issues that exacerbate this, too, such as some iffy final third decision making (the tendency for a player to shoot rather than wait for a run so he can pass is a lot worse playing with a high-risk set-up, for example) and slow reaction times from defenders (which I'm currently in the process of filing a bug report about, assuming nobody beats me to it) but I'm not here to talk about them.

Rather, I think a big issue is the ambiguity of the tactics creator and the advice which is given the player in-game. There's a disconnect between what the game says will happen and what actually happens. For instance, Positive mentality says its good for teams who are favourites, want to control possession and manage counter-attacks, but in reality it's an aggressive setting that sees a lot of direct passes, dribbling and shots, which are all scenarios that can lead to counter-attacks. It's a deceptive description which can trip up a lot of players because it's not clear they're taking a lot of risks by using it. What's more, that it's said to be for teams who are favourites is a misnomer because Positive and above mentalities are often used in successful counter-attacking systems, precisely because of the more aggressive risk-taking. Yet, if you wanted to build a counter-attacking system, players would instinctively choose Cautious because it's stated in-game to be a specific feature of that mentality. Cautious can certainly be used for counter-attacking, but it's not the counter-attacking mentality. It says it can facilitate aggressive counter-attacks, yet in actuality it lowers tempo and gives players a lower individual mentality. The names being changed from the old "Counter/Control" was good, but it really seems the descriptions weren't changed accordingly along with it and that doesn't help players make better decisions when building their tactics.

To compound this further, the team instructions editor will show the changes mentality has on passing, tempo, width, pressing and defensive line, but these do not show up in the sidebar as active instructions. So playing on Positive, my tempo is automatically set to Fairly High, but it's only when I set it to "Higher" that it'll appear in the sidebar. In this case, it's not immediately clear to players how mentality changes their approach. Stranger still, if I play on Balanced and increase tempo to "Fairly High", it'll show up as a TI. TIs decided by the user will appear, but the ones inherent to the mentality do not, and I think that creates unnecessary confusion. 

This brings me on to the advice the player is given on how to approach games. My ass man will frequently suggest that I should play with an Attacking mentality, and then play with four/five attacking duties because that's "appropriate for such a mentality", but this is, frankly, complete and total bull. If Attacking already makes my team more aggressive and take more risks, why do I then need to add even more aggression and risk taking on top of that? In effect, the AI here isn't promoting well-balanced tactics - it's promoting the bad habit of doubling down and making things more extreme, which creates tactics that make very little sense. While the player is free to ignore this advice, I'm concerned AI managers are following the same logic and creating unbalanced set-ups. Obviously, there has to be some poor decisions because real life managers do the same, but there are top managers in-game who under-perform because of this (hello, Pep Guardiola). 

I may put this in the features request, but I really think removing CCCs and Half Chances would be a step in the right direction. What the game determines to be a chance versus what the player determines to be a chance are too far apart for those stats to be worthwhile. My more successful teams in this series have never generated a lot of CCCs, by the game's definition, yet frequently win and score plenty of goals. This alone renders the stat pointless. It's existence causes a few other issues, too. Players playing only on Key or Extended highlights (which I feel like is the majority?) may judge their tactic on the generation of CCCs, but as we're seeing now, this is incredibly misleading. The game considers most 1v1 situations a CCC, but as has been pointed out, this isn't the case in reality - 1v1s are actually harder to score than they look. Meanwhile, a straight-forward tap-in from a cut-back is often not considered a CCC in game, despite this being one of the most common types of goals scored in real life. Players who fail to convert CCCs receive a penalty to their rating, which in turn effects a lot of other things, such as their confidence and body language, and the likelihood of them being subbed (it also leads to the infuriating "he should have done better/how did he miss that?" commentary line).

The game's assessment of chances is just weird in general. A player running onto a through pass to score is a routine move, but is often considered a "great solo effort" by the game and can even appear in goal of the month competitions. It seems any player that has to run more than 10 yards to get on the ball is deemed to be in the middle of a great solo goal. I have to wonder if this affects the quality of finishing at all; if it's not a case of the game deeming these chances more difficult, and therefore applying more inconsistent shooting to ensure that "great" goals aren't being scored all the time. 

