broken game engine

[gmati1998]

Hi, I put some screenshots from the game, all except one from another club, they are from one season. 
If this game is to look like that, where it dominates, or you can't call it another, the whole match, then fm 2020 was my last purchased part.
Of course there are matches in real football, like those in FM, but this is a GAME not real life.
if the engine in 2021 will work the same as every year, then I will definitely not get the game from a legal source. I will not pay for a reheated chop, as every year people do it at Fifa.
 I won the season with this Sunderland, after a hard battle of draws and being r ... by the game engine.
Im done, have fun, rest will be uploaded at imgur, because 9.7 is the limit

imgur with screens

If 2021 works the same way as the same engine, then you can be sure that I won't get the game from a legal source, because you don't deserve giving us the same **** every year

Of course there are matches in real football, like those in FM, but this is a GAME not real life.

Of course there are matches in real football, like those in FM, but this is a GAME not real life.Of course there are matches in real football, like those in FM, but this is a GAME not real life.

Of course there are matches in real football, like those in FM, but this is a GAME not real life.

Of course there are matches in real football, like those in FM, but this is a GAME not real life.

 

[zyfon5]

then go play games that you feel are fun. FM is not the game for you if you cannot accept results like this.

Edited June 7, 2020 by zyfon5

[alian62]

6 minutes ago, zyfon5 said:

then go play games that you feel are fun like FIFA. FM is a football simulation game and is meant to be realistic. Do you win football matches by just having more shots and possession?

In all honesty, possession has never and will never establish the winner of the game, but goals do. It’s simple logic that, teams which score more of their shots that are on target, would be the eventual winners, than the team that holds on to the ball for longer

[zyfon5]

1 minute ago, prot651 said:

In all honesty, possession has never and will never establish the winner of the game, but goals do. It’s simple logic that, teams which score more of their shots that are on target, would be the eventual winners, than the team that holds on to the ball for longer

Sorry I edited my comments. But in courtesy of replying to your comment, the team that creates the most number of high quality shots will likely to score more not the number of shots on target.

[gmati1998]

shots on target are not passed goals, but some cases fall in, especially after total domination in the match. Some situations are so clear, that goals should be scored, but the game thinks there will be miss, not a goal. For example here's screen from game that i was played while ago.

60% possession of the ball, 24 shoots, 12 on the target, but no, it gonna be draw, because i do not diserve to win bull...it

The game gives me a joy, but I'm sick of this engine. I won't pay for "fifa" anymore. 

[shaunwwfc]

I unfortunately had to give up on FM20. It may be you have to do the same. The great thing about FM is, you have a previous version to fallback on which is every bit as good because it retains its core elements that makes FM the amazing game it is.

Every aspect of 20 was spot on but ultimately the ME, i couldnt suffer it. There are always negatives with ME but 20 i just couldnt live with. Any game I win is by a setpiece or a cross with an insanely good header by a winger who has heading/jumping rating of 7.

I hope and have every faith 21 will be superb. I have every faith in SI as we all should. 

Until then, FM19 is providing a great game for me personally. 

[Federico]

@zyfon5 Let's pretend this is true, and it's not, you don't know about the quality of chances created by the OP.

Statistically speaking, the higher the number of shots on goals is, the higher the probability that a good % of them are quality ones.

[DaveMac]

I don’t personally think those screenshots are wild results. Some games you even won. What I do think needs to be taken into account is we as players create formations whether we mean to or not that exploit the match engine. Say you create a really good tactic that creates loads of great chances I think the game has to try an balance that out. It can’t let you score all the time or people would be complaining the game is too easy as you’d be winning games scoring 7 or 8 goals which isn’t realistic. So I think to a degree when the match engine starts to get exploited the game must kick some sort of defensive mechanisms in to avoid every game being a cricket score to keep it more realistic. 
 

I could of course be completely wrong. 

[zyfon5]

1 hour ago, Federico said:

@zyfon5 Let's pretend this is true, and it's not, you don't know about the quality of chances created by the OP.

Statistically speaking, the higher the number of shots on goals is, the higher the probability that a good % of them are quality ones.

