Football Manager 2020 Feedback Thread

[Major Raver]

10 minutes ago, sidslayer said:

This is showing that your tactic is off. Yes it looks wonky, bad even, and is very frustrating. But it’s the games way of telling you that your tactic is off. It’s not pretty. But that is what’s happening.

Then this is just plain ridiculous.  So what you are saying for example is changing an IF to sup from attack, now means your AF doesn't miss a barn down from 2 yards continuously, and you wont concede a 35 yard free kick.  In fact this isn't a football management game, but a puzzle game all about finding the combinations that go together.  Doesn't that then mean all your you are doing is breaking the match engine with these combinations, in the same way a Diablo tactic, or a throw in set up did in FM19?

[bitzu_rock]

1 minute ago, pheelf said:

That has been done to death already (just look in the feedback thread). If SI aren't aware of the issues in the ME by now considering that there has been constant daily reminders for months now then I don't know what to say. Keep repeating the same things over and over isn't going to make any difference.

Yes, ultimately improving the ME and addressing bugs is what we all want to see but what's the point in playing it in its current state which he states he's not happy with and then complaining about it, it's a waste of time in my view. Just don't play it until your happy with it and if that time never comes then don't buy it anymore especially if getting value for money is a consideration.

What about SI's brand ? Shouldn't that matter? What..they release a product...buy it... but is not top quality...don't buy it ?

[Crusho79bv]

Is this the worst ever Match Engine?

I would say "Top 3" in my book!!!  

Edited January 31, 2020 by Crusho79bv

[Tyburn]

1 minute ago, Major Raver said:

Then this is just plain ridiculous.  So what you are saying for example is changing an IF to sup from attack, now means your AF doesn't miss a barn down from 2 yards continuously, and you wont concede a 35 yard free kick.  In fact this isn't a football management game, but a puzzle game all about finding the combinations that go together.  Doesn't that then mean all your you are doing is breaking the match engine with these combinations, in the same way a Diablo tactic, or a throw in set up did in FM19?

Yes. Exactly that. Combinations are important and well done for spotting that this is actually a puzzle game! It’s not breaking the ME. It’s understanding how to work with it.

[andysafc]

6 minutes ago, pheelf said:

That has been done to death already (just look in the feedback thread). If SI aren't aware of the issues in the ME by now considering that there has been constant daily reminders for months now then I don't know what to say. Keep repeating the same things over and over isn't going to make any difference.

Yes, ultimately improving the ME and addressing bugs is what we all want to see but what's the point in playing it in its current state which he states he's not happy with and then complaining about it, it's a waste of time in my view. Just don't play it until your happy with it and if that time never comes then don't buy it anymore especially if getting value for money is a consideration.

Maybe because Football Manager has become a way of life for many people and due to lack of competition it is either this or nothing. I have had many years of enjoyment from this game so should I just throw it aside because I am struggling with this particular ME?

[Major Raver]

1 minute ago, sidslayer said:

Yes. Exactly that. Combinations are important and well done for spotting that this is actually a puzzle game! It’s not breaking the ME. It’s understanding how to work with it.

No where is the game listed as a puzzle game, strategy, sports and simulation yes, so your patronising response isn't correct, is it.  The game was always about the players you sign, how you develop them and then picking formations and tactics to win.  Having to pick set combinations, is the same as a Diablo, and is shunting people people down the route of having to set their teams up in very similar ways just to satisfy a ME.  That is broken to me, and not the way FM once was.

[Tyburn]

10 minutes ago, Major Raver said:

No where is the game listed as a puzzle game, strategy, sports and simulation yes, so your patronising response isn't correct, is it.  The game was always about the players you sign, how you develop them and then picking formations and tactics to win.  Having to pick set combinations, is the same as a Diablo, and is shunting people people down the route of having to set their teams up in very similar ways just to satisfy a ME.  That is broken to me, and not the way FM once was.

