Restarts leading to different results

[Maldini's Heir]

There's simply no way I can get through a season without re-starting games. I lose a game (I'm a bad loser), the frustration gets too much for me so I quit and replay matches. 

And I always regret it.

The main reason for my regret is that when I replay a match, with the exact same tactics, I get a different result. A loss becomes a win. Why?

If my tactics were the issue I should have lost again. 

People who say that re-starting the same game and losing every time is a sign of scripting. I say losing a game and re-starting it and getting a completely different result is a sign of something.

But what? 

What's the game trying to achieve?

Throwing in a defeat so that it can test your ability to manage a run of bad results?

Fine. But it's still not fair that I should lose a game on a whim. Life is not fair. But simulating unfairness is very difficult to swallow.

Is it just me?

[FrazT]

There are many different criteria that the game uses to calculate a result and not just the tactics and these start at the end of the previous game with the team talk- thereafter the team training, player interaction, press conferences, player selection, team and player instructions, pregame team talk,tunnel interviews, in game shouts, tactics changes, subs and of course any changes by the AI team and manager.  So the chances of you and the AI manager doing exactly the same actions from one game to another, thereby giving the same result is very, very small, hence the different result.

[Maldini's Heir]

I did think that but the issue is sometimes I save the game just after the press conference.

So the only variables that can happen are those involving tactics (same) and team talk (same), and then, sure, the game starts and anything can happen. But still. A different result immediately?

And it's not just a once off. I can practically guarantee that if I re-start a game I will get a different result. It's happened about 20 times against weak, medium and strong teams. 

It's the worst thing about re-starting. It kills the myth that there's something I could have done differently. Well there is something I can do - re-start......

[HUNT3R]

You're looking at the match as a single event. As if it's start match --> instantly fulltime and result. There's a LOT that happens in a match.

Firstly, there's the Consistency attribute (and others like Big Matches) and I'm not sure at what point it's 'locked in' but that could be a factor as it determines how many matches a player will be playing to his full ability. Lower consistency and that ability is more random. I want to say it is set only when you enter a match, but not 100% sure on that.

Second - tactics. Yes, how you set up and how the other team sets up and how the two tactics work against each other is a big factor in a match. It's not any guarantee though. You may find that your amazing tactic gets the first goal in 65 of the 100 matches that you play. That still leaves 35% where you don't get the first goal.

Third, replaying a match once or twice won't give you consistent ideas as to what's going on. To get a proper evaluation, you're going to have to do it a LOT. 50 or 100 times, I'd say. There's the tactic, the consistency of players, luck (as in the cross, pass, shot this one time is hit JUST right) and also the in-match changes that happens when a goal is scored. On that note -

4. Goals change games. Yes, it's painfully obvious, but AI managers will make changes based on what happens, especially if a goal is scored. Your tactic may be amazing against their starting tactic. But what happens when you rip them apart and they change to something more adventurous? How does your tactic fare then? There are also things like players becoming nervous, complacent, uninterested, motivated, fired up after a goal or a tackle etc.

5. "Luck". Their midfielder has a long shot attribute of 8. Not great, but not pathetic either. In match number 20, after seeing the other 19 matches and him having no luck, in this moment in this game he just hits that one shot perfectly. Goal. You may not see it in another 40 replays. Same with a cross or a pass or a save etc.

There may be more I'm missing, but don't reduce the thousands and thousands of little in-game events to just a singular result. It's all those events that combine to eventually give you the result. In-game changes, both yours and the AI's and also the 22 players (more if there are subs) will affect the end result.

[Maldini's Heir]

I think of your list the main differences when I restart are goals changing games and luck.

For example, one of the most frustrating things is when I have "one of those games" where I have 30 shots on goal and end up losing. In fact I know when I have a large number of shots on goal that there's a good chance I'll lose because it's simming "one of those games". I then re-start out of frustration and I will inevitably score early on which will lead to a completely different result. So the key difference was getting that early goal.

I suppose the next question is, without re-starting, how do I intervene in "one of those games"?

[HUNT3R]

3 minutes ago, Maldini's Heir said:

I think of your list the main differences when I restart are goals changing games and luck.

For example, one of the most frustrating things is when I have "one of those games" where I have 30 shots on goal and end up losing. In fact I know when I have a large number of shots on goal that there's a good chance I'll lose because it's simming "one of those games". I then re-start out of frustration and I will inevitably score early on which will lead to a completely different result. So the key difference was getting that early goal.

In that example, it could be that the striker is not having a good day or maybe one or two misses and confidence starts affecting him/them. It could also be that the tactic creates chances, but more 'half chances' than anything else, so they're good but not great chances. That can make goal scoring more difficult, so more of a chance of getting "one of those games".

6 minutes ago, Maldini's Heir said:

I suppose the next question is, without re-starting, how do I intervene in "one of those games"?

That's impossible to say. First you'd need to find what the actual issues is and fix that. Otherwise, you're going to be randomly making changes and hoping for something to work.

If you can't find the issue or don't know where to look or what to do, you can always have a backup tactic as a plan B. So if your tiki taka fancy football tactic isn't working, do a Moyes - bring Fellaini on and lump/cross it to the big target man. That sort of thing.

