Football Manager 2020 Feedback Thread

[likesiamesefish]

55 minutes ago, MBarbaric said:

@sidslayer @likesiamesefish

there is absolutely no reason for any team in the world to stay in that position on goal kicks. no offence but, at times, the length you are stretching what eyes see looks like you are insulting inteligence. 

that being said, the screenshot is either took out of context and the players either got back in their expected positions (can't see that from the screenshot), or it is a bug. Since we saw it only once on this forum I'd guess it was, at worst, just a temporary glitch (if it wasn't we'd see that far more on this forum). so a non issue

I haven’t said that they should stay in that position, it is others who seem to think there is a ‘correct’ position that the game should put your players in regardless of your instructions. I have just suggested ways he could get them in the position he wants them in and tried to explain why the AI is doing it in the first place.

I said in my first post about this (and you yourself just stated) that this is a screenshot and the players are clearly moving rather than just standing still. I also said that they shouldn’t be so close together. I think it is clear I was talking about why they weren’t where he wanted them, not saying they should be exactly where they were.

[jc577]

4 hours ago, likesiamesefish said:

Your formation is narrow because three of the four players that you are playing in wide positions you are asking to move in field.

If you think that because you have wide players and so do they, that when their wide players go all the way out and hug the line your players are supposed to follow them, then you should really be telling them to man mark them. You have players asked to play on the inside and close down as part of a front three and they're up against a back three so this is why they aren't stuck out there on the wing marking the player you'd like them to mark.

I understand what you’re saying, but my formation is narrow in possession. In FM, the defensive shape is based on your formation, so naturally I would expect the wide players to take up wider positions. Perhaps the fact that the opposition are using a back three has meant my players attempt to press their CBs, but I don’t believe this should be the case. The positioning is clearly wrong - they’re too deep to even press their CBs. I don’t believe I should have to use man-marking instructions for my wide players to defend the flanks? That’s where they are positioned, that’s where they should be.

[Rashidi]

 

Just now, jc577 said:

In FM, the defensive shape is based on your formation,

Maybe before FM19, but now you have to consider roles and duties as well. The positioning will also be affected by the roles and duties you have chosen. A 442 with wingers on attack duty will look different in the defensive transition than a 442 with defensive wingers on defend duty. The defensive shape is not based on your formation, but the combination of team instructions and roles and duties. 

[MBarbaric]

6 minuti fa, Rashidi ha scritto:

 

Maybe before FM19, but now you have to consider roles and duties as well. The positioning will also be affected by the roles and duties you have chosen. A 442 with wingers on attack duty will look different in the defensive transition than a 442 with defensive wingers on defend duty. The defensive shape is not based on your formation, but the combination of team instructions and roles and duties. 

this is one of the biggest problems with the ME/TC. You are basically saying that the player practically has no idea what his defensive shape will look like until he sees it play out. And even then you can't be sure why things happen since there are million variables. One would need to make FM full time job to understand how it works.

[Keyzer Soze]

29 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

 

Maybe before FM19, but now you have to consider roles and duties as well. The positioning will also be affected by the roles and duties you have chosen. A 442 with wingers on attack duty will look different in the defensive transition than a 442 with defensive wingers on defend duty. The defensive shape is not based on your formation, but the combination of team instructions and roles and duties. 

This is what puzzles me in FM/SI.

Why this sort of information, and changes in the game, not explicit explain in the game?

Why we come to know them in a random post inside a thread?

Edited February 18, 2020 by Keyzer Soze

[91427]

Shame that they still haven't fixed the absurd way the ball curves, Look at 2:14 in this video, looks ridiculous 

 

[jc577]

58 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

 

Maybe before FM19, but now you have to consider roles and duties as well. The positioning will also be affected by the roles and duties you have chosen. A 442 with wingers on attack duty will look different in the defensive transition than a 442 with defensive wingers on defend duty. The defensive shape is not based on your formation, but the combination of team instructions and roles and duties. 

This is a massive change, and something we should have been made aware of. But in any case, the positioning of my players is still wrong, surely? I mean I understand support duties defending slightly deeper than attack duties, which shouldn’t be the case as it indicates you need to use attack duties to press high, but for my centre-mids to be higher than the wide players? This can’t be right, even with changes to the ME.

[Louisking1992]

5 hours ago, likesiamesefish said:

Come on man, the word wide being in the name of the formation doesn't mean that there is a wide style of play it just means that they are in the AML and AMR positions rather than three AMCs...

Your formation is narrow because three of the four players that you are playing in wide positions you are asking to move in field.

If you think that because you have wide players and so do they, that when their wide players go all the way out and hug the line your players are supposed to follow them, then you should really be telling them to man mark them. You have players asked to play on the inside and close down as part of a front three and they're up against a back three so this is why they aren't stuck out there on the wing marking the player you'd like them to mark.

What did happen then? They didn't just stand there did they.