There are multiple ways of winning. I wasn’t being patronising. I was being serious. Football is a puzzle, isn’t it? It’s a gigantic mess of all sorts of things, the details! To transfer into winning in 90 mins. You are right. Football is a puzzle. So it stands to reason the ME would be one. And it’s always been a puzzle. Every ME is a puzzle to be cracked. This version is no different. 

If you’re conceding 35 yarders and your ST’s are constantly missing then it’s the games way of telling you something is wrong. Change something.

Everyone is banging on about attacking mentality being OP. In FM19 yes for sure. But I personally have only failed at any attacking mentality tactic I’ve tried. I’m having huge success with a standard 4123 at the moment with a cautious mentality. Others I’m sure are making other tactics work, and wouldn’t be able to make my tactic work. It’s organic. It relies on the players at your disposal, morale etc etc.

To say there is only one way of winning is not correct.

Edited January 31, 2020 by sidslayer

[forameuss]

6 minutes ago, andysafc said:

Maybe because Football Manager has become a way of life for many people and due to lack of competition it is either this or nothing. I have had many years of enjoyment from this game so should I just throw it aside because I am struggling with this particular ME?

That depends on how much it bothers you.  It's nowhere near as prevalent as with some other games (*cough* FIFA *cough*) but if you're really not enjoying something then just don't do it.  I don't see any issue with just putting the game down and then coming back to it on an update to see if it's any better, and if not then saving yourself the upset.

At release, everyone has all the tools they're going to need to determine whether the product is any good (from a match engine perspective).  We see so many comments of "x hasn't changed in y years", completely missing the irony that they're part of a problem in continually buying a product that they're admitting themselves has had a problem for years.  There's a million other things someone can do with their time that they might not immediately hate, I've never understood why people would voluntarily put themselves through things like this.

3 minutes ago, Major Raver said:

No where is the game listed as a puzzle game, strategy, sports and simulation yes, so your patronising response isn't correct, is it.  The game was always about the players you sign, how you develop them and then picking formations and tactics to win.  Having to pick set combinations, is the same as a Diablo, and is shunting people people down the route of having to set their teams up in very similar ways just to satisfy a ME.  That is broken to me, and not the way FM once was.

You can't really call out someone's "patronising" response, and then dictate what the game has "always been about".  What FM is about is a massively subjective thing.

[Neil Brock]

To clarify I merged across a thread which was discussing exactly the same points as the feedback thread. 

[likesiamesefish]

22 minutes ago, andysafc said:

Maybe because Football Manager has become a way of life for many people and due to lack of competition it is either this or nothing. I have had many years of enjoyment from this game so should I just throw it aside because I am struggling with this particular ME?

Got to say (even as someone who is happy with the current ME and really enjoying FM20) that I really agree with this point. I've been there and it's not fun.

[Tyburn]

The stress people are expressing is out of love. It’s because we all love this title that any perceived issues we have with it get blown out of all proportion.

 

 

Edited January 31, 2020 by sidslayer

[FlorianAlbert9]

32 minuti fa, sidslayer ha scritto:

Yes. Exactly that. Combinations are important and well done for spotting that this is actually a puzzle game! It’s not breaking the ME. It’s understanding how to work with it.

So One of the two. Not both. 

Or FM Is a simulation or a puzzle game. 

For example, if i change throw-in and then my striker stopped to score 1vs1 or penalty, then it's a puzzle game nor a simulation. 

If i change throw-in a i score less in general, than could be right 'cause (example) i lost possession due to the throw-in. That's simulation.

 

 

[Tyburn]

3 minutes ago, FlorianAlbert9 said:

So One of the two. Not both. 

Or FM Is a simulation or a puzzle game. 

For example, if i change throw-in and then my striker stopped to score 1vs1 or penalty, then it's a puzzle game nor a simulation. 

If i change throw-in a i score less in general, than could be right 'cause (example) i lost possession due to the throw-in. That's simulation.

 

 

FM is a simulation. The ME is a simulation of the simulation within FM that presents itself as a puzzle. Imo.

Regardless, the ME is certainly puzzling! Haha.