[sporadicsmiles]

2 hours ago, Maldini's Heir said:

The main reason for my regret is that when I replay a match, with the exact same tactics, I get a different result. A loss becomes a win. Why?

Replay it more, you will win and lose plenty, if you so desire. Football is a chaotic system. Similar initial conditions can lead to wildly different outcomes, and it is not predictable. 

2 hours ago, Maldini's Heir said:

If my tactics were the issue I should have lost again. 

That is an extremely naive way to look at things. There is so, so much more that goes into a football game. If, for example, you are a good side, your players are good enough to win in spite of your tactics. 

2 hours ago, Maldini's Heir said:

People who say that re-starting the same game and losing every time is a sign of scripting. I say losing a game and re-starting it and getting a completely different result is a sign of something.

But what? 

What's the game trying to achieve?

Throwing in a defeat so that it can test your ability to manage a run of bad results?

The game is not scripted in this way. Why on earth would it be? It is trying to achieve nothing. You lost because you were the worse team in a particular game. The game does not distinguish between you and the AI. It does not try to achieve anything. It calculates the results of matches. People throwing out lines such as your last one simply cannot take responsibility for the loss being their fault (at least in part their fault anyway). The game is not to blame. It does not "test" users. 

20 minutes ago, Maldini's Heir said:

I think of your list the main differences when I restart are goals changing games and luck.

The moment you kick off, any replayed match diverges from itself. This is not the same as, say, flipping a coin. They are not independent trials of the same thing. They are entirely separate things. You can compare the outcome of them, but it is not predictable  knowing the initial conditions.

24 minutes ago, Maldini's Heir said:

I suppose the next question is, without re-starting, how do I intervene in "one of those games"?

You have to watch it, see what is going wrong, and try to change things so they stop going wrong. Your question is too broad to answer. I make several changes in almost all the matches I play anyway, not only when I am losing. And if I lose, then I just chalk it up to something I have to learn and I move on. Sometimes you lose. It is part of life. 

[Maldini's Heir]

This is just pointless. 

For no reason, two defeats against Juve and Parma with countless one on one misses. Re-start. Play both games. A draw and a win.

The Parma game pushed me over the edge. Parma 1 chance, 1 goal, go down to 10 men, my players created 20 chances including missed 2 or 3 one v one's. 

It's just so obvious. I knew I was going to lose after 60 minutes. I made subs but I knew it would make no difference. 

Re-start. Enter a new reality. Win the game.

The real lesson here is not to re-start because it shows up the game.

[HibeeRyan]

Imagine Bournemouth and Crystal Palace played each other 100 times in real life, same 22 players and the same formations. The result would not be the exact same every single time. 20/100 games Zaha might have a stormer and win the game single handed. Another time Cahill might pull his hamstring and therefore allow Bournemouth to score on the counter.

You can't expect the same results simply because both teams set up before a game the same way. The game isn't hard coded before the game to have certain things happen. Hence why you see different goals in two of the same games. 

Football manager isn't perfect and yes it can be frustrating but restarting every game isn't the way to go, it won't teach you anything.

Edited December 10, 2019 by HibeeRyan

[Smurf]

5 hours ago, Maldini's Heir said:

The main reason for my regret is that when I replay a match, with the exact same tactics, I get a different result. A loss becomes a win. Why?

The match plays out in real time - and different permuations of how the ball moves affects the outcome. Perhaps the 2nd game you didn't win the coin toss and didn't kick off the first half.

There's litterally thousands if not millions of ways the game result changes playing it over and over and over again.

 

[FrazT]

47 minutes ago, Maldini's Heir said:

This is just pointless. 

For no reason, two defeats against Juve and Parma with countless one on one misses. Re-start. Play both games. A draw and a win.

The Parma game pushed me over the edge. Parma 1 chance, 1 goal, go down to 10 men, my players created 20 chances including missed 2 or 3 one v one's. 

It's just so obvious. I knew I was going to lose after 60 minutes. I made subs but I knew it would make no difference. 

Re-start. Enter a new reality. Win the game.

The real lesson here is not to re-start because it shows up the game.

You have been given multiple reasons why restarting the game will not give the same results- if you do not want to accept these reasons, then that is your choice, but there is little point coming back on here and complaining about it.

[rockpie]

48 minutes ago, Maldini's Heir said:

This is just pointless. 

For no reason, two defeats against Juve and Parma with countless one on one misses. Re-start. Play both games. A draw and a win.

The Parma game pushed me over the edge. Parma 1 chance, 1 goal, go down to 10 men, my players created 20 chances including missed 2 or 3 one v one's. 

It's just so obvious. I knew I was going to lose after 60 minutes. I made subs but I knew it would make no difference. 

Re-start. Enter a new reality. Win the game.

The real lesson here is not to re-start because it shows up the game.

I made a thread on the Tactics & Training forum all about identifying what changes you can make during a game.

I never restart any game because I prefer trying to work out what's going on.

If it works, great. If it doesn't work, analyze even more and try something else next time.

 

[Welshace]

Please stop restarting...  what is the point of the game if you can't accept a loss? it's like playing doom with god mode on.. what's the point?