 

Don't get me wrong, they could move a little bit and not be stood so close to each other I guess, but you're not actually using the ME to it's full extent in order to try and get them to do what you want and I figured you posted your tactics to get some assistance.

Using a positive mentality means the team will naturally be wider, using two wider midfielders even with an AP and IF doesn't mean its a narrow formation and 100% doesn't mean that the CMs and the  wide midfielders should be standing this close to each-other when the opposition have a goal kick. The starting position of these players is completely wrong no matter what you think, you could use two IF on either side and you still shouldn't see this type of positioning.

 

Even using a flat 4-1-4-1 with attacking width of Narrow, having two IW and two IWB you wouldn't see this so I struggle to see you point? This may just be a one off but its certainly not right. 

[Rashidi]

12 minutes ago, jc577 said:

This is a massive change, and something we should have been made aware of. But in any case, the positioning of my players is still wrong, surely? I mean I understand support duties defending slightly deeper than attack duties, which shouldn’t be the case as it indicates you need to use attack duties to press high, but for my centre-mids to be higher than the wide players? This can’t be right, even with changes to the ME.

You mean the changes to roles and duties, the addition of defensive width and line of engagement wasn't even enough to tell you something had changed? The game has evolved but people are still using old assumptions of how it used to work and hope that it still applies today. 

[Louisking1992]

Just now, Rashidi said:

You mean the changes to roles and duties, the addition of defensive width and line of engagement wasn't even enough to tell you something had changed? The game has evolved but people are still using old assumptions of how it used to work and hope that it still applies today. 

But what JC is saying is that the starting positions look wrong? I mean ive never seen a WM and CM stand this close to each other irl or in the game? 

[Bakiano]

I can't believe how lucky they are. They are rivals, but they were so lucky in all these three games against them. And what is more weird, beside my Halands PK miss in the last second, is that in all these games, they score the goal after their FIRST shot at all in the game.

[Rashidi]

3 minutes ago, Louisking1992 said:

But what JC is saying is that the starting positions look wrong? I mean ive never seen a WM and CM stand this close to each other irl or in the game? 

My point is that he thinks the formation defines your defensive shape when in reality its the combination of roles duties, mentality and what the settings for defensive shape are - line of engagement and defensive line. I am not saying that WM and CM standing close together is correct. Thats a different discussion, cos he needs to upload a pkm cos it could have happened for a host of other reasons. I was just correcting the assertion that the formation = your defensive shape when that actually oversimplifies it.

[jc577]

7 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

You mean the changes to roles and duties, the addition of defensive width and line of engagement wasn't even enough to tell you something had changed? The game has evolved but people are still using old assumptions of how it used to work and hope that it still applies today. 

I have great respect for you Rashidi, and have learned so much from you over the years, but this sounds a tad patronising.
 

In hindsight, the fact that different roles now have different mentalities does suggest that there may be differences in pressing intensity, positioning etc, however this is not public information. Secondly, I’m not sure if this is a good change. Say for example you’re using a 4231 and want to press high, and have an IF-A and W-S on the flanks, surely the winger’s deep(er) positioning will impact the ability of your team to press high? 

[JordanMilly]

7 hours ago, Bobek said:

Second season as West Ham. This is top scorers after 38 games. ( 20 goals 17 and 16 what??)  I never had so few goals in any fm edition

Given the goal differences, people were obviously scoring. That any individual player didn't score 25-30 goals a season isn't unprecedented, similar happened last year: https://www.premierleague.com/stats/top/players/goals

[Rashidi]

45 minutes ago, jc577 said:

In hindsight, the fact that different roles now have different mentalities does suggest that there may be differences in pressing intensity, positioning etc, however this is not public information. Secondly, I’m not sure if this is a good change. Say for example you’re using a 4231 and want to press high, and have an IF-A and W-S on the flanks, surely the winger’s deep(er) positioning will impact the ability of your team to press high?

Apologies if i sounded patronising, twas not my intention. What frustrates me is that many people seem to assume that each edition of the game has to be the same. Perhaps that was the case prior to the changes in the tactical creator. Maybe at that point we could all agree on something, but the moment the tactical creator was changed, all bets were off.  SI had said there were major changes to roles and duties and that there were changes, I never once expected them to go out of their way to detail how these would specifically impact the game. Perhaps I have become accustomed to finding these out myself. I know people usually get frustrated with all the changes and tbh I was surprised to find out that the IF and IW had changed, but I guess for me finding out these little changes can be exciting. That though may not be the case for everyone.
 

If you want to press high, what guides that is basically your line of engagement, and your mentality. A player on support will naturally drop a bit deeper during the buildup phase to support play, however when you lose the ball the winger on support could very easily press the opponent just as much as an IF on attack. What could affect how effective the attack duty or the support duty do these will depend on your in transition instructions, your defensive line, your line of engagement and any other instructions you may have chosen. 