While I'm at it - and I've complained about this before - the player ratings system is too rewarding for players who score penalties and long-shots. Any player who scores a worldie or penalty gets a significant increase despite how poorly they play. I have had striker miss every chance and give the ball away at every turn, yet still end the game with a 7.5 because they buried a pen. To say nothing of an opposition player scoring a screamer within two minutes, and my ass man telling me to close him down because "he's pulling the strings" or "running the game". This is more of a syntax issue than anything, but I do feel feedback shouldn't be attached to player ratings at all. Or, if it has to be, then player ratings should not be so easily influenced by one-off events. If this was a case of the in-game media assigning the rating, then sure, that'd be added realism. However, player ratings play a significant part in player assessment, so I hope this can one day be addressed.

I think tweaks in these areas can really help make things easier for the player. Most of the time, problems come from the player not actually knowing what everything in games does and how it affects their team, which leads them to making unbalanced set-ups.

This is one of the best posts that I’ve read in this thread. Thanks for this. I’m starting to experiment in some of the easier home games, just to see how my system works with some small changes and the different mentalities. Honestly, a “Balanced” mentality seems to be the best, depending on the quality of your team and your base tactics. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd have to agree with JEinchy regarding the attacking settings. I was becoming quite frustrated with the new patch (it was great to see that the shooting from tight angles had been fixed tho).

I then changed my tactic around slightly to calm everything down, still operating on positive but with a couple less attacking duties and some role changes, the difference has been profound. My striker is now converting chances, there are still heaps of long balls but the defence is dealing with those much better now (there's still the odd occasion when a cb stops as a long ball goes over head but nothing that could be called a big issue).

Thanks for the tip.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

Been reading a few of the 'career update' threads in that section of the forum today, always enjoy hearing about other people's saves. And then it hit me. 

Hardly any of the people who post in that part of the forum are found anywhere near here. And yet, there they are, loving their saves and being passionate about sharing their stories online. 

But, but, how can this be if the game is a 'broken, unplayable mess'? *

 

 

*Clue - it isn't. 

This is the first FM I've really felt. A need to complain about. The new additions are great and usually I'd be deeply engrossed even more than normal in my longterm save. 

But I just can't enjoy the ME as it is.

It isn't unplayable but it is difficult to get much joy from it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Strikers scoring - i play a CaC Club in a lower league and have started over bcs i got bored with the other save though i had in that save b4 that one Striker with 16 Flair and he at times was scoring 2 Goals per match, when i started over it was still 1,7 Goals per match.

He had a really good acceleration of 14 and this very high Flair of 16, every other thing was average or below average...around 8...

The next best Striker had 0,4 Goals per match…(that one was quicker, faster, had better finishing, first touch, decison etc but only a Flair of 7...).

 

Edited by Etebaer

Share this post


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

After some initial grumblings with the game, I've found something that works for me and can't quite pull myself away. That's Football Manager for you. Just one more game...

Having played nearly two seasons with a myriad of different tactics, I feel confident in saying that this year's FM has made playing a high risk approach tricky. A few pages back, I posted the stats from a match I played that ended with nearly 30 shots a side, with about 15 CCCs between both teams. I kept the same tactic from that game and although I was winning, I was conceding about 20 shots a game, whether it was against a good side or a struggling team down at the bottom of the table. Obviously, this couldn't continue, so I thought about why this was happening and how we could tighten up and concluded my team were taking far too many risks and getting hurt far too often in transition. I made some tweaks, reduced the amount of risk my team was taking, and now have a team which creates chances without conceding a bunch. I have hit that "FM sweet spot" of around 15-20 shots and 55-60% possession per game. 

This isn't a revelation, but it turns out, playing with a high defensive line, high line of engagement, counter-press, counter, mixed passing and a fairly high tempo, all on a positive mentality, creates a lot of turnovers and leaves my team out-of-shape and exploitable. I'm not saying this approach can't work, but in my experience, it's been one of the most punished set-ups in this year's FM and the number of players using it and struggling seems to support that. There are some ME issues that exacerbate this, too, such as some iffy final third decision making (the tendency for a player to shoot rather than wait for a run so he can pass is a lot worse playing with a high-risk set-up, for example) and slow reaction times from defenders (which I'm currently in the process of filing a bug report about, assuming nobody beats me to it) but I'm not here to talk about them.