Edited January 31, 2020 by sidslayer

[bleventozturk]

14 hours ago, JordanMillward_1 said:

Those are my key passes for the match, 13 of them. (66=Trent, 32=Matip, 3=Fabinho, 14=Hendo, 15=Oxlade-Chamberlain, 11=Salah)

Good point, I'm just heading to bed and I'm not back from work until about 7pm tomorrow (it's fun having to travel 2 hours to London each way ), but I'll set a post up there tomorrow, and with that the discussion about the tactic ends. Once I get around to making that post, I can always link it.

This map is alarmingly similar to FM 19. It is a great example of how the unrealistically narrow defenses ignore the wider areas until the key pass is played to the completely unmarked wingers/wingbacks. This is not how defenses act in real life, this is not football.

[duesouth]

12 minutes ago, sidslayer said:

The stress people are expressing is out of love. It’s because we all love this title that any perceived issues we have with it get blown out of all proportion.

 

 

Now, that's one thing we can all agree on!!!

[JordanMilly]

43 minutes ago, andysafc said:

Maybe because Football Manager has become a way of life for many people and due to lack of competition it is either this or nothing. I have had many years of enjoyment from this game so should I just throw it aside because I am struggling with this particular ME?

If you aren't enjoying the game, and playing it, as some have said, makes you want to punch the monitor, then yes, you should stop playing, because that's the healthy thing to do. If you continue to play the game at that point, you either have a compulsion that you should look into, or just enjoy inflicting negative experiences on yourself.

I mean, are you honestly suggesting that your only option is to continue playing a game you aren't enjoying, rather than taking up a new hobby or doing literally anything else?

[pheelf]

1 hour ago, bitzu_rock said:

What about SI's brand ? Shouldn't that matter? What..they release a product...buy it... but is not top quality...don't buy it ?

I think @forameuss covered this point very well in his post.

1 hour ago, andysafc said:

Maybe because Football Manager has become a way of life for many people and due to lack of competition it is either this or nothing. I have had many years of enjoyment from this game so should I just throw it aside because I am struggling with this particular ME?

Competition is a double edge sword which I think is something which is often overlooked on this forum as people always seem to espouse only the positive aspects of it. At its best it can make the relevant parties innovate and accelerate the rate of progress knowing that you have to fight for customers. At its worst it can lead to cannibalization of each others market share which leads to lower revenues for both and thus less ability to invest in their respective products.

Was the rate of innovation that much better when the FIFA Manager franchise was still going? I'm not sold on that and if anything the demise of that series has actually led to more innovation in FM as they adopted some of the aspects of that series which were good (for e.g. squad dynamics). As for where this mythical new contender is going to emerge from well I don't know given that LMA Manager, FIFA Manager and Championship Manager (after the split) have all been gone for years. I wouldn't rule it out but it's going to require some deep pockets for sure considering how much ground they would have to make up.

I understand it's a way of life for many people and I feel the passion when people talk about this series but ultimately it's only a game and if you're not enjoying it then that kind of defeats the point of playing it, wouldn't you agree? If you don't like this version of the ME then play a version which you do like.

Edited January 31, 2020 by pheelf

[Jimmious7]

I still wonder if an updated version of the beta ME will be released as a hotfix patch or we will wait for the full Winter Update patch for another month or so

[forameuss]

The competition argument is one that people can trot out to look smart with zero backing behind it.  There is very little actual, measurable proof that in this particular case, another competitor would make any difference to FM as a product.

Not to mention the fact that they've had competition in the past, and they've torn them to shreds.  To the point where they're unlikely to ever have any competition again given the risk involved.

[andu1]

9 minutes ago, Jimmious7 said:

I still wonder if an updated version of the beta ME will be released as a hotfix patch or we will wait for the full Winter Update patch for another month or so

They said they don't have any plans to release anymore public updates until the winter update. 

 

[Jimmious7]

1 minute ago, andu1 said:

They said they don't have any plans to release anymore public updates until the winter update. 

 

Not really, they only said they won't update the beta anymore afaik

[likesiamesefish]

1 minute ago, forameuss said:

The competition argument is one that people can trot out to look smart with zero backing behind it.  There is very little actual, measurable proof that in this particular case, another competitor would make any difference to FM as a product.