 

I don't really understand what the issue you are having is tbh... of course the game will have different outcomes... there are countless permutations being calculated in each match and one tiny change can have massive reprecussions.. 

'those games' ... when you have a million shots and no goals, as a manager you should be asking yourself why aren't any of your shots of the quality you need to score? are you getting pushed too wide and players are forced to shot from bad angles? is there no passing opportunities so players are constantly forced to shoot long? what is going on?

[MrPompey]

I find this a strange post. Football will always offer so many permutations and potential outcomes during a match both in FM and IRL so it is extremely unlikely that in FM exactly the same things will happen if you replay a match, why would you expect that to happen?

If you are one of these people who cant accept a loss so re-load and play until you get the result you want then I suppose that is your choice but not a way I would like to play the game and this in itself would be very frustrating for anyone.

You can tell from the responses that your approach differs significantly from a majority who play and perhaps your understanding of FM isnt quite there yet.

May be try posting in the Tactics forum and someone may help. 

 

[Svenc]

Restarts can't be the same exactly, unless the game were indeed "scripted". The ME is a kick by kick sim though, 90 minutes. Therefore from the first sequence, it's going to be different. Think of the Butterfly effect.

Reloading until you luck out over and over again is just that. Fine if that's your style, mind, but it is what it is. Even if the exact same chances would occur in the two runs, few them as weighted internal dice rolls. Some chances are better than others, so different dice. Weighted as Attributes, Motivation, etc. can off-set it all to a certain Degree. That's how I view it anyways.  

Reminds me of an old thread. It was a good one. 

https://community.sigames.com/topic/290802-is-fm-a-simulator-or-an-illusion/

Edited December 10, 2019 by Svenc

[sporadicsmiles]

I have to admit that someone complaining about winning because they restart matches until they win is a new one for me. If it annoys you that you win all the time by restarting, then do not restart. If you want to win every single game always, then you will never enjoy FM. 

9 hours ago, Maldini's Heir said:

It's just so obvious. I knew I was going to lose after 60 minutes. I made subs but I knew it would make no difference. 

I find this very telling. You were banging your head against a brick wall without success for 60 minutes, but you chose to change nothing? Only bringing on substitutes, who we can assume are not as good as the players they replaced if they do not start. Why would you think this is going to work? If you are seeing things not working, change them. If you want help doing so, there are plenty of people around here who will help out.

If you just want to moan about losing and moan about winning after restarting, then okay, but the thread has therefore run its course. 

[AytchMan]

The issue here is neither the differing results on reloading a save or whether you win or lose the reload.  The reasons for this have been fully explained in the above posts.  The real issue -- and I mean absolutely no offense -- is your admission that you're a bad loser and must reload the game.  I'm a firm believer in the philosophy of " it's your game, play as you like".  But how can this possibly be any fun?  The same question goes to people who load up some Premier League team in the editor, giving them 25 world-class players and winning the league eight times in a row while running up a 117-game win streak.  Why bother?  You're missing 90 percent of the value and, yes, the fun of an imperfect but highly entertaining (and instructive) simulation.  Some of the most enjoyable seasons I've had have been with poopy Grade Z teams battling relegation, managing a massive list of injuries and fighting an obstreperous board.  Losing some games should not damage your ego in the slightest (no one can see, no one knows but you) and the satisfaction you get from winning through can be immense.  Give it a try.

Edited December 10, 2019 by AytchMan

[Maldini's Heir]

Thank you for your explanations.

One issue that has not really been addressed is why it only takes one re-start to achieve a different result.

I get that if two teams played each other 100 times, they would get different results. But in my experience I only need to re-start once to change a defeat into a victory. So the re-start tells me that I didn't actually do much wrong in the first game and it was just "one of those days" which is very frustrating.

I would be much more comforted if a re-start lead to the same result. It would tell me I had done something wrong.

I accept I'm a bad loser. I don't re-start every defeat. It usually when the game thinks I should accept three or four games in a row where I've had the worst luck imaginable, missed countless one v one's, and haven't scored any goals. It pushes me over the edge, I re-start and all that pain goes away. 

It's quite clear the game is setting me up for a challenge whereby I have to use my man management skills to drag my players out of a slump. But when the slump arises after I've had 30 shots on goal it sort of feels a little forced.

It is what it is. It's mostly my fault for re-starting.

[Maldini's Heir]

4 hours ago, AytchMan said:

But how can this possibly be any fun?

Because it's more fun than watching Milan play in real life.

The only reason I play these games is to escape how terrible real life Milan are. I then have to deal with situations which are far worse than real life. The only thing I can think of that's worse than watching Milan play in real life is watching a computer generated Milan miss 30 chances in a game and lose.

I haven't got into a groove yet in the game so re-starts are more of a thing. I will eventually get to a stage (hopefully) where I will have this rule that re-starts cannot impact the overall results in the season. So re-starts will not determine whether or not I win titles or qualify for Europe.

I have tried playing without re-starts but it's almost unavoidable and therefore I'd never get through any careers. 