And he did score some goals from those shots no? You can check if your statement is true from this website. 

https://www.premierleague.com/stats/top/clubs/goals?se=274

https://www.premierleague.com/stats/top/clubs/ontarget_scoring_att

[zyfon5]

1 hour ago, DaveMac said:

I don’t personally think those screenshots are wild results. Some games you even won. What I do think needs to be taken into account is we as players create formations whether we mean to or not that exploit the match engine. Say you create a really good tactic that creates loads of great chances I think the game has to try an balance that out. It can’t let you score all the time or people would be complaining the game is too easy as you’d be winning games scoring 7 or 8 goals which isn’t realistic. So I think to a degree when the match engine starts to get exploited the game must kick some sort of defensive mechanisms in to avoid every game being a cricket score to keep it more realistic. 
 

I could of course be completely wrong. 

There are exploit tactics that allows you to overachieve massively so I really doubt there is a defensive mechanism in place to prevent these things from happening. Its more of AI adjusting and playing very defensive that stops you from scoring more most of the time. I don't think these screenshots are wild results either so its very clear that OP has different expectations from most of us that expect a more realistic match engine.

[zyfon5]

1 hour ago, gmati1998 said:

shots on target are not passed goals, but some cases fall in, especially after total domination in the match. Some situations are so clear, that goals should be scored, but the game thinks there will be miss, not a goal. For example here's screen from game that i was played while ago.

60% possession of the ball, 24 shoots, 12 on the target, but no, it gonna be draw, because i do not diserve to win bull...it

The game gives me a joy, but I'm sick of this engine. I won't pay for "fifa" anymore. 

Do you consider these as unrealistic results? All these teams are equal or better than me.

[Guest]

Why every time people refer exclusively PL real statistics?

Does the game based on PL football brand?

[zyfon5]

3 minutes ago, Cadoni said:

Why every time people refer exclusively PL real statistics?

Does the game based on PL football brand?

its just much easier to find statistics from PL. And generally PL players are more high quality and the gulf between teams is not large meaning random variables are minimized compared to other leagues. If you want to prove something feel free to use other sources

[Guest]

44 minutes ago, zyfon5 said:

its just much easier to find statistics from PL. And generally PL players are more high quality and the gulf between teams is not large meaning random variables are minimized compared to other leagues. If you want to prove something feel free to use other sources

I don't want to prove something, you have posted official statistics from PL.

So, the game is based on PL brand of football?

 

[turnip]

It is too easy to build a tactic that creates lots and lots of low-quality shots. The problem is that the game doesn't tell you explicitly that they're low-quality shots, so 20 shots from the edge of the area that dribble along the ground to the goalkeeper look - as far as match stats go - like 20 swerving missiles that only an AI goalkeeper could ever save.

I'm not a fan of the hysterical "it's broken" accusation, though. I've played plenty of utterly broken games and even the worst FM/CM is, at worst, flawed.

[Federico]

1 ora fa, zyfon5 ha scritto:

And he did score some goals from those shots no? You can check if your statement is true from this website. 

https://www.premierleague.com/stats/top/clubs/goals?se=274

https://www.premierleague.com/stats/top/clubs/ontarget_scoring_att

Thanks.

Please correct my math if it's wrong (I was TERRIBLE at school at math, I'm not ashamed to admit it).

Man City, which is the team that both scored the most and shoot on target the most in the PL season 2019/2020, has an average of 1 goal every 2,8 shots on target.

Norwich, among the worse in the league according to the same statistics reported above, has an average of 1 goal scored every 4,6 shots on goal.

The OP counts 43 shots on target resulting in 5 goals scored. This means an average of.... 1 goal scored every 8,6 shots on target. Almost double the worst PL club for that statistics.

If you also could please expand what you meant to demonstrate by showing those stats? I don't think you wanted to demonstrate figures were realistics because they're clearly not. I also don't think you wanted to demonstrate the quality of chances by showing a couple of tabs.

Sorry, I'm sincerely and genuinely missing your point.

[Federico]

1 ora fa, zyfon5 ha scritto:

Do you consider these as unrealistic results? All these teams are equal or better than me.

Ahmm.... sorry... maybe yes, just a little bit. I don't know what season you are into, but I hardly think a japanese side could get out well from a couple of games against two PL clubs (Liverpool especially).

Ah, probably you're using one of those exploit tactics you talked about, tell us the truth, we busted you!