Not to mention the fact that they've had competition in the past, and they've torn them to shreds.  To the point where they're unlikely to ever have any competition again given the risk involved.

It's a shame though because I'd love to have a few more titles out there even if they would come nowhere close to FM. Seems to me there is at least room for a multiplayer focused game and a game with more of a superficial feel where you get to build the stadium etc. - FM doesn't really focus on any of these things. It's been about fifteen years since I enjoyed a management game that wasn't FM and I've tried many.

If there was a lot of competition then I think it would make SI focus more on the things we long time fans love. I would imagine that if their market share dropped off then they might make the game harder to appeal to that audience, it used to be more like this when FIFA and LMA were still active franchises because they mostly took the casual gamers and SI was the more challenging and deeper game. That's all just personal preference though, I don't think they are really all that complacent when you consider their dominant position.

[Neil Brock]

11 minutes ago, andu1 said:

They said they don't have any plans to release anymore public updates until the winter update. 

 

 

9 minutes ago, Jimmious7 said:

Not really, they only said they won't update the beta anymore afaik

To clarify, we stated previously there are no current plans to update the public beta. Like anything this can potentially change.

We've not made an announcement regarding our future update plans. When there's more info or a release available we'll make that clear on here. 

[Jimmious7]

See, I'm paying attention 

[davehanson]

1 hour ago, sidslayer said:

This is showing that your tactic is off. Yes it looks wonky, bad even, and is very frustrating. But it’s the games way of telling you that your tactic is off. It’s not pretty. But that is what’s happening.

Sorry but that is absolute bs. If the match engine can only show you that your tactics are off by having world class strikers miss one on ones then the game is truly lost. I dont believe that they are missing to tell you something is wrong. 

[FlorianAlbert9]

Even if i think there are great area of improvements (non only ME, but even the fictional world, let's say that FM Is very very bad at created the enviromental passion: fans have little space, there Is not sense of difference between a derby in Hungary and a final of World Cup, there isn't legacy, there isn't sense of great generational player like Cr7/Messi now so that i  playing in Hungary in FM and i don't know even who are the best players in world) 

Said that. 

It would be very hard for a competitor fight against FM, cause SI reach with 2 major aspects (ME and Database) a level hard to reach. 

Sometimes we forget that this Is a game (simulation ok, but sim game) and not a pro-software of 300€ 

Edited January 31, 2020 by FlorianAlbert9

[forameuss]

5 minutes ago, likesiamesefish said:

It's a shame though because I'd love to have a few more titles out there even if they would come nowhere close to FM. Seems to me there is at least room for a multiplayer focused game and a game with more of a superficial feel where you get to build the stadium etc. - FM doesn't really focus on any of these things. It's been about fifteen years since I enjoyed a management game that wasn't FM and I've tried many.

I haven't looked for them as it doesn't really interest me, but aren't there mobile games that go after that market?  Obviously they're mobile, and won't be as good, but I think there are examples out there.  Nothing on the scale of FM though, I suspect because the market for someone to get their money back spending millions building such a product isn't there.

5 minutes ago, likesiamesefish said:

If there was a lot of competition then I think it would make SI focus more on the things we long time fans love. I would imagine that if their market share dropped off then they might make the game harder to appeal to that audience, it used to be more like this when FIFA and LMA were still active franchises because they mostly took the casual gamers and SI was the more challenging and deeper game. That's all just personal preference though, I don't think they are really all that complacent when you consider their dominant position.

For me, where this argument falls down is that it kind of suggests that SI aren't giving it their all.  I'm not suggesting they're sitting there hell for leather with 18 hour days to bring the current product, but they have a roadmap, and I'd imagine they reach their targets for the most part.  The product we get, is probably pretty close to the product that SI wanted to put out.

Would a competitor coming in and taking away sales make them change that roadmap?  That's the really subjective thing, and where the "measurable" part of my previous post comes in.  Would they put in a few extra features that they maybe wouldn't have before?  Perhaps.  But then they're running from a worse financial position than they would have been otherwise, so their potential is lowered.  