[likesiamesefish]

1 hour ago, Louisking1992 said:

Using a positive mentality means the team will naturally be wider, using two wider midfielders even with an AP and IF doesn't mean its a narrow formation and 100% doesn't mean that the CMs and the  wide midfielders should be standing this close to each-other when the opposition have a goal kick. The starting position of these players is completely wrong no matter what you think, you could use two IF on either side and you still shouldn't see this type of positioning.

 

Even using a flat 4-1-4-1 with attacking width of Narrow, having two IW and two IWB you wouldn't see this so I struggle to see you point? This may just be a one off but its certainly not right. 

My point about his formation and roles was solely to do with why the AI was pushing the wing backs out so wide. Been pretty clear on that.

I have been saying that the team and player instructions are what has left these players free and suggested what could be done to make sure it doesn’t happen again. If he told his wide players to man mark the wing backs then I doubt the positioning would be the same as in the screenshot. I’m really not sure what the problem with me suggesting this was.

[likesiamesefish]

9 minutes ago, Rashidi said:

 SI had said there were major changes to roles and duties and that there were changes, I never once expected them to go out of their way to detail how these would specifically impact the game.

Personally I prefer the fact that they don’t give too much detail. There have been times I wanted to know the weighting of different tactical tweaks in the ME but I feel a certain level of opaqueness and a lack of total control is needed or else the game loses any sense of realism.

The fact that there are lots of different variables than can have an impact on shape and positioning makes sense and it’s good to know that all of the tweaks make a tangible difference and can cancel out each others effects. As you say, it makes sense really that all of it would.

[BigV]

Don't want to barge in on the discussion here but i think i've clocked onto something (might be old news but I thought I'd post as it is GF):

BG knowledge- Playing as United, started a new save to test some things out. 433, 2AP either one on support and other on attack or both on support. RW- IF-s and LW-IF-A and striker AF. Relative to traits and formation, the whole tactic is based on having 2 playmakers to pass that ball into the box either by cross, through ball or just general passes (short). Wide players push in, RW more of the creator in suso, LW the pacey rashford getting to the byline or just before it darting into the box where martial/greenwood should be. Won all 4 of these games on atatcking mentality, high tempo and work the ball into the box (counter that attacking and working it in slow doesn't technically work BUT watching the match it does, they still do it quick enough to pass around and attack with speed to unsettle the oppositon- not working the ball into the box would show less balls being played in- in theory).

From the images the box is rarely passed into and where it has been they're away from the centre. Now I know my formation is a 433 with IF's but surely looking at the highlighted box, there has to be a point in the game where they successfully pass the ball in the highlighted area. 2 of them show some passes into the box and some in the area but if you look at the circles indicating where the passes are successfully made, not alot of them are in that highlighted area where goals usually do come from. E.g. bournmouth was a good game to watch, saw some passes in around the box and noticed in and around the pentality area it doesn't occur that often. Mainly widely bassed and that's possibly an effect as to why crossing is so effective, the 6 yard box isn't being penetrated enough by normal passes. IRL I believe it's close to 10-12 goals for united while city have scored 21 from their 74 (https://www.dreamteamfc.com/c/news-gossip/440326/man-city-scoring-open-goals/). Open play isn't as useful as it should be especially using pogba and maddison running games as playmakers when they have the ability to thread those balls in for the likes of rashford, martial/greenwood and at times suso (who gets into the box trait) should work at times. 

[LucasBR]

It's so frustrating how useless AMC's are in this game, even against extremely weak team they don't perform good at all.

[Marko1989]

I bought FM 2020 a week ago even after I read all the criticism here.

I can understand why people are frustrated. Fullbacks are overpowered and there are too many set-piece goals. BUT. BUT. As older I am, I have less time to spend on FM.

So, overpowered fullbacks are not problem for me. It is even fun to see some great goals from them. I just want to play 2-3 games a day, and for that, FM 2020 is good. It is fun for me for those couple of games a day, so I don't regret buying it.

But if you expect some good representation of football, then, no.

But, even I have something to complain. And those are strikers and AMC's. I didn't see a single through ball or some good play from my strikers, it is like they are not in the game at all. C'mon SI, it is 2020 year, at least make that basic part of the football work.

If they fix strikers in the next patch I think I will be satisfied with my purchase. I love when the game is realistic and totally unrealistic at the same time. 

 

Edited February 18, 2020 by Marko1989

[szp]

10 hours ago, jc577 said:

In all honesty I don't believe this to be true. The positioning of my players is during the opposition's goal kick i.e the ball has just gone out of play. The only instructions that should have a direct impact on this should be 'prevent short GK distribution' which wasn't used, and line of engagement settings. In any case, my CM's should never be higher up the pitch than my wide players, and my wide players shouldn't be so narrow. 

Anyway, here is the tactic:  

The front three have been asked to close down more, mark tighter & tackle harder. 