[zyfon5]

17 minutes ago, Federico said:

Ahmm.... sorry... maybe yes, just a little bit. I don't know what season you are into, but I hardly think a japanese side could get out well from a couple of games against two PL clubs (Liverpool especially).

Ah, probably you're using one of those exploit tactics you talked about, tell us the truth, we busted you!

Nope it's not an exploit tactic. I've shared it to others before in this forum in another thread. The two matches against the PL side is not too far off from the usual tactic I used either just a more defensive variant of it. The two match is in the restructured 2025 club world cup in case anyone wonder. So many people think that you can't get a result using a counter tactic so I figured why not use one? But I have to admit though all of these matches I have made slight changes throughout the game to respond to the AI.

[zyfon5]

33 minutes ago, Federico said:

Thanks.

Please correct my math if it's wrong (I was TERRIBLE at school at math, I'm not ashamed to admit it).

Man City, which is the team that both scored the most and shoot on target the most in the PL season 2019/2020, has an average of 1 goal every 2,8 shots on target.

Norwich, among the worse in the league according to the same statistics reported above, has an average of 1 goal scored every 4,6 shots on goal.

The OP counts 43 shots on target resulting in 5 goals scored. This means an average of.... 1 goal scored every 8,6 shots on target. Almost double the worst PL club for that statistics.

If you also could please expand what you meant to demonstrate by showing those stats? I don't think you wanted to demonstrate figures were realistics because they're clearly not. I also don't think you wanted to demonstrate the quality of chances by showing a couple of tabs.

Sorry, I'm sincerely and genuinely missing your point.

My point is simple: shots on target rarely if ever correlates to goals scored. However in FM it is too easy to generate shots hence you will always find matches where you seem to generate a ton of shots but scored a few. But generally when I inspect some of these saved matches the shots they created are very often low quality chances mixed with a bit of bad luck which resulted in these frustrating scorelines that many of us can relate to.

[johnhughthom]

1 hour ago, Cadoni said:

I don't want to prove something, you have posted official statistics from PL.

So, the game is based on PL brand of football?

 

 

It's a game made in England, of course it's based on PL brand of football.

[Svenc]

58 minutes ago, Federico said:

The OP counts 43 shots on target resulting in 5 goals scored. This means an average of.... 1 goal scored every 8,6 shots on target. Almost double the worst PL club for that statistics.

It doesn't as these are specific picks obviously months apart based on the date of the Matches. We do not know his averages.

That's like Pep logging on to Whoscored and Looking exclusively at the Matches where he struggled. You can do it too, it's actually pretty fun this season, in particular considering that this is coming from the likes of Pep Managing spaces on a pitch rather FM Joe Managing shot Counts on a spread sheet.

(The ME has Always had flaws, mind you).  
 

Edited June 7, 2020 by Svenc

[Preveza]

Reheated chop LOL

[Federico]

1 ora fa, zyfon5 ha scritto:

My point is simple: shots on target rarely if ever correlates to goals scored. However in FM it is too easy to generate shots hence you will always find matches where you seem to generate a ton of shots but scored a few. But generally when I inspect some of these saved matches the shots they created are very often low quality chances mixed with a bit of bad luck which resulted in these frustrating scorelines that many of us can relate to.

Well... I slightly disagree with you, especially when you say shots on target rarely if ever correlated to goals scored. If you say "don't expect to score at every shot", I should also read "don't expect to concede at every shot".

Unless you're saying only AI (and certain users of course. Like 2 or 3, the other thousands know nothing of FM) can produce good quality chances. Naa it's not that.

1 ora fa, Svenc ha scritto:

It doesn't as these are specific picks obviously months apart based on the date of the Matches. We do not know his averages.

Yeah of course I perfectly know how silly is to get a statistic from 5 matches, but hey... let's consider it as a trend, ok?

[Federico]

1 ora fa, johnhughthom ha scritto:

It's a game made in England, of course it's based on PL brand of football.

No actually every leagues have researchers and every tactic, coaching behaviour, statistic, tries to be as realistic as possible according to that specific league data.

[johnhughthom]

15 minutes ago, Federico said:

No actually every leagues have researchers and every tactic, coaching behaviour, statistic, tries to be as realistic as possible according to that specific league data.