Rather, I think a big issue is the ambiguity of the tactics creator and the advice which is given the player in-game. There's a disconnect between what the game says will happen and what actually happens. For instance, Positive mentality says its good for teams who are favourites, want to control possession and manage counter-attacks, but in reality it's an aggressive setting that sees a lot of direct passes, dribbling and shots, which are all scenarios that can lead to counter-attacks. It's a deceptive description which can trip up a lot of players because it's not clear they're taking a lot of risks by using it. What's more, that it's said to be for teams who are favourites is a misnomer because Positive and above mentalities are often used in successful counter-attacking systems, precisely because of the more aggressive risk-taking. Yet, if you wanted to build a counter-attacking system, players would instinctively choose Cautious because it's stated in-game to be a specific feature of that mentality. Cautious can certainly be used for counter-attacking, but it's not the counter-attacking mentality. It says it can facilitate aggressive counter-attacks, yet in actuality it lowers tempo and gives players a lower individual mentality. The names being changed from the old "Counter/Control" was good, but it really seems the descriptions weren't changed accordingly along with it and that doesn't help players make better decisions when building their tactics.

To compound this further, the team instructions editor will show the changes mentality has on passing, tempo, width, pressing and defensive line, but these do not show up in the sidebar as active instructions. So playing on Positive, my tempo is automatically set to Fairly High, but it's only when I set it to "Higher" that it'll appear in the sidebar. In this case, it's not immediately clear to players how mentality changes their approach. Stranger still, if I play on Balanced and increase tempo to "Fairly High", it'll show up as a TI. TIs decided by the user will appear, but the ones inherent to the mentality do not, and I think that creates unnecessary confusion. 

This brings me on to the advice the player is given on how to approach games. My ass man will frequently suggest that I should play with an Attacking mentality, and then play with four/five attacking duties because that's "appropriate for such a mentality", but this is, frankly, complete and total bull. If Attacking already makes my team more aggressive and take more risks, why do I then need to add even more aggression and risk taking on top of that? In effect, the AI here isn't promoting well-balanced tactics - it's promoting the bad habit of doubling down and making things more extreme, which creates tactics that make very little sense. While the player is free to ignore this advice, I'm concerned AI managers are following the same logic and creating unbalanced set-ups. Obviously, there has to be some poor decisions because real life managers do the same, but there are top managers in-game who under-perform because of this (hello, Pep Guardiola). 

I may put this in the features request, but I really think removing CCCs and Half Chances would be a step in the right direction. What the game determines to be a chance versus what the player determines to be a chance are too far apart for those stats to be worthwhile. My more successful teams in this series have never generated a lot of CCCs, by the game's definition, yet frequently win and score plenty of goals. This alone renders the stat pointless. It's existence causes a few other issues, too. Players playing only on Key or Extended highlights (which I feel like is the majority?) may judge their tactic on the generation of CCCs, but as we're seeing now, this is incredibly misleading. The game considers most 1v1 situations a CCC, but as has been pointed out, this isn't the case in reality - 1v1s are actually harder to score than they look. Meanwhile, a straight-forward tap-in from a cut-back is often not considered a CCC in game, despite this being one of the most common types of goals scored in real life. Players who fail to convert CCCs receive a penalty to their rating, which in turn effects a lot of other things, such as their confidence and body language, and the likelihood of them being subbed (it also leads to the infuriating "he should have done better/how did he miss that?" commentary line).

The game's assessment of chances is just weird in general. A player running onto a through pass to score is a routine move, but is often considered a "great solo effort" by the game and can even appear in goal of the month competitions. It seems any player that has to run more than 10 yards to get on the ball is deemed to be in the middle of a great solo goal. I have to wonder if this affects the quality of finishing at all; if it's not a case of the game deeming these chances more difficult, and therefore applying more inconsistent shooting to ensure that "great" goals aren't being scored all the time. 