*When I increased the line of engagement, I removed these split-block instructions. 

*I've watched previous goal-kicks and the positioning is the same throughout the match.  

Notable changes to the tactic at this point in the match:

DLP --> Defend. 

Line of engagement --> Higher.

Width (In possession) fairly narrow.

Here's a clearer screenshot of the goal kick:

Any thoughts? 

It happens to me pretty often. I'm using the same formation but other roles, duties and TI's. 
My team is:

GK/D

2x FB/S

BPD

CD

DM/D

AP/A

CM/S

IF/S

IW/A

PF/A

[omar778]

since the update i noticed something with the match engine  the extended highlights

the game just zooms past very quickly the game finishes quickly with not much highlights

it is also pretty boring I’m not saying it was perfect before the update but it was more exciting to watch please fix this issue. thanks

[likesiamesefish]

4 hours ago, jc577 said:

I don’t believe I should have to use man-marking instructions for my wide players to defend the flanks? That’s where they are positioned, that’s where they should be.

Fair enough but if I had told my front three to close down the ball or have a higher line of engagement but then the wide players left my centre forward to close down three centre backs on his own and sat out wide away from the ball then I would find that frustrating, especially if I wasn't telling them to mark anyone.

I guess it's hard for SI to please everyone but there are instructions that could help you solve your issue so it just seems to make sense to apply them rather than expecting the players to do things automatically.

[bcereus]

Why do my players stop and then pass back when they have acres of space to run into or cross the ball across goal?

 

This happens every match, they either pass it back or they wait until the opposition full back is in position to block the cross, it's insane.

[jc577]

1 hour ago, likesiamesefish said:

Fair enough but if I had told my front three to close down the ball or have a higher line of engagement but then the wide players left my centre forward to close down three centre backs on his own and sat out wide away from the ball then I would find that frustrating, especially if I wasn't telling them to mark anyone.

I guess it's hard for SI to please everyone but there are instructions that could help you solve your issue so it just seems to make sense to apply them rather than expecting the players to do things automatically.

I here what you’re saying, but my wide players are nowhere near their CBs  So who exactly are they marking? How does their positioning benefit us in anyway? 

[likesiamesefish]

18 minutes ago, jc577 said:

I here what you’re saying, but my wide players are nowhere near their CBs  So who exactly are they marking? How does their positioning benefit us in anyway? 

I don't think they are marking anyone or in a particularly good position, I just don't think they should be sat out wide unless you tell them to. I don't even think that this stage of play is fully underway as the ball is still with the GK.

Your wide players look close enough to the WB that between them and their full back it should be covered (pace allowing) and it's not like the opponent doesn't have the ball and the majority of their players in the middle of the pitch and could be moving forward into the middle. I think it's the midfield players who should be more central but that's just me. I didn't mean it as a criticism when I said your formation is extremely narrow btw, it just seemed to me that could be the reason why the AI WBs are so wide and high.

[jc577]

3 hours ago, Rashidi said:

Apologies if i sounded patronising, twas not my intention. What frustrates me is that many people seem to assume that each edition of the game has to be the same. Perhaps that was the case prior to the changes in the tactical creator. Maybe at that point we could all agree on something, but the moment the tactical creator was changed, all bets were off.  SI had said there were major changes to roles and duties and that there were changes, I never once expected them to go out of their way to detail how these would specifically impact the game. Perhaps I have become accustomed to finding these out myself. I know people usually get frustrated with all the changes and tbh I was surprised to find out that the IF and IW had changed, but I guess for me finding out these little changes can be exciting. That though may not be the case for everyone.
 

If you want to press high, what guides that is basically your line of engagement, and your mentality. A player on support will naturally drop a bit deeper during the buildup phase to support play, however when you lose the ball the winger on support could very easily press the opponent just as much as an IF on attack. What could affect how effective the attack duty or the support duty do these will depend on your in transition instructions, your defensive line, your line of engagement and any other instructions you may have chosen. 

No worries, all good 

Personally, when the tactics creator changed I believe it would have been prudent to document changes to player’s individual mentality, and the effects it has on pressing, positioning etc. The vast majority of people play on key or extended highlights, so may not be able to identify these changes in behaviour. Also, with all the additional features there is so much information to take in, people may not necessarily have the time. 
 

In regards to pressing, the example I gave earlier was actually real, from a 4231 I ran with Leverkusen at the start of FM20. The main issue I had was from opposition goal-kicks, where the Winger was positioned as if he were a strata lower. I also think attack duty CM’s should be higher during build up play, but that’s another conversation entirely 

[h3nrique_SEP]

Great football by my "false nine" system.

Guys, don't use the false 9 role, use a strikerless AP-A with Roam from position,

Edited February 18, 2020 by h3nrique_SEP

[h3nrique_SEP]

[jc577]

38 minutes ago, likesiamesefish said:

I don't think they are marking anyone or in a particularly good position, I just don't think they should be sat out wide unless you tell them to. I don't even think that this stage of play is fully underway as the ball is still with the GK.