The me is still coded by a mainly English team and is therefore, actually, very heavily biased towards an English view of how the game is played. Despite those reams of data, the matches look the same whatever level, whatever locale.

[yolixeya]

I am sure that SI does a lot of testing and simulating and I'm sure the stats look pretty close to real world. But the problem comes when you throw human manager into the mix and especially someone who will make overly attacking tactic that will generate a lot of poor quality shots. A scenario that never happens IRL.  Imagine if some club IRL appointed a total noob and the players had to obey his orders and play like that. God knows what would that look like and what kind of stats would generate. That is not to say that balanced tactic don't generate a lot of shots. It could be that just inserting human manager into the game is spoiling the perfect football simulation.

[Federico]

This would be true, if those silly statistics were reproduced by human users only. Unfortunately for your theory tough, it happens (and quite often) on AI vs AI matches too.

[enigmatic]

Pep Guardiola could also show stats like that for a season. Maybe he should give up on football management too  

[yolixeya]

19 minutes ago, Federico said:

This would be true, if those silly statistics were reproduced by human users only. Unfortunately for your theory tough, it happens (and quite often) on AI vs AI matches too.

It can happen in single matches but when you look at the whole season I think stats are probably ok because SI tests those things.

[Federico]

It happens to AI as much as to a human player. I'm just saying it's not the human player who mixes the cards on the table.

[yolixeya]

13 minutes ago, Federico said:

It happens to AI as much as to a human player. I'm just saying it's not the human player who mixes the cards on the table.

I seriously doubt that. But if you are certain care to provide such data then. And by data I don't mean screenshot and snippets like shown earlier in this thread but the data that will show AI teams having stats massively different then teams IRL. And all without human manager included in the save.

[Federico]

Well, I can. At the end of the season I'm playing. But at the moment, I can tell you Chelsea is the team that has more shots on goal after 3 EPL games. The number is 38, and scored 7. This means a goal is scored every 5,4 shots on goal. I'm managing Man Utd, I count 22 shots on goal and scored (miserably) 4 goals. The average is 1 goal every 5,5 shots on goal.

You can make your math and comparison with the statistics from EPL kindly posted above.

And why no human included

[yolixeya]

10 minutes ago, Federico said:

And why no human included

Because I said that is possible that human manager spoils perfect simulation as SI tests the game by simulating when there is no human manager present. Then you dismissed the theory and I asked if you have the data for it. You are Man Utd in that save so that data wouldn't do it.

[Federico]

Ah ok, now I understood.

Well sorry, while I'm sure every software house makes his own soak tests, I don't believe those can be somehow altered by the mere presence of a human player, which, anyway, is requested in order for copies to be sold and game to be played.

That said, I evaluate what I see according to my experience during my playtime and for me that is a matter of facts enough. But maybe you can do that experiment by yourself.

[gmati1998]

Over 80 minutes 11 out 10, 36 shoots, 16 on the target, and what?? Sh...t

One shoot, one shoot on the target. Goalkeeper made  long kick to the striker, he made shoot outside the box. 

How can you explain this.

imgur screen because i cant upload here

[zyfon5]

17 hours ago, gmati1998 said:

Over 80 minutes 11 out 10, 36 shoots, 16 on the target, and what?? Sh...t

One shoot, one shoot on the target. Goalkeeper made  long kick to the striker, he made shoot outside the box. 

How can you explain this.

 

imgur screen because i cant upload here

The opposing team is playing with one man down yet still got 50% possession. Ouch. Sure let's blame the ME. Any chance that the scorer is a sub?

[FMunderachiever]

The real problem, as i eluded to in my thread about struggling to find a save I like, is the expectations of the player.

Because FM is a computer game, I think a lot of us generally think we will smash it.

The problem is, WE can only do so much and then its up to the players, controlled by the ME, to then win the game. That requires understanding the game to the degree you know what changes to make and when to produce the desired results in FM world.

Id speculate youre having loads of blocked shots, loads of players end up camped around the opposition area trying to force the breakthrough, and then they clear the ball downfield into an empty space that all your players have left behind, and they score.

Id chuck everything youve read tactically out the window and do whatever you can for these things not to happen.

If it means playing with hardly any vertical compactness, so be it. If it means playing on a crazy attacking mentality as an underdog, do it. if it means playing three players next to each other with the same role, do it.