While I'm at it - and I've complained about this before - the player ratings system is too rewarding for players who score penalties and long-shots. Any player who scores a worldie or penalty gets a significant increase despite how poorly they play. I have had striker miss every chance and give the ball away at every turn, yet still end the game with a 7.5 because they buried a pen. To say nothing of an opposition player scoring a screamer within two minutes, and my ass man telling me to close him down because "he's pulling the strings" or "running the game". This is more of a syntax issue than anything, but I do feel feedback shouldn't be attached to player ratings at all. Or, if it has to be, then player ratings should not be so easily influenced by one-off events. If this was a case of the in-game media assigning the rating, then sure, that'd be added realism. However, player ratings play a significant part in player assessment, so I hope this can one day be addressed.

I think tweaks in these areas can really help make things easier for the player. Most of the time, problems come from the player not actually knowing what everything in games does and how it affects their team, which leads them to making unbalanced set-ups.

Excellent post. I would just like to add here that people were already spoiled by last year's overpowered nature of this kind of tactical setup - 'Positive mentality', 'Very high DL', 'Very high LOE', 'Extremely urgent pressing', 'Mark tightly', ' Get stuck in', 'counter', 'counter press', 'high tempo'.

Now that the above risky kind of setup is balanced in the ME and is getting punished more (rightly so, should be very hard to play like that in the first place), people are finding it hard to adapt IMO. Most of these setups now concede bucket loads of chances each game. As a result, users get frustrated but the problem is, rather than trying to reduce some of the extreme tactical instructions and trying to balance out their tactics, they come here to moan.

Should a simulation be berated for making you think and adapt? No. The tactical module was overhauled in FM19 and imo it took about a year to get polished. I'm sure the developers will continue to strive for perfection but it's certainly a much better and more balanced game this year imo. Far from being 'unplayable' or 'broken'. Based on my own playing experience so far.

Edited by pats

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JUst started a new save with Bayern Munich, and it's similar  to the City save (see above). League Leaders are Mönchengladbach, who barely dominate a Thing. Actually, on average they seem to have 14 shots, whilst they actually concede 15! 3 losses in 14 matches with stats like that. Doesn't make sense. Should be mid-table at best. Some of  Our own Point Drops meanwhile look like this:

2-2 Draw against Hertha (17 vs 6 shots)
1-2 loss against  Hoffenheim (20 vs 8 shots)
2-2 draw against Augsburg ( 24 vs 9 shots)
1-2 loss against Gladbach ( 16 vs 7 shots)
1-2 loss against Leverkusen (23 vs 11 shots)

Surely can't be Right? Feels like the AI is cheating at times… how else could it lead the league with Gladbach like this? Even Freiburg are in front of us (12 shots FOR them average, 17 AGAINST!) It's all becoming a bit of a joke really. The weirdest Thing is, on the Occasion there is the odd  trashing, like away to Spurs in the CL,  where every other shot seems to go in: 7-2 win (19 vs 15 shots). If it was like that in the league, we'd be champions already. Totally random. No wonder the top Teams on occasion don't dominate on this and Pep gets sacked so often. 

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Tiger666 said:

Has something happened to heading? So many headers are going wide or over the bar.

Have they at all been touched by the patch?

If so, maybe they've tried to address heading accuracy for a reason some (*fabulously optimistic*). Prior it was really easy to rack up a lot of SOT exclusively from the Header from the set piece. OFten times These aren't that good chances to begin with -- they're in jam packed boxes, oft from a few Yards out, and well, headers. Headers are more difficult than shots. And the keeper if on target would have saved most of them. Looking at FM's far too simple stats, like many do, a Player would look at like the dozen+ SOT his Team had created and conclude he would have completely dominating an Opposition start to finish. When the truth may have eben a bit more complicated.  All blue dots in this match pre-patch for instance were headers and similar from the set piece… loads of added SOT. Still 2 Goals scored, mind.

2HCSDGR.png

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tiger666 said:

Has something happened to heading? So many headers are going wide or over the bar.

This is happening to me too..

Share this post


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

This is happening to me too..