Your wide players look close enough to the WB that between them and their full back it should be covered (pace allowing) and it's not like the opponent doesn't have the ball and the majority of their players in the middle of the pitch and could be moving forward into the middle. I think it's the midfield players who should be more central but that's just me. I didn't mean it as a criticism when I said your formation is extremely narrow btw, it just seemed to me that could be the reason why the AI WBs are so wide and high.

If you look at the screenshot, the wide players are too narrow for my liking. In all honesty they shouldn’t be out on the flanks, but they should be maybe 5 yards wider than their current position, and definitely higher than the CM’s. If we stop focusing on the wide players for a second, what could be causing that behaviour from the CM’s? We can both agree (finally) that their positioning is definitely an issue here 

[jimbo22]

This isnt a bug, but I have a player that Inter Milan have tried to buy, he's worth 2m and I turned down their offer (managed to get it up to 10m). He then wanted to speak about why I rejected the move and I told him the finances werent right (which then goes to the point where you say how  much you will accept). He has a buyout clause of 21m. I say that I will accept 21m and he doesnt agree....

Well buddy, you signed the contract and accepted the buyout clause. Surely he shouldnt be upset that I want 21m for him (even though its a unrealistic fee). 

[likesiamesefish]

8 minutes ago, jc577 said:

If you look at the screenshot, the wide players are too narrow for my liking. In all honesty they shouldn’t be out on the flanks, but they should be maybe 5 yards wider than their current position, and definitely higher than the CM’s. If we stop focusing on the wide players for a second, what could be causing that behaviour from the CM’s? We can both agree (finally) that their positioning is definitely an issue here 

Yeah I was only ever talking about the WBs and the freedom they had really in terms of how to combat it, I thought this was more of a common issue you had than a one off occurrence if that's all it was. I did actually say that the centre mids were the ones who looked most weird and that they would have pressed the central players as the ball came out in my initial responses. I agree that they could be 5yds further out as well and definitely wouldn't be man marking them myself and I play the same formation as you.

[Maldini's Heir]

I think I'm finally tapping out.....

I can't do it any more. 

I can't watch another game on this ME.

I can't watch my FB hit the most unlikely of passes to my inside CM on the other side of the pitch which either gets intercepted to start a counter attack or my CM takes a touch and shoots into top corner from 40 yards out.

This is just one example of the countless completely unlikely scenarios that I have to sit through each game. And they're so repetitive and so like nothing I have ever seen happening on a football pitch.

And that's before we get to the fact that tactics and instructions don't seem to make the slightest difference. A personal favourite is when I go a goal down to the bottom team and switch to a more attacking formation and the very next scene in the ME is that bottom team in my third. The game is telling me my tactics are meaningless. Now here's another pass from my LWB missing out my AM to my RCM who will hit another goal of the season......broken.

But really it was my own fault. I broke the game with restarts. The worst thing about restarts is that it shows how arbitrary the whole thing is. I lose. I restart. I win. "It's football". Thanks for ruining football. 

I won't be buying this game next season without a vast improvement in the ME.

 

[Keyzer Soze]

Really enjoying this version of the ME.

Only thing i think it really needs some fix is this amount of goals from set pieces, in particulary from corners.

I'm in february, and my central defenders (Ruben Dias and Ferro) have 20 goals so far combine (Ruben Dias with 14 and Ferro with 6).

[pheelf]

4 hours ago, Maldini's Heir said:

I think I'm finally tapping out.....

I can't do it any more. 

I can't watch another game on this ME.

I can't watch my FB hit the most unlikely of passes to my inside CM on the other side of the pitch which either gets intercepted to start a counter attack or my CM takes a touch and shoots into top corner from 40 yards out.

This is just one example of the countless completely unlikely scenarios that I have to sit through each game. And they're so repetitive and so like nothing I have ever seen happening on a football pitch.

And that's before we get to the fact that tactics and instructions don't seem to make the slightest difference. A personal favourite is when I go a goal down to the bottom team and switch to a more attacking formation and the very next scene in the ME is that bottom team in my third. The game is telling me my tactics are meaningless. Now here's another pass from my LWB missing out my AM to my RCM who will hit another goal of the season......broken.

But really it was my own fault. I broke the game with restarts. The worst thing about restarts is that it shows how arbitrary the whole thing is. I lose. I restart. I win. "It's football". Thanks for ruining football. 

I won't be buying this game next season without a vast improvement in the ME.

To coin a word you used, you have a completely arbitrary way of playing the game so it comes as no surprise to me that you have become disillusioned.

Lose a game...reload until you win it.

See your players doing something you don't like in the ME...ME must be broken.