[Svenc]

If the game were to produce the same result on the first reload, that would be very suspect. That would mean it's likely not a Simulation of Football, a Sports settled in the finest of margins (and seconds of 90 minutes…), but pre-determinism. Trends could be only gauged in the longer term. I know that Mitja's gonna kill me for this, but.... if only Pep could reload this term. And that's a supposedly top class Manager taking even the tiniest Detail into account.  

https://1xbet.whoscored.com/Matches/1375942/MatchReport/England-Premier-League-2019-2020-Manchester-City-Tottenham

https://1xbet.whoscored.com/Matches/1376038/MatchReport/England-Premier-League-2019-2020-Manchester-City-Wolverhampton-Wanderers

https://1xbet.whoscored.com/Matches/1375969/MatchReport/England-Premier-League-2019-2020-Norwich-Manchester-City

https://1xbet.whoscored.com/Matches/1376045/MatchReport/England-Premier-League-2019-2020-Newcastle-United-Manchester-City

https://1xbet.whoscored.com/Matches/1376286/MatchReport/England-Premier-League-2019-2020-Manchester-City-Manchester-United

Edited December 11, 2019 by Svenc

[Maldini's Heir]

7 minutes ago, Svenc said:

If the game were to produce the same result on the first reload, that would be very suspect. That would mean it's likely not a Simulation of Football, a Sports settled in the finest of margins (and seconds of 90 minutes…), but pre-determinism. 

I see what you're saying and I get this drive for "realism" but these fine margins should not be enough for me to lose to Parma after my striker misses numerous one v one chances and then to re-start and win, comfortably.

Football games will always struggle with getting the balance right between the elements the player controls and the elements that they don't. 

The funny thing is when I see people complaining about scripting because the re-started the same game numerous times, I actually think that's a sign that they're doing something wrong. And that's a good thing in my view because it means there's something they can change.

PS The assumption is I'm doing something wrong because a better team is losing to a worse team. I usually accept defeats to better teams. It's losing two games in a row to relegation teams that grates. And yes that is exactly what happens to Milan in real life.

[Dagenham_Dave]

1 hour ago, Maldini's Heir said:

I see what you're saying and I get this drive for "realism" but these fine margins should not be enough for me to lose to Parma after my striker misses numerous one v one chances and then to re-start and win, comfortably.

 

I don't know how many more times you need this explained to you. 

[AytchMan]

Let me make one last try.  Take the simplest example imaginable:  flipping coins.  I think we can all agree that flipping coins is both random and fair.  Over the long haul, you're going to get extremely close to 50-50, right?  Now. let's say you flip 100 times, call heads every time and get heads 54 times.  That's a 54-46 win.  Now you flip another 100 times and again call heads every time.  But this time you lose -- it's 45-55.  But how could you lose?  You used the exact same strategy and the coin is exactly the same.  As is the probabilistic mathematics.  Well, that's the essence of FM, a long and involved series of (essentially) coin flips.  Thus, a player in a given situation can make one decision one time and a completely different one the next.  And the match can go in a completely different direction.

[Maldini's Heir]

1 hour ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

I don't know how many more times you need this explained to you. 

It's been explained to me and I have thanked people for their explanations and have not sought out any more.....

Did I give the impression I needed any further explanations?

What part of: 

It is what it is. It's mostly my fault for re-starting. 

did people not get?

Was that too philosophical?

My posts are mostly rants since I lost a game, replayed it, and got a different result, and then had a go at myself (not the game - me) for re-starting.

I find that self-deprecation - like sarcasm - is something that gets lost in translation online.

 

[Maldini's Heir]

1 hour ago, AytchMan said:

Let me make one last try.  Take the simplest example imaginable:  flipping coins.  I think we can all agree that flipping coins is both random and fair.  Over the long haul, you're going to get extremely close to 50-50, right?  Now. let's say you flip 100 times, call heads every time and get heads 54 times.  That's a 54-46 win.  Now you flip another 100 times and again call heads every time.  But this time you lose -- it's 45-55.  But how could you lose?  You used the exact same strategy and the coin is exactly the same.  As is the probabilistic mathematics.  Well, that's the essence of FM, a long and involved series of (essentially) coin flips.  Thus, a player in a given situation can make one decision one time and a completely different one the next.  And the match can go in a completely different direction.

Let's just say it needs to do better than being a glorified coin toss.  

[Maldini's Heir]

19 hours ago, rockpie said:

I made a thread on the Tactics & Training forum all about identifying what changes you can make during a game.

I never restart any game because I prefer trying to work out what's going on.

If it works, great. If it doesn't work, analyze even more and try something else next time.

 

This is a great thread by the way. Thanks for the tips.

[Etebaer]

My anecdotal experience with crashes is (and FM20 has not crashed yet - fingers crossed) that i usualy was winning that crashed match and after the restart i was not able to win said match anymore regardless how many times i tried, usually it would be a loss.

So crashing inevitable was a source of a pretty bad mood afterwards…

And words better not heard…

 

Edited December 11, 2019 by Etebaer

[Svenc]

2 hours ago, Maldini's Heir said:

Let's just say it needs to do better than being a glorified coin toss.  

Actually, that the reload is immediately a win most of the time Shows that it is anythingn but a simple coin toss.