It's shooting also. I think there's just far too many shots happening. Finishing needs improving along with something to reduce the number of shots, otherwise scorelines will be too high. Better finishing along with better defending to reduce the chances.

Edited by Tiger666

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Tiger666 said:

It's shooting also. I think there's just far too many shots happening. Finishing needs improving along with something to reduce the number of shots, otherwise scorelines will be too high. Better finishing along with better defending to reduce the chances.

Yes, I agree. Fullbacks especially when they shoot from distance from the side, they always shoot with power and it is unnstoppable for the keeper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, MatthewS17 said:

The obsession  with realism has given way to complete unrealism...

If the aim was realism, they'd likely had it a lot easier to Limit Managers to making actually "realistic" Football decisions.
This goes for the AI Managers too mind.
As hinted at by @JEinchy, there's a bucket load of combinations possible that are neither balanaced, nor very much "realistic." They oft translate to something visibly you'll never see on a Football pitch for prolonged periods of Play, ever. And that's not counting the not that obvious contradicitions possible in the myriad of Team / Player instructions. For instance, sides going all narrow / keeping the pitch reasonably compact, and pushing everybody up against a Team parking the bus? And many more. What Manager in Football would do that. If Play, scorelines and data then would perfectly mimic what's actually going on out there, I would be hugely concerned about the Integrity of the ME as a whole from the ground up. Apparently it would come out with Feedback perceived as "realistic" even if the Input was anything but. Not a good sign...

If the aim is Football, let managers make Football decisions. Would make the game also a lot easier to balance in the Long-term, likely.

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


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

For instance, sides going all narrow / keeping the pitch reasonably compact, and pushing everybody up against a Team parking the bus? What stupid Manager in Football would do that.

Every (AI) manager playing Gegenpress?

Share this post


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

As hinted at by @JEinchy, there's a bucket load of combinations possible that are neither balanaced, nor very much "realistic."

How would you setup team to camp inside the penalty area, like City did yesterday in last half an hour? I see no other option than using attacking mentality + more attacking duties. It was perfect display of what FM considers attacking tactics. 

Share this post


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

You're probably given the AI too much credit (and some of it is due, mind, in particular regarding its match dynamicism). :D 

No usually I don't but I think AI tactics have improved a lot this years, game feels harder. Also AI's match dynamicism seems improved a lot, they will change formations, tactics. Only thing I don't like is AI being too defensive.

Share this post


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

How would you setup team to camp inside the penalty area, like City did yesterday in last half an hour? I see no other option than using attacking mentality + more attacking duties. It was perfect display of what FM considers attacking tactics. 

Plus the opposition basically camping in their own area. Rashford was basically a supporting left back. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Switched to commentary only, bored of seeing the long ball over the top failures over and over, it;s been like this since FM19, IRL long balls over the top against good centre backs shouldn't work unless the ball is brilliant or there is a mistake but they work in game because the defenders react to a ball in the air far later than the attackers and it just looks stupid.

No defender IRL would see some hit a long ball and continue walking forward, whilst letting the guy who he is marking run in behind, it's just dumb to watch. 

Pretty much every team does it, regardless of how they play, hoof balls from defenders acting like wonder balls because defenders act like brainless idiots , that or they are literally blind. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MatthewS17 said:

Plus the opposition basically camping in their own area. Rashford was basically a supporting left back. 

What a game!! Outstanding performance from Utd in first half and City in second. City always looking for those little through balls even from inside penalty area, crazy.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Mitja said:

How would you setup team to camp inside the penalty area, like City did yesterday in last half an hour? I see no other option than using attacking mentality + more attacking duties. It was perfect display of what FM considers attacking tactics. 

It's admittedly tricky as for City the CBs oft are still availble to pass to (and generally are the deepest guys still available). Whereas on FM CBs, they oft to have hang all the way back or else they would put the Opposition Forward/s onside. That also means they aren't systematically available much anymore once Play has transitioned into the final third. Play has moved too far ahead of them.

Edited by Svenc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never saw many missed 1v1's, until I changed my tactic. Then I saw loads. Now I have changed tactic again I am back to seeing 'proper' goals and chances again.