If tactics were meaningless as you suggest in FM20 then I wouldn't have been able to make tactical changes and come back from 3-0 down to draw a game 4-4 to take my team through to the Champions League group stage. If tactical changes made no difference then I wouldn't have been able to beat vastly superior opposition in the qualifiers after watching the game and spotting how my opponent was playing and exploiting their weaknesses with tactical tinkering.

The fact that you believe that changing to a more attacking formation would be enough to get past a parked bus speaks volumes to your approach when it comes to tactics. Piling men forward and hoping for the best isn't a strategy, it's desperation. Also, by switching to a more aggressive formation you realize that you are leaving yourself more open defensively and if your team isn't troubling the opponent that the quality of chance the opposition will be able to create against you will be better when they have possession as you will be giving them more space.

All that reloading you have done has taught you precisely nothing about how to change things when they aren't going your teams way. As a result, anytime you get into difficulty you just throw stuff against the wall and hope it sticks and if it doesn't instead of trying to learn the game and understand the reasons why you have an easy scapegoat in the ME so don't bother hence you make no progress.

There are issues in the ME (I don't think there are many posters in this thread which have said any different) but they aren't severe to the point where the manager can't influence at all how his team plays through tactics. If your tactics and instructions aren't making any difference to the way your team is playing then there is something fundamentally wrong with how you are creating tactics.

Also, I would caution against regularly making major tactical changes during a match such as formation changes if you aren't playing FMT as familiarity is a factor.

If ultimately you choose to give up playing the game then more power to you if it's "ruining football" for you, no point continuing to play a game you can't stand.

Best Regards

[tajj7]

22 hours ago, Sharkn20 said:

Gegen Press is largely OP in this ME

I don't think it is, due to the problem I highlighted about defensive teams somehow retaining huge amounts of possession and very high pass success rates against high press teams, that should be good at it.

If I look real life, as a Southampton fan, I know what a good pressing system can do and it creates chances, a lot of our goals this year have been from a high press, we create chances from the press and transitions high up the pitch.

In game, this barely happens, I see the odd turnover, but most of the time I watch teams that are average at best at passing just pinging the ball around easily to bypass my press. 

If an average team like Southampton, with the right players, doing well can created several chances a game from pure pressing, you should be able to replicate this in game, and we should see teams who try to pass it around struggle on the back foot and have a poor pass completion rate and we should see chances directly created from turnovers high up the pitch, but in my experience we don't. 

Hence why I showed that screenshot of Sporting, my Milan team were much superior to that Sporting team, we were heavy favourites and I had players well suited to a high press, but that relatively average Sporting team, despite being pinned back in their own half for most of the game, knocked around passes like they were Barcelona. 

Liverpool this year set a record for most completed passes in a PL game at 874, yet this much worse Sporting team, against a superior team that was pressing them high managed 625 completed passes at a success rate of 90% ? 

Which is a higher number of passes than most PL teams average this season. 

Something is clearly wrong there and shows pressing is not working as it should be IMO. 

Edited February 19, 2020 by tajj7

[ferrarinseb]

41 minutes ago, tajj7 said:

I don't think it is, due to the problem I highlighted about defensive teams somehow retaining huge amounts of possession and very high pass success rates against high press teams, that should be good at it.

If I look real life, as a Southampton fan, I know what a good pressing system can do and it creates chances, a lot of our goals this year have been from a high press, we create chances from the press and transitions high up the pitch.

In game, this barely happens, I see the odd turnover, but most of the time I watch teams that are average at best at passing just pinging the ball around easily to bypass my press. 

If an average team like Southampton, with the right players, doing well can created several chances a game from pure pressing, you should be able to replicate this in game, and we should see teams who try to pass it around struggle on the back foot and have a poor pass completion rate and we should see chances directly created from turnovers high up the pitch, but in my experience we don't. 

Hence why I showed that screenshot of Sporting, my Milan team were much superior to that Sporting team, we were heavy favourites and I had players well suited to a high press, but that relatively average Sporting team, despite being pinned back in their own half for most of the game, knocked around passes like they were Barcelona. 

Liverpool this year set a record for most completed passes in a PL game at 874, yet this much worse Sporting team, against a superior team that was pressing them high managed 625 completed passes at a success rate of 90% ? 

Which is a higher number of passes than most PL teams average this season. 

Something is clearly wrong there and shows pressing is not working as it should be IMO. 

Well i agree, if they gone defensive or Very Defensive the AI defenders keep the ball with themselves and no matter what we try at them they can keep the ball accumulating more Posession as well. 

However SI replied that they are looking to improve pressing.

 

[andu1]

2 minutes ago, ferrarinseb said:

Well i agree, if they gone defensive or Very Defensive the AI defenders keep the ball with themselves and no matter what we try at them they can keep the ball accumulating more Posession as well. 

However SI replied that they are looking to improve pressing.

 

Hopefully improve means for the winter update not FM21 

[ferrarinseb]

16 minutes ago, andu1 said:

Hopefully improve means for the winter update not FM21 

I wish. But with the complexity i just hope it does work better when ever it implements with out any knock on effects. 