- A match you were unfortunate to lose should be more likely a win the next time around. Isn't it logical that you were more likely to win it the next time around then if the Opposition got lucky? (lots of shots does not necessarily mean you were unforunate… you will have quite a few shots as soon as the AI Plays defensive Football). 
https://www.theringer.com/soccer/2018/6/27/17511596/2018-world-cup-germany-south-korea-mexico-sweden-elimination

 

- Now a match you were fully deserved to lose may be a bit more tricky affair.

 

 

Apart of that Goal changes games. This goes doubly so on FM, as the AI Manager reacts to the scoreline. 

- In one reload he may hang on in there, and if by luck
- In the other he concedes early and is forced to push up, visually leaving far more space around his backline
- Additionally, the game simulates Forward snatching at chances becoming frustrated, and the keeper growing in confidence
- Therefore, the same match can either end in a dour 0-0, or a trashing, and the run of the Goals is going to Play a Major part of that.

Actually, all of the above is a sign of a fairly robust Simulation to me, at the core anyways. The specifics, see ME Bugs section. 1vs1 appear under review, as the Long ball defending Looks borked some to begin with. I don't think your AI rivals will reload if they ever drop the Points, and trust me, they do.

Edited December 11, 2019 by Svenc

[AytchMan]

Let's just say it needs to do better than being a glorified coin toss.  

Except that I don't think there's any other way.  Perhaps somebody smarter than I am can clue me in but I see only one other possible approach:  a fully-deterministic game engine that removes all of the "coin tosses", i.e., all of the randomized decision-making.  In that environment, a player in any type of situation would make one and only one choice of action.  In that case, your replay would repeat exactly as before -- every time.  But it seems to me that all matches in general would become exceedingly rigid.  If you set up a tactic to go down the flanks, then all passes would go down the flanks.  Always.  The variety of the current match engine -- with all of its frustrations and pleasant surprises -- would be completely lost.  I don't think any of us would be very happy with that.

[Svenc]

5 minutes ago, AytchMan said:

Except that I don't think there's any other way. 

Yeah, determinism is the end of Simulation.

He's arguing the game were BUT a coin toss.

It isn't. He's actually proven it isn't by reloading Matches he were unfortunate to lose and getting a win immediately the next time round (see my post above).  
 

22 hours ago, Maldini's Heir said:

For no reason, two defeats against Juve and Parma with countless one on one misses. Re-start. Play both games. A draw and a win.

The Parma game pushed me over the edge. Parma 1 chance, 1 goal, go down to 10 men, my players created 20 chances including missed 2 or 3 one v one's. 

It's just so obvious. I knew I was going to lose after 60 minutes. I made subs but I knew it would make no difference. 

Re-start. Enter a new reality. Win the game.

Edited December 11, 2019 by Svenc

[Maldini's Heir]

23 minutes ago, Svenc said:

A match you were unfortunate to lose should be more likely a win the next time around.

Ah, now I think we found our explanation!

Yes, I was unfortunate to lose the match which drove my frustration and caused me to quit (in fairness it usually takes a few unlucky results in a row) and then I re-start and win. 
 

So the thing I need to figure out is how to reduce the number of unlucky defeats. One thing I’ve done is not berated my players after they missed 30 chances.

[Halofon]

Ok, I understand all the things you say. But is there any kind of random number generator involved, please? Like I don't know - Player has passing 11that means with all given aspects his pass is calculated on scale from 8 to 12, and this number is random? If so, I get that every reloaded match is different. I guess there must be some degree of randomisation, right? Even if like 5 - 10 & of attrobutes range.

[XaW]

1 hour ago, Maldini's Heir said:

Ah, now I think we found our explanation!

Yes, I was unfortunate to lose the match which drove my frustration and caused me to quit (in fairness it usually takes a few unlucky results in a row) and then I re-start and win. 

So the thing I need to figure out is how to reduce the number of unlucky defeats. One thing I’ve done is not berated my players after they missed 30 chances.

There is the other thing though. Not being demanding enough when you win. This can lead to overconfidence and the players not bringing their best. A few commentators talked about that in regards to Inter after the loss to Barcelona last night. Barcelona played their B side, resting just about all of their important players while Inter played with most of their best. And there were talk about the Inter-players thinking a win was inevitable because of the reduced Barcelona side. Now, I don't know this for a fact, but it was discussed last night by certain ITKs and such.

So being demanding of the players when you face the poorer teams is just as important to support the team when playing the tougher sides.

[XaW]

4 minutes ago, Halofon said:

Ok, I understand all the things you say. But is there any kind of random number generator involved, please? Like I don't know - Player has passing 11that means with all given aspects his pass is calculated on scale from 8 to 12, and this number is random? If so, I get that every reloaded match is different. I guess there must be some degree of randomisation, right? Even if like 5 - 10 & of attrobutes range.

I don't think it's exactly like that. I think I read somewhere that every player's action is calculated 30 times per second or something to decide how they act and what they do. All attributes contribute differently for each situation, but also form, morale, the "hidden attributes" like important matches, consistency, etc, and of course, tactics and PPM and load of other impacts. All this get calculated and I expect some randomness in there somewhere as well, or rather pseudo-random, but that's a whole other discussion.