The long ball over the top to put a striker through is the problem for me in seeing the 1v1 annoyance. My current and original tactic has cut this out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/12/2019 at 11:19, emil_sbn said:

I honestly think they made the keepers to good in this game they react super fast even those with lower ratings and constantly makes the right decisions and perfect positioning. Remi Matthews in my Bolton team saves shots like Alisson Becker!

I've made this conclusion as well. If you watch some of the one-on-ones in slow you can see the keeper actually diving before the shot. It's only a fraction of a second, but if the keeper already knows the direction and height the shot will go, that much easier it is to get to.

If you go into your goal stats for the season and watch where the goals are saved, you can find a dead zone in the middle of the goal where the keeper will always get the save, which probably means that the keepers are too efficient parrying balls at close range (just a guess):

6j.thumb.png.9c66b277b5a0e63357a175a11d1ba40a.png

 

Share this post


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

It's admittedly tricky as for City the CBs oft are still availble to pass to (and generally are the deepest guys still available). Whereas on FM CBs, they oft to have hang all the way back or else they would put the Opposition Forward/s onside. That also means they aren't systematically available much anymore once Play has transitioned into the final third. 

Yes. But actually you can't replicate Pep's tactics in FM because wide forwards are always narrow. And as you rightly noticed about narrow width against packed defense, it's against basic principles of team sports. It's no surprise there's no space for playing one-two's into space, while in real football it's what all teams are doing one in final third. Fullbacks are there to support attacks with first time crossing. In FM they are playmakers with little support from wide forwards once in final third.  

Share this post


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

I've made this conclusion as well. If you watch some of the one-on-ones in slow you can see the keeper actually diving before the shot. It's only a fraction of a second, but if the keeper already knows the direction and height the shot will go, that much easier it is to get to.

Keepers do that, they set themselves as the striker swings his leg back then react as he strikes it unless you're saying he's committed to a side before the ball's left the striker's foot?

Share this post


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

I certainly agree with that. However, the upvoting of this as well as your own perception just confirms the (attacking) bias here at Play which I've noted for years. There's good reason why FM17 had varied Goals, one of which being that ist defending had been the most detached from Football in probably the past decade. FM17 is a release where lower league sides could pull EPL sides including their CBs all over the pitch (and successfully overload / crack their central defense) simply because of a man Advantage in the middle of the park. To me personally, it's one of the most baffling Things I've seen ever since playing this. And I don't mean the Goals, or the tackles, or anything. I mean structurally, how the Play would transpire from the Ground up due to such. It was Nothing much like Football at times, and undermined the Integrity of the AI vs AI simulated game world also. I can still understand what SI were trying to do with that mind. Which was adressing the open flanks of FM16, and providing the full backs with more cover.

However, I agree with the goals and sort of understand your Sentiment also -- this is just art imitating life -- strikers scoring plenty Goals Always have an Edge over world class defenders in most of the awards. Maybe SI should just Code the wide mids to stick out wide again during each team's defensive Phase, though, creating several seperate Units of defending on the pitch (wide midfielders helping out wide backs, central midfielders all alone on themselves), rather than a Team defending as a unit proper. A bit like in actual football.  (Kidding, of Course).

Would you please stop capitalizing random words in the middle of your sentences. It makes no sense.

Share this post


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

Keepers do that, they set themselves as the striker swings his leg back then react as he strikes it unless you're saying he's committed to a side before the ball's left the striker's foot?

"unless you're saying he's committed to a side before the ball's left the striker's foot?"

That is what I am seeing at my end; he jumps to one side or sticks out a leg or arm before the ball is hit. It could just be a graphics thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Woo Hoo!

 

Just uploaded my first ever bug report after 14 years of playing FM!!!!

 

Anyone else having problems with teams having zero money in June/July 2020?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much does the individual player attributes actually matter?

It seems that one-on-ones are a big problem this year, and even Messi can't seem to convert them enough. 

Have anyone run experiments with, let's say, taking a fast striker who scored a lot in the Vanarama (sp?) league and put him as a striker on a top Premiership team? Would his fast pace be enough to make him do good enough over the entirety of a season, or would he totally bomb? How is his conversion rate on 1-1's compared to the regular strikers? How is his rating compared to them? What about his shot-ratio, is it much lower than the rest of the attacking unit?