[bintang]

Do we know if there is likely to be any further update to the match engine on the 2020 edition, or is what we have now likely to be the final version?

 

[craigcwwe]

22 minutes ago, bintang said:

Do we know if there is likely to be any further update to the match engine on the 2020 edition, or is what we have now likely to be the final version?

 

Most likely be a ME update in a couple of weeks. 

[Maldini's Heir]

12 hours ago, pheelf said:

To coin a word you used, you have a completely arbitrary way of playing the game so it comes as no surprise to me that you have become disillusioned.

Lose a game...reload until you win it.

See your players doing something you don't like in the ME...ME must be broken.

If tactics were meaningless as you suggest in FM20 then I wouldn't have been able to make tactical changes and come back from 3-0 down to draw a game 4-4 to take my team through to the Champions League group stage. If tactical changes made no difference then I wouldn't have been able to beat vastly superior opposition in the qualifiers after watching the game and spotting how my opponent was playing and exploiting their weaknesses with tactical tinkering.

The fact that you believe that changing to a more attacking formation would be enough to get past a parked bus speaks volumes to your approach when it comes to tactics. Piling men forward and hoping for the best isn't a strategy, it's desperation. Also, by switching to a more aggressive formation you realize that you are leaving yourself more open defensively and if your team isn't troubling the opponent that the quality of chance the opposition will be able to create against you will be better when they have possession as you will be giving them more space.

All that reloading you have done has taught you precisely nothing about how to change things when they aren't going your teams way. As a result, anytime you get into difficulty you just throw stuff against the wall and hope it sticks and if it doesn't instead of trying to learn the game and understand the reasons why you have an easy scapegoat in the ME so don't bother hence you make no progress.

There are issues in the ME (I don't think there are many posters in this thread which have said any different) but they aren't severe to the point where the manager can't influence at all how his team plays through tactics. If your tactics and instructions aren't making any difference to the way your team is playing then there is something fundamentally wrong with how you are creating tactics.

Also, I would caution against regularly making major tactical changes during a match such as formation changes if you aren't playing FMT as familiarity is a factor.

If ultimately you choose to give up playing the game then more power to you if it's "ruining football" for you, no point continuing to play a game you can't stand.

Best Regards

Lose a game...reload [once and I] win it is more like it.

Anyway I think you're missing the point. The thing that caused me to switch off was my team scoring three goals of the season in one game......

I can't watch my team constantly score goals of the season.

Since I win far more than I lose, it's the winning that hurts the most. The losing is usually just farcical but the winning I find even more painful!

[thejay]

I really hope the next patch will make the game better, its really broken and I am not sure how anyone can defend how incredible dull and unrealistic the match engine is. 

 

I played a full season Betis reaching 3rd place so my tactic is obviously working but I scored exactly 1 goal after a passing move, even though my team is setup to play combination football. 

I scored by penalties and set pieces or random shots despite having one of the smallest teams in the league. 

I also press high and didnt concede a single goal by a  counter attack, only by set pieces or crosses. 

 

This is frankly completely ridiculous and for me game breaking, if the next patch does not fix that I will not buy the next fm. 

I think the new defensive width and line of engagement features gimped the offensively limited me and bascially broke the match engine, how Si can release the game with such a game breaking feature is beyond me. 

 

I wish I could post all pkms from my season if someone wants evidence but can only post the last 5 or six as the game makes this impossible for some reason. 

 

 

[GOODNAME]

So the million dollar question :

In the winter patch we will get ME update? what do you guys think? 

[Nick_CB]

An honest question to SI programmers. Do you think there is a problem with the Strikers' involvement in the matches? My strikers are scoring but do not participate in other situations. The average of my main Striker (complete forward) is 9 passes. I don't think this is normal

[f.zaarour]

Putting out a suggestion for SI. I've seen alot of sadness of players who can't enjoy the game and failing winning their games. So ...

As they have a visual image for the different tactic styles, they should do the same for the different TI's and if possible also for the PI's. As in that way you really could know what your team will do 

when you click something and to understand the instructions you give your team in a better and easy way without going desperate clicking every possible instruction.

We can read the instructions or what kind of role it is or even the explanations but if you don't use watching the whole game you can hardly see what it does or where it goes wrong. 

 

So i really think it would be helpfull if they put out visual images for every TI (PI and even roles) it would be much clearly of what it would do in your tactic in the match. How you guys think about something like this...? 

Edited February 20, 2020 by f.zaarour

[FMSD0]

3 hours ago, f.zaarour said:

Putting out a suggestion for SI. I've seen alot of sadness of players who can't enjoy the game and failing winning their games. So ...

As they have a visual image for the different tactic styles, they should do the same for the different TI's and if possible also for the PI's. As in that way you really could know what your team will do 

when you click something and to understand the instructions you give your team in a better and easy way without going desperate clicking every possible instruction.