I'm not sure how anyone can just say competition is this great thing with no downsides.

Just now, FlorianAlbert9 said:

Even if i think there are great area of improvements (non only ME, but even the fictional world, let's say that FM Is very very bad at created the enviromental passion

FM has never been good at this.  At all.  It's almost entirely devoid of any kind of atmosphere or context or nuance.  A huge amount of the onus is put on the user to roleplay, and fill in the blanks.  Not necessarily a bad thing, as with a decent amount of imagination you can get a good experience, but it's still often a very po-faced, bland game on that front.

[Tyburn]

1 minute ago, davehanson said:

Sorry but that is absolute bs. If the match engine can only show you that your tactics are off by having world class strikers miss one on ones then the game is truly lost. I dont believe that they are missing to tell you something is wrong. 

It’s just my opinion based on what I’ve seen. I’ve altered my tactics to make this happen less and it’s worked. But keep blaming the ME if you wish. It’s your game. 

I also said it’s not pretty. It’s not a great way to show you something is wrong. But wrong it is.

[witchplease]

Just now, davehanson said:

Sorry but that is absolute bs. If the match engine can only show you that your tactics are off by having world class strikers miss one on ones then the game is truly lost. I dont believe that they are missing to tell you something is wrong. 

Agreed. Think bad finishing is a known and acknowledged issue in beta... has been this fm in general.

 

[Tyburn]

1 minute ago, witchplease said:

Agreed. Think bad finishing is a known and acknowledged issue in beta... has been this fm in general.

 

Sure. But you can mitigate this by altering your tactics. I’ve done it. I’m no wizard, but Pellegri now scores plenty of 1v1’s. The ratio is def off. But he’s not missing all of them anymore. In fact it’s about 50/50 atm. 

Again. I’m no magician. I’ve just tweaked a tactic to make this element of the wonky ME work for me. It CAN be done.

[alian62]

4 minutes ago, forameuss said:

I haven't looked for them as it doesn't really interest me, but aren't there mobile games that go after that market?  Obviously they're mobile, and won't be as good, but I think there are examples out there.  Nothing on the scale of FM though, I suspect because the market for someone to get their money back spending millions building such a product isn't there.

For me, where this argument falls down is that it kind of suggests that SI aren't giving it their all.  I'm not suggesting they're sitting there hell for leather with 18 hour days to bring the current product, but they have a roadmap, and I'd imagine they reach their targets for the most part.  The product we get, is probably pretty close to the product that SI wanted to put out.

Would a competitor coming in and taking away sales make them change that roadmap?  That's the really subjective thing, and where the "measurable" part of my previous post comes in.  Would they put in a few extra features that they maybe wouldn't have before?  Perhaps.  But then they're running from a worse financial position than they would have been otherwise, so their potential is lowered.  

I'm not sure how anyone can just say competition is this great thing with no downsides.

FM has never been good at this.  At all.  It's almost entirely devoid of any kind of atmosphere or context or nuance.  A huge amount of the onus is put on the user to roleplay, and fill in the blanks.  Not necessarily a bad thing, as with a decent amount of imagination you can get a good experience, but it's still often a very po-faced, bland game on that front.

Sorry but companies hold a lot back . You don't put all your eggs in 1 basket . There are plenty of things in this game that's been there for years that they wont fix because then they have nothing to release as a new item . While we are playing FM20 , FM21 is on the go and FM22 has already started . I believe they work in 3 years cycles so I have read . So the product we get is close to what they want us to have but certainly not the best they can do . My opinion though 

[likesiamesefish]

2 minutes ago, forameuss said:

For me, where this argument falls down is that it kind of suggests that SI aren't giving it their all.  I'm not suggesting they're sitting there hell for leather with 18 hour days to bring the current product, but they have a roadmap, and I'd imagine they reach their targets for the most part.  The product we get, is probably pretty close to the product that SI wanted to put out.