Just do whatever it takes. I chucked the theory out the window long, long ago.

[Federico]

10 ore fa, zyfon5 ha scritto:

The opposing team is playing with one man down yet still got 50% possession. Ouch. Sure let's blame the ME. Any chance that the scorer is a sub?

Well, defending teams getting the possession too easily is something discussed until boredom since 2-3 editions if I remember correctly. That 50% of possession hasn't anyway denied the user to get through on goal many times, so I hardly think he did something wrong, especially when he conceded only one shot to the opponents. That said, wins or loss are given by goal scored and not by the number of passes and for how long you get this successfully. It's well known that you score goals by shooting on target. It seems to me he did it, and quite much. I haven't watched the game so I can't say, but I bet 1 penny that at least 3-4 of those 16 shots on goal were good enough for an average player to score'em. If you say you can't blame the ME, well I can't blame the user either and his venting is justified in my opinion.

And yes, the scorer is a sub as clearly shown by the screenshot.

[zyfon5]

1 hour ago, Federico said:

Well, defending teams getting the possession too easily is something discussed until boredom since 2-3 editions if I remember correctly. That 50% of possession hasn't anyway denied the user to get through on goal many times, so I hardly think he did something wrong, especially when he conceded only one shot to the opponents. That said, wins or loss are given by goal scored and not by the number of passes and for how long you get this successfully. It's well known that you score goals by shooting on target. It seems to me he did it, and quite much. I haven't watched the game so I can't say, but I bet 1 penny that at least 3-4 of those 16 shots on goal were good enough for an average player to score'em. If you say you can't blame the ME, well I can't blame the user either and his venting is justified in my opinion.

And yes, the scorer is a sub as clearly shown by the screenshot.

I have a good idea why he lost that match. And I didn't notice the players list next haha. Thanks for pointing out the player which further confirms my suspicion.

[Ronaldinho Gaúcho 10]

It would help if your post game stats included CCC (Clear cut chances) and HC (Half chances) because those are usually more appropriate indicator of how many my goals you could have scored. Your tactic is most likely flawed and too aggro, too high tempo and makes your team rush the chances which they are unable to do and don’t trouble the goalkeeper properly. 

I still wish the game had more stats like xG, xA which again, are slightly better indicator of how many times you could have scored or made an assist 

[Federico]

1 ora fa, Ronaldinho Gaúcho 10 ha scritto:

It would help if your post game stats included CCC (Clear cut chances) and HC (Half chances) because those are usually more appropriate indicator of how many my goals you could have scored. Your tactic is most likely flawed and too aggro, too high tempo and makes your team rush the chances which they are unable to do and don’t trouble the goalkeeper properly. 

I still wish the game had more stats like xG, xA which again, are slightly better indicator of how many times you could have scored or made an assist 

Unfortunately CCCs and HCs aren't calculated properly by the in-game stats (and even if, some of them are highly subjectives), so that's not an indicator at all of how many goals he could have scored. The only real and proper indicator would be watching the game. As said above, looking at figures there's an high probability he had some good ones in my opinion.

That said, stating his tactic is flawed is unfair. The opponents had 1 player off after few minutes. Struggling to score but seeing your team being so dominant, I would have tried to go as much attacking as I could at least in the last 30-35 minutes.

[Ronaldinho Gaúcho 10]

On 07/06/2020 at 13:32, Federico said:

Statistically speaking, the higher the number of shots on goals is, the higher the probability that a good % of them are quality ones.

I disagree. If the ME gathers the required information (all the deciding factors) and based on that reads that the shot should not be of high quality then it won’t be. And most likely be showcased by a player just shooting straight into goalkeepers hands for example. 

[Federico]

So we have to rely on ME deciding whether a shot should be high quality or not. If so, no tactics is flawed. Every tactic is flawed. From my point of view you just contradicted yourself. Getting back to our match, why the ME decided that not even 1 out of 16 shots on goal was good enough to be scored but 1 out of 1 from the AI was an high quality one instead?

I can't say, nor you can. None of us watched the match. But I look at figures because, as you stated above, the ME reads and makes its calculations. We're talking about math here if I understood. If we're talking about math, and I'm terrible at it, statistic is an inherent argument. So I assume that the probability that at least 3-4 out of 16 shots on goal are high quality ones is higher than the percentage from 1 shot out of 1. It's not that you have to agree or disagree. It's math.