We can read the instructions or what kind of role it is or even the explanations but if you don't use watching the whole game you can hardly see what it does or where it goes wrong. 

 

So i really think it would be helpfull if they put out visual images for every TI (PI and even roles) it would be much clearly of what it would do in your tactic in the match. How you guys think about something like this...? 

Well, that would be helpful for a lot of people, but it will turn out to be a disappointment if nothing else changes since tactics don't really do what they promise right now. Long story short: It's no solution at the moment.

I'm sure many who can't enjoy this game actually know what they're doing and understand what the tactical instructions do, but the game doesn't really translate them the way it should. You just have to take a look at all these successful exploit tactics which hurt FM's credibility and absolutely make no sense. This game doesn't reward logical tactical setups as often as it should. There are simpy too many things that are out of control. It's tiring to create an attack-heavy tactic just to end up with amazing defensive achievements and just a boring, low amount of attacking plays. It's like you get something totally different opposed to what you really created.

I won't say this game is broken. It rather contains lots of fundamentally unacceptable inconsistencies.

Edited February 20, 2020 by FMSD0

[theeyeofthetiger]

10 hours ago, thejay said:

I really hope the next patch will make the game better, its really broken and I am not sure how anyone can defend how incredible dull and unrealistic the match engine is. 

 

I played a full season Betis reaching 3rd place so my tactic is obviously working but I scored exactly 1 goal after a passing move, even though my team is setup to play combination football. 

I scored by penalties and set pieces or random shots despite having one of the smallest teams in the league. 

I also press high and didnt concede a single goal by a  counter attack, only by set pieces or crosses. 

 

This is frankly completely ridiculous and for me game breaking, if the next patch does not fix that I will not buy the next fm. 

I think the new defensive width and line of engagement features gimped the offensively limited me and bascially broke the match engine, how Si can release the game with such a game breaking feature is beyond me. 

 

I wish I could post all pkms from my season if someone wants evidence but can only post the last 5 or six as the game makes this impossible for some reason. 

 

 

100%. Next patch better be a game changer for me or thats me out of FM for good as i've been frustrated with this series for the last 3 years now. FM20 has to be the dullest most boring version yet, cant get a long term save going as results are unrealistic - feels too ramdom now.

Edited February 20, 2020 by theeyeofthetiger

[Gegenklaus]

10 hours ago, thejay said:

I really hope the next patch will make the game better, its really broken and I am not sure how anyone can defend how incredible dull and unrealistic the match engine is. 

 

I played a full season Betis reaching 3rd place so my tactic is obviously working but I scored exactly 1 goal after a passing move, even though my team is setup to play combination football. 

I scored by penalties and set pieces or random shots despite having one of the smallest teams in the league. 

I also press high and didnt concede a single goal by a  counter attack, only by set pieces or crosses. 

 

This is frankly completely ridiculous and for me game breaking, if the next patch does not fix that I will not buy the next fm. 

I think the new defensive width and line of engagement features gimped the offensively limited me and bascially broke the match engine, how Si can release the game with such a game breaking feature is beyond me. 

 

I wish I could post all pkms from my season if someone wants evidence but can only post the last 5 or six as the game makes this impossible for some reason. 

Did you also experience very defensive being able to hold on to the ball for almost forever despite pressing them? Like they accumulate over 600 passes by mainly passing around in their last third. For me that is game breaking. I have no problem with teams who tries to go for the 0-0 abd have 11 players behind the ball as that is a trend in modern football because of the gap between the really good teams and those under has become bigger. But, them being able to pass like Pep's Barca in their own half, even under great pressure, is so broken. SI has acknowledged that though and are working on a fix.

My greatest critique on this game and the last one is that the matches you watch are very dull to watch - mainly because of very defensive teams - and almost no open play goals. Most of the good stuff happens during a transition. I know this is very subjective though. 

[thejay]

vor 58 Minuten schrieb Gegenklaus:

Did you also experience very defensive being able to hold on to the ball for almost forever despite pressing them? Like they accumulate over 600 passes by mainly passing around in their last third. For me that is game breaking. I have no problem with teams who tries to go for the 0-0 abd have 11 players behind the ball as that is a trend in modern football because of the gap between the really good teams and those under has become bigger. But, them being able to pass like Pep's Barca in their own half, even under great pressure, is so broken. SI has acknowledged that though and are working on a fix.

My greatest critique on this game and the last one is that the matches you watch are very dull to watch - mainly because of very defensive teams - and almost no open play goals. Most of the good stuff happens during a transition. I know this is very subjective though. 

I press as high and agressive as possible so I manage to win the ball sometimes when they pass it around. 

 

But I never get punished by a counter attack for it despite my players pressing at times all over the place with two players attacking one at the same time regularly. 

 

Somehow the me is made to always play wide for the cross which also most of the time is crossed into the feet of the defender