I think you missed my point here, I wasn't saying that they don't make any effort and tbf I made that clear in my post. I wasn't even remotely having a pop at SI, I was just saying that if they lost some of their market share then they would have to change the focus slightly (especially if they had less money to spend on the game like you say). In that scenario I think it's pretty clear that SI's market share would end up being those looking for the closest to reality, in depth (and most difficult) management game which would appeal to me personally as I think the games been made too easy over the year in order to appeal to fans who are just looking for a few quick seasons of glory. It's not about how hard they're working, it's about who the game is being made for. In the past they've made it clear time and time again that this core audience is still their main focus (like when they are pushed to add more superficial features, better graphics in the ME).

8 minutes ago, forameuss said:

I'm not sure how anyone can just say competition is this great thing with no downsides.

Definitely don't think I implied this, obviously it could mean they lose licences or something like, I was just hypothesising on what would happen if there were competitors and potential positives.

[forameuss]

2 minutes ago, prot651 said:

Sorry but companies hold a lot back . You don't put all your eggs in 1 basket . There are plenty of things in this game that's been there for years that they wont fix because then they have nothing to release as a new item . While we are playing FM20 , FM21 is on the go and FM22 has already started . I believe they work in 3 years cycles so I have read . So the product we get is close to what they want us to have but certainly not the best they can do . My opinion though 

None of which I disagree with.  I said they had roadmaps.  They know roughly how the next 3, maybe even 5 versions are going to look like.  But that's the whole point.  The product is, first and foremost, the product they want to release.  A lot of the time that is going to mesh with what the user wants, but not all the time.  

1 minute ago, likesiamesefish said:

I think you missed my point here, I wasn't saying that they don't make any effort and tbf I made that clear in my post. I wasn't even remotely having a pop at SI, I was just saying that if they lost some of their market share then they would have to change the focus slightly (especially if they had less money to spend on the game like you say). In that scenario I think it's pretty clear that SI's market share would end up being those looking for the closest to reality, in depth (and most difficult) management game which would appeal to me personally as I think the games been made too easy over the year in order to appeal to fans who are just looking for a few quick seasons of glory. It's not about how hard they're working, it's about who the game is being made for. In the past they've made it clear time and time again that this core audience is still their main focus (like when they are pushed to add more superficial features, better graphics in the ME).

Definitely don't think I implied this, obviously it could mean they lose licences or something like, I was just hypothesising on what would happen if there were competitors and potential positives.

No, don't worry, I wasn't saying that you necessarily were, you weren't.  But the argument - and it gets made a lot - can often come across that way, even if it's indirect.

And the second part wasn't necessarily directed at you either.  I'm probably poisoned by being involved on the FIFA reddit, and one of their favourite arguments is the competition one.  I just hate when it gets thrown out for any game with little backup, as it's rarely that simple.

[witchplease]

29 minutes ago, sidslayer said:

Sure. But you can mitigate this by altering your tactics. I’ve done it. I’m no wizard, but Pellegri now scores plenty of 1v1’s. The ratio is def off. But he’s not missing all of them anymore. In fact it’s about 50/50 atm. 

Again. I’m no magician. I’ve just tweaked a tactic to make this element of the wonky ME work for me. It CAN be done.

Just because your alterations to your tactics lead to better 1v1 conversion rate for you doesn't prove anything, it requires bigger sample to actually be relevant. Correlation does not imply causation.

Edited January 31, 2020 by witchplease

[bleventozturk]

I am basically playing (I should say trying to play) two games these days. One is our beloved FM, and the other is Rimworld (I am sure a lot of you know the game, but I have only recently discovered it - my life doesn't allow me to follow the gaming world closely any more).