[Guest]

22 minutes ago, Federico said:

So we have to rely on ME deciding whether a shot should be high quality or not. If so, no tactics is flawed. Every tactic is flawed. From my point of view you just contradicted yourself. Getting back to our match, why the ME decided that not even 1 out of 16 shots on goal was good enough to be scored but 1 out of 1 from the AI was an high quality one instead?

I can't say, nor you can. None of us watched the match. But I look at figures because, as you stated above, the ME makes its calculations and reads. We're talking about math here if I understood. If we're talking about math, and I'm terrible at it, statistic is an inherent argument. So I assume that the percentage that at least 3-4 out of 16 shots on goal are high quality ones is higher than the percentage from 1 shot out of 1. It's not that you have to agree or disagree. It's math.

Exactly. The game is based on 0 and 1 palm and mathematics. Isn't real life. 

[Federico]

Which for me is one of the reasons for people being so vitriolic about the ME, about SI and the FM.

And I'd also add because some people likes to pontificate about how football works and how FM works, filling their mouths of astonishing and smart words, bringing statistics from real life and tons of data and schemes. I have a licence for coaching and I'm perfectly aware and I'm not ashamed to admit I know nothing of football. I think I know, but no, not even in my dreams. Probably a bit more than the average Joe, but surely not at the level of the many "master-coaches" from this forum. I'd like to see their coaching degrees one day.

What I know is that the more the word "realism" is used, the more people will expect for realism.

FM is the best "emulation" around, but yet an entertaining software. A great piece of "entertaining" (for us players, for devs must be a nightmare) software surely. In my personal opinion if we all begin looking at FM a bit less as "real football" and bit more for what it is, an entertaining software, probably a lot of people would enjoy it much much more.

 

[yolixeya]

I really think having more shots on target (quantity) is not a indication of having quality chances in FM. It can be in some cases if you are someone who knows what is a balanced tactic in FM terms. But you can make something overly attacking which puts player in position to take low quality shots, you can add shot on sight and stuff like that and that would generate more shots. Some of them will be on target, that doesn't mean they are quality chances.

Most of us know what is a good chance when they see it. A shot from the box, the less under the preassure from defenders the better the chance, a shot after having the ball under control is better then first time volley, receiving the ball on your well timed run is easier to score then running a counter from your half at full speed even if it's one on one with the keeper. Just look at your chances each, one by one, when you analyze it, if you truly care about it and want to know the truth.

[AuchAyeTheNoo]

I'm in the same boat with the match engine. The number of key highlights which involve your IF/IW going on a mazey run then either hitting a tame shot straight at the GK or into the side netting is infuriating, also failing to see a striker sitting waiting for a tap in just to blast it into the side netting. I literally can't take it anymore.  I'm done playing this year. It's a sad state of affairs when the CM 97/98 text commentary delivered a better experience than the match engine 23 years later. The match engine needs rebuilt from the ground up, or at least just have a better text based system as an alternative.

[JordanMilly]

@AuchAyeTheNoo @turnip - Alright then lads, no need on either part. I've hidden those posts, and the conversation was decent before then, so if we can stick to that, it'd be appreciated.

[KingCanary]

5 hours ago, AuchAyeTheNoo said:

I'm in the same boat with the match engine. The number of key highlights which involve your IF/IW going on a mazey run then either hitting a tame shot straight at the GK or into the side netting is infuriating, also failing to see a striker sitting waiting for a tap in just to blast it into the side netting. I literally can't take it anymore.  I'm done playing this year. It's a sad state of affairs when the CM 97/98 text commentary delivered a better experience than the match engine 23 years later. The match engine needs rebuilt from the ground up, or at least just have a better text based system as an alternative.

I can sympathise with this- I think one of the big things the match engine needs to work on is decision making and movement in and around the box.

Players are far too happy to just blast a shot straight at a defender directly infront of them when another touch would likely open up the opportunity. Similarly strikers are a bit too happy to just stand next to a defender when a player gets to the byline rather than try and beat them to the near post of pull back to the penalty spot to create the extra yard of space- this ends up leading to players taking shots from impossible angles because their options in the box aren't making an effort to be open. 

[steam just is]

The annoying thing is it’s got worse.