[Halofon]

18 minutes ago, XaW said:

I don't think it's exactly like that. I think I read somewhere that every player's action is calculated 30 times per second or something to decide how they act and what they do. All attributes contribute differently for each situation, but also form, morale, the "hidden attributes" like important matches, consistency, etc, and of course, tactics and PPM and load of other impacts. All this get calculated and I expect some randomness in there somewhere as well, or rather pseudo-random, but that's a whole other discussion.

Ok but should not in that case be all the results the same on reload if ALL the prerequisites are exactly the same? shouts, everything. Only thing I can think of that there are things in the background we do not see and can change from hour to hour like really really slight morale changes or so.

[Balahara]

24 minutes ago, Halofon said:

Ok but should not in that case be all the results the same on reload if ALL the prerequisites are exactly the same? shouts, everything. Only thing I can think of that there are things in the background we do not see and can change from hour to hour like really really slight morale changes or so.

No because the rng should spit out wildly different results on all the decisions made. The result of these decisions should not be decided before the game has kicked off.

[XaW]

35 minutes ago, Halofon said:

Ok but should not in that case be all the results the same on reload if ALL the prerequisites are exactly the same? shouts, everything. Only thing I can think of that there are things in the background we do not see and can change from hour to hour like really really slight morale changes or so.

Not exactly, because there are some small random variation, and the game will respond differently to these things. So the start might be almost identical, but a player mistimes a tackle after 5 second and this time it's a freekick instead of winning the ball, or the player slightly mistimes the clearance and it goes out of play instead of to a team mate, after that the whole rest of the game is different. From there on this would NOT be the same, or even comparable at any rate. So all these small variations changes the game, and if I remember correctly, all this happens 30 times per second, so the number of different "realities" is enormous even after a few seconds. And big events in the game, such as yellow and red cards, referee decisions, or, most importantly, goals, will make the rest of the game very different. If a shot is 1 or 2 meters outside the post won't make much difference in how the rest of the game goes, but if it's goes inside the post for an early lead, then it makes a lot of difference because this impacts morale, and potentially even the tactics of both teams.

[Thengil]

By its very nature a computer simulation of a footballer has to rely on randomization. In essence it works as an RPG - in a given situation, how does the game decide whether a midfielder spots the late run of an opposing player into the penalty area and if that player is hard-working enough and tactically astute enough to track that run? It depends on attributes of course, but by necessity it also includes random chance into the equation. How does the game decide whether a shot is on target or not? Attributes + external factors + random chance.

[Halofon]

37 minutes ago, Thengil said:

By its very nature a computer simulation of a footballer has to rely on randomization. In essence it works as an RPG - in a given situation, how does the game decide whether a midfielder spots the late run of an opposing player into the penalty area and if that player is hard-working enough and tactically astute enough to track that run? It depends on attributes of course, but by necessity it also includes random chance into the equation. How does the game decide whether a shot is on target or not? Attributes + external factors + random chance.

This is basically what I was looking for. I know there is set of pretty complex calculations, but there has to be some sort of RNG which I do not understand but there is.

[melogroovy]

Classic example of why I love this game:  I'm Newcastle, home to Wolves 3rd game of 1st season.  I'm down 1-2 as I put the pressure on from the 70th minute on I hit woodwork twice and have a goal dribble away from Patricio and sit on the line before he lunges back and holds it.  I figure there is no way to rescue a point and am resigned to a loss.  3rd minute of injury time and a blocked shot falls to St Maximin and he tucks it in the far post for the draw.

[Snorks]

16 hours ago, AytchMan said:

Let me make one last try.  Take the simplest example imaginable:  flipping coins.  I think we can all agree that flipping coins is both random and fair.  Over the long haul, you're going to get extremely close to 50-50, right?  Now. let's say you flip 100 times, call heads every time and get heads 54 times.  That's a 54-46 win.  Now you flip another 100 times and again call heads every time.  But this time you lose -- it's 45-55.  But how could you lose?  You used the exact same strategy and the coin is exactly the same.  As is the probabilistic mathematics.  Well, that's the essence of FM, a long and involved series of (essentially) coin flips.  Thus, a player in a given situation can make one decision one time and a completely different one the next.  And the match can go in a completely different direction.

Many coin-flips a second I believe the match engine calculates. 

[Maldini's Heir]

14 hours ago, dREIS said:

If you don't discipline your players though they will come to believe that missing 30 chances is acceptable and not try harder. Potentially losing the dressing room because of your lax attitude to poor performance. By constantly restarting you want to win each "coin flip" by sheer luck rather than try to influence the game through making changes to win. Reminds me of those folks who want a second referendum. 

I think it depends on the players. 

With my Milan team it seems they are (quite realistically) lacking mental strength particularly Piatek who completely loses it if he misses a chance. 

Therefore I'm finding the gently, gently approach is working. I will lambast them occasionally. But it's got to be used sparingly. I find the best time to do is after I've beaten a team but the performance hasn't been good.

I suppose like in real life.  Telling your striker he's an idiot for missing 10 chances probably is not the best motivator. He got into the right positions and worked hard and just had an off day. 