Just noticed that I have an interesting experience with these two, and I wanted to share. Whenever I have some free time, my first choice, my desire, is to play FM. So I start FM, browse around a little bit within my roster, to see who has been doing good, young players developing, etc. Then I check out my next match, I start making plans, thinking about which mentality and formation do I want, which players to choose, etc. All great fun. But then I notice something. I notice that I keep dwelling, not wanting to start the match. Then I start reading some sports news on my second monitor. I see some news about a team or a certain player, I switch to my FM monitor, start browsing other teams and players, see latest transfers in the game. Still great fun, so immersive, almost like an alternative reality created by a beautiful (and mostly within boundaries of logic) randomness. Let's just start the match shall I? Shall I? I almost don't want to. And sometimes right at that point I save the game and turn it off already!! Some other times I finally hit that button to start the match. In the next few minutes I am just bored, looking at something on my screen that is just.. wrong? and boring in so many ways. And this is with me scoring bunch of goals and winning (but I shouldn't be so easily winning and maybe that's part of the problem, I don't know. My star player could be a squad player, if that, in my opponents team, but I am killing them. Yay? Not really). So I turn it off after my first match. Sometimes I just keep it on my screen. and go nibble on it every once in a while, maybe play another match, but that's it.

Then there is Rimworld. Complete opposite situation. I think about playing it, idea comes to my mind several times a day, and most of the time I keep deciding not to. And that is because I know that once I start playing, I will be glued to it for many many hours, which will just kill my entire day. I load the game, the first 10 minutes is not fun, trying to remember the latest situations and progress. But once I pass that first threshold, I can't stop playing. FM was like that for me until the FM 19 abomination of an ME, and I fear FM 20 will end up looking awfully close to that after the final patch.

I have been playing this game since the very first Championship Manager game, and this is my current experience as a lifetime fan.

 

[Polski97]

I once read an interesting study with a conclusion that 'Games that are very similar to real life make us more angry as we can relate to them more' maybe all this ME complaining is because we want this 'game' to be an accurate depiction of reality.

 

It never will be. 

[Tyburn]

28 minutes ago, witchplease said:

Just because your alterations to your tactics lead to better 1v1 conversion rate for you doesn't prove anything, it requires bigger sample to actually be relevant. Correlation does not imply causation.

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

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

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

[Martini1991]

Players missing one on one's has naff all to do with tactics, it's the tactics that get them into the positions to be in those one on one's.

A player that'd walk into a PL team based on their attributes but is scoring 1 in 3 (Games on average) in the championship isn't missing one on one's because my tactics are off.

Edited January 31, 2020 by Martini1991

[JordanMilly]

2 hours ago, andu1 said:

They said they don't have any plans to release anymore public updates until the winter update. 

 

They didn't say that at all.

1 hour ago, Jimmious7 said:

Not really, they only said they won't update the beta anymore afaik

This is what they said, which doesn't preclude a full patch coming out before the winter transfer update. 

Edit: Bum, just noticed I'd missed Neil's reply to this an hour ago 

[sverige91]

1 hour ago, sidslayer said:

It’s just my opinion based on what I’ve seen. I’ve altered my tactics to make this happen less and it’s worked. But keep blaming the ME if you wish. It’s your game. 

I also said it’s not pretty. It’s not a great way to show you something is wrong. But wrong it is.

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

[Jimmious7]

3 minutes ago, sverige91 said:

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

There are ways to create more space for your strikers so that they don't shoot under pressure etc. Not claiming I know the magic trick but the goal would be to improve the circumstances in which the shot is being made

[Tyburn]

19 minutes ago, Martini1991 said:

Players missing one on one's has naff all to do with tactics, it's the tactics that get them into the positions to be in those one on one's.

A player that'd walk into a PL team based on their attributes but is scoring 1 in 3 (Games on average) in the championship isn't missing one on one's because my tactics are off.

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

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

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

[Martini1991]

5 minutes ago, sidslayer said:

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

[Tyburn]

51 minutes ago, sverige91 said:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Edited January 31, 2020 by sidslayer
Player role edits after memory jog

[Tyburn]

5 minutes ago, Martini1991 said:

 

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

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

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

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

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

[witchplease]

1 hour ago, sidslayer said:

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

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

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

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

[bleventozturk]

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

[Martini1991]

2 minutes ago, sidslayer said:

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

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

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

[Tyburn]

1 minute ago, Martini1991 said:

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

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

[Tyburn]

5 minutes ago, witchplease said:

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

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