I'd do it myself if a season didn't take ages on my computer, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was one of the critics because no way to play short passing game and that there were no through balls nor strikers involvement but in my first game after the patch I just scored two goals I haven't seen before in FM20.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First time I am complaining about a match engine here... But the latest match engine makes the game not enjoyable at the moment. I hope it gets fixed soon as now I feel really frustrated playing the game and seeing these missed 1v1's, long ball over the top from the AI to score. I don't know how the AI is able to convert much more chances than human players at the moment.

 

I just want to compare the tactic testing table to show a point about the game being 'enjoyable'. I know these tactic tables are not the most scientific way of representing my point but I want to point out the Goals Difference and Points per match. It has gradually fallen since 19.3 to 20.2. These people who make tactics are churning about nearly every formation, every type of plays and it just seems like the game is getting harder and harder for human players. Relying more on luck as it patch goes on and reducing effectiveness of a good tactic. 

 

Points per match of top tactics falling from around 2.2 in FM19 Patch 19.3 to around 2 in FM20 patch 20.1 and now down to 1.7. 

 

Goal difference going down from around +1.5 to +0.95 and with the latest patch it is now +0.5.

 

Casual gamers will not be able to create tactic better than these people who test everything under strict conditions (testing leagues) and testing over many hundreds of games. It's just getting more difficult. 

 

Overall I still love FM20 and think it is a fantastic game, please just fix the match engine a bit. 

 

 

 

 

image.thumb.png.a6714fecd8f19f166b1d86676f398fca.pngimage.thumb.png.3f6e9b865630cc96c63a6fd425f7e504.pngimage.thumb.png.d306660b5556a09ed773f4cb4bda45ad.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, rovers1993 said:

Casual gamers will not be able to create tactic better than these people

These people usually create a tactic to specifically exploit any flaws in the match engine. They aren't creating 'good' tactics. Which is why you'll see screenshots of people winning the league with Burnley in the first season. It's not so easy to do this year. Instead of criticising the match engine for such a change, you should really be praising it, as it clearly implies there are less holes to exploit. I've worked hard on my tactics on both saves this year, and it's all the more rewarding for it. 

Also, this is not a game for 'casual gamers'. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The situation with 1v1's and long balls over the top is not really praise worthy...... 

The match engine has improved year on year and I still love playing the game, racking up 500 hrs + per year.

But when there is some flaws that kills the enjoyment like with this current match engine, I think alot of people will get discouraged from spending hours perfecting their tactic only to see the effectiveness drastically reduced by inherent match engine flaws. 

I don't usually post on this forum, just read but I hope even you can see the general sense at the moment about the current match engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like everything outside of the match engine.  Match engine itself seems to have more potential than previous versions however the current result is worse. Still too many clear chances missed and way too many set pieces being scored.

Options is to reduce set piece goals and increase the clear cut chances. Or reduce how many chances are created but increase the conversion ratio

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

These people usually create a tactic to specifically exploit any flaws in the match engine. They aren't creating 'good' tactics. Which is why you'll see screenshots of people winning the league with Burnley in the first season. It's not so easy to do this year. Instead of criticising the match engine for such a change, you should really be praising it, as it clearly implies there are less holes to exploit. I've worked hard on my tactics on both saves this year, and it's all the more rewarding for it. 

Also, this is not a game for 'casual gamers'. 

I agree with this. But I also think that some people will always try to find exploits, and I feel like they always will because there are just so many combinations you can try in the game and it is probably next to impossible for SI to find the balance for all these combinations. Otherwise, if you play the game just to enjoy the illusion of being a real life football manager, this won't be a problem. I guess that's why I am loving FM 17 so much. Some here say that the ME in FM 17 was easily breakable/exploitable, but I am not trying to take advantage of the shortcomings of the ME just to beat the game, and that's why they don't bother me. It probably becomes a bigger issue for online gamers when they play against other humans where everybody is just trying to win no matter what.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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


×
×
  • Create New...