[Maldini's Heir]

14 hours ago, Halofon said:

Ok, I understand all the things you say. But is there any kind of random number generator involved, please? Like I don't know - Player has passing 11that means with all given aspects his pass is calculated on scale from 8 to 12, and this number is random? If so, I get that every reloaded match is different. I guess there must be some degree of randomisation, right? Even if like 5 - 10 & of attrobutes range.

I get this. I never expect there to be anything else. That's why I think scripting discussions are such red herrings. 

I don't know, but I guess, every game is winnable or, at least, not losable, if you are really good at the game. I assume someone has gone undefeated all season. 

[Maldini's Heir]

13 hours ago, XaW said:

Not exactly, because there are some small random variation, and the game will respond differently to these things. So the start might be almost identical, but a player mistimes a tackle after 5 second and this time it's a freekick instead of winning the ball, or the player slightly mistimes the clearance and it goes out of play instead of to a team mate, after that the whole rest of the game is different. From there on this would NOT be the same, or even comparable at any rate. So all these small variations changes the game, and if I remember correctly, all this happens 30 times per second, so the number of different "realities" is enormous even after a few seconds. And big events in the game, such as yellow and red cards, referee decisions, or, most importantly, goals, will make the rest of the game very different. If a shot is 1 or 2 meters outside the post won't make much difference in how the rest of the game goes, but if it's goes inside the post for an early lead, then it makes a lot of difference because this impacts morale, and potentially even the tactics of both teams.

This is exactly it. 

The games I have lost my striker, Piatek, would miss an early chance and then he'd lose it, and the team would lose it. 

I have no other proper CF so if Piatek doesn't play well I'm in trouble. I use Rebic and Leao but they're not goalscorers.

I'm now on my longest run without re-starts. 

It's my 5th or 6th attempt at starting a career with Milan. I've saved the game just prior to the first game so I don't need to re-do all of the pre-season stuff each time. I then had this awesome start where Piatek scored 4 goals against Fiorentina and I won the first 3 games so I have saved there and then just went with it.

After a run of 3 games where I beat Fiorentina, Napoli and Lazio, I lost to Genoa and SPAL. Go figure. So I re-started at Genoa and have now continued from there and I've made it to the end of January. I have lost games but have kept my nerve and not re-started. And I've changed my approach to responding to defeats and dropped points. I don't lambaste my players. Just say "Hey guys, you were so unlucky today, no need to come into training tomorrow" (while I scream at the computer). I then hold my anger until the next win.

It's got me to 5th 4 points off the top.  

[XaW]

8 hours ago, Maldini's Heir said:

This is exactly it. 

The games I have lost my striker, Piatek, would miss an early chance and then he'd lose it, and the team would lose it. 

I have no other proper CF so if Piatek doesn't play well I'm in trouble. I use Rebic and Leao but they're not goalscorers.

Sounds like he might be a bit fragile to morale changes, but that happens every once in a while. The key is having a squad with options from the bench should your main goal outlet have an off day. Missing sitters early on can have a bad impact on strikers, I'm having something similar in a game of my own. My striker is really good, but I just had him miss sitters and that leads to even more misses. This other game I pulled him off after he had squandered 7 CCCs, the sub scored 2 goals in 20 minutes to win us the game.

Examples like that are often a sign of a decent tactic, but maybe not the correct players (or just an off-day if it happens once or twice a season).

8 hours ago, Maldini's Heir said:

After a run of 3 games where I beat Fiorentina, Napoli and Lazio, I lost to Genoa and SPAL. Go figure. So I re-started at Genoa and have now continued from there and I've made it to the end of January. I have lost games but have kept my nerve and not re-started. And I've changed my approach to responding to defeats and dropped points. I don't lambaste my players. Just say "Hey guys, you were so unlucky today, no need to come into training tomorrow" (while I scream at the computer). I then hold my anger until the next win.

That's FM for you, and I expect some managers have to do this in real life as well. When they are so angry with the players, but know they have to keep their spirits up. Keep it up, you'll find that success without reloading is far more rewarding!

[CAE82]

There can be huge variation in results after re-playing. When designing tactics, I sometimes play the same game again and again, seeing how the tactic can be tweaked and improved. In my mind I think that playing the same opposition helps to keep things more consistent during testing, but since there can be so much variation it is hard to see if the difference in results is caused by the inherent match engine randomness (which is to be expected and is welcomed) or by a change in the tactics.

Even if you play the re-play the match with the same tactics, the result can vary, but overall the results are what you would expect e.g. City will beat Burnley 9 times out of 10.

If you are playing as Burnley and keep re-playing until you get the 'lucky' win then it seems like it will spoil the game, but each to their own. We've all paid for the game and can play it how we wish to!

[sporadicsmiles]

The coin toss analogy is also not a good one though. Coin tosses are independent Bernoulli trials, and obey binomial statistics. Which basically means the outcome of previous flips has no influence on the current flip. This is fundamentally different to fooball, or any complex system. I do not know how the game is programmed, so I do not know how events relate to each other. The existence of player body language implies that things that have happened in the past do influence the present though. That means we are not in a regime of independent trials, that outcome of previous events do influence current ones (and current events influence future ones). So the statistics most of us are familiar with go out of the window. At least when we are talking about the individual elements of chance that are embedded within the ME. Football is a complex system, and it exhibits chaotic behaviour. Which means you cannot predict the outcome based on the initial conditions. Which is essentially true here, when you think about it. We can see that small changes in the initial conditions (whatever the ME calculates to start a match) can lead to wildly different outcomes. This is the hallmark of chaotic systems, and why you see such vast chances in games.

What people are then conflating with this is the statistics where you compare the results of many replayed games. In this case, we do have independent trials and we can use the statistics we are all familiar with. Each time you replay a game, it is like flipping a coin. The previous times you replay the game have zero influence on the next time you do it (let's assume the user makes zero changes during the game, otherwise this is untrue). Then you can start thinking about the probability to win the game. However this is where you can really see the non-linear nature of football (in real life and in FM). You cannot access this probability before playing any game. It is not a deterministic system, in other words.

For example, go back to the coins. You know before tossing a fair coin you will get 50-50 heads and tails if you perform enough flips. This is because each trial is independent and you know what the probability of the outcome of each trial is. So before you even start flipping your coin 100 times, you can calculate the probability of any outcome, from 100 heads 0 tails to 0 heads 100 tails. It is deterministic (even if you cannot actually call the outcome of an individual flip). This is fundamentally different to what happens in football, and the same probabilistic logic you are familiar with simply does not apply. You can apply these methods to the results of matches, but it makes no sense to apply them to the individual matches themselves.

[Maldini's Heir]

14 hours ago, eencae said:

There can be huge variation in results after re-playing. When designing tactics, I sometimes play the same game again and again, seeing how the tactic can be tweaked and improved. In my mind I think that playing the same opposition helps to keep things more consistent during testing, but since there can be so much variation it is hard to see if the difference in results is caused by the inherent match engine randomness (which is to be expected and is welcomed) or by a change in the tactics.

Even if you play the re-play the match with the same tactics, the result can vary, but overall the results are what you would expect e.g. City will beat Burnley 9 times out of 10.

If you are playing as Burnley and keep re-playing until you get the 'lucky' win then it seems like it will spoil the game, but each to their own. We've all paid for the game and can play it how we wish to!

In fairness this is sort of what I'm doing (or at least a handy excuse!).

But these first few career modes are really just designed to test a few things out. I think my formation works because I can beat any team. It's just about getting some consistency and I think the key to that is being nicer to my players and switching it up occasionally.

I've made it to March! No re-starts since that Genoa game. If I get to the end of the season then I might be able to get build a decent career. 

[Maldini's Heir]

14 hours ago, sporadicsmiles said:

The coin toss analogy is also not a good one though. Coin tosses are independent Bernoulli trials, and obey binomial statistics. Which basically means the outcome of previous flips has no influence on the current flip. This is fundamentally different to fooball, or any complex system. I do not know how the game is programmed, so I do not know how events relate to each other. The existence of player body language implies that things that have happened in the past do influence the present though. That means we are not in a regime of independent trials, that outcome of previous events do influence current ones (and current events influence future ones). So the statistics most of us are familiar with go out of the window. At least when we are talking about the individual elements of chance that are embedded within the ME. Football is a complex system, and it exhibits chaotic behaviour. Which means you cannot predict the outcome based on the initial conditions. Which is essentially true here, when you think about it. We can see that small changes in the initial conditions (whatever the ME calculates to start a match) can lead to wildly different outcomes. This is the hallmark of chaotic systems, and why you see such vast chances in games.

What people are then conflating with this is the statistics where you compare the results of many replayed games. In this case, we do have independent trials and we can use the statistics we are all familiar with. Each time you replay a game, it is like flipping a coin. The previous times you replay the game have zero influence on the next time you do it (let's assume the user makes zero changes during the game, otherwise this is untrue). Then you can start thinking about the probability to win the game. However this is where you can really see the non-linear nature of football (in real life and in FM). You cannot access this probability before playing any game. It is not a deterministic system, in other words.

For example, go back to the coins. You know before tossing a fair coin you will get 50-50 heads and tails if you perform enough flips. This is because each trial is independent and you know what the probability of the outcome of each trial is. So before you even start flipping your coin 100 times, you can calculate the probability of any outcome, from 100 heads 0 tails to 0 heads 100 tails. It is deterministic (even if you cannot actually call the outcome of an individual flip). This is fundamentally different to what happens in football, and the same probabilistic logic you are familiar with simply does not apply. You can apply these methods to the results of matches, but it makes no sense to apply them to the individual matches themselves.

Yes.

I think we've got to the rub of it though so my rants were not a total waste of time!

The key is those incidents, particularly early in the game e.g. a miss by a striker, that then change the course of the whole game. If he scores, I go on and win. If he misses, his confidence drops, he can't score and it's much more difficult. I'm assuming these are still winnable (or not losable) games. There's something I could do to change the outcome.

Just to be clear, I'm not talking about a weaker team v a stronger team. Sure, I accept that ultimately if you choose a weaker team you accept that that team will lose matches and then the joy comes from not losing to the big teams and avoiding relegation. 

I'm talking about stronger teams losing to weaker teams. If it was statistics alone then weaker teams would never win, so this is where all of the complexity of the game comes into it.