FM 17 M.E.

[naterego93]

Why is it so much better than the latest versions of the game? Had both games running side by side & it's amazing to see the wear and tear of the field, the player movement but most of all teams playing with the tactics that were implemented. Every play felt earned, it wasn't a crossing/set piece/penalty taking simulator. It was pure football. Sadly the newest versions despite all the new bells and whistles just can't compare once you actually run a game.

[XaW]

When I look at my played FMs it's one of the lesser ones for me, so for whatever reason I didn't enjoy it as much as newer versions. For FM17 I had less than 1000 hours. For FM20 I have over 2500 in comparison. So I enjoy FM20 much more.

Thing is, different people like different things, and that's fine. So if you enjoy it, then great. Keep playing FM17, I'll play FM20 (until FM21) and we're both happy, no?

[santy001]

I'll be honest, I don't keep much track in my mind of previous ME's since there isn't much reason for me to do so.

Is it the one where you just left 3 up front and ended up getting a truck load of goals as a result? Or was it the near post corner one?

I think most people end up favouring the ME in which they stumbled onto a weakness in it with their preferred style of play that lets them win games quite easily.

[enigmatic]

Just now, santy001 said:

Is it the one where you just left 3 up front and ended up getting a truck load of goals as a result? Or was it the near post corner one?

FM17 was the game where the wide players were so busy marking the touchline and defending so passive even an AI-managed lower division AI side with 3 men in the middle of the park could keep the ball for minutes on end against superior opponents with two.

You could get truckloads of goals from shadow strikers too, but I think a lot of the people who argue about how brilliant the ME was didn't do that, they're just convinced that inadvertently exploiting a permanent man advantage in central midfield against passive opponents was the ME perfectly interpreting their possession football dreams, 

 

[llDracoll]

26 minutes ago, santy001 said:

Is it the one where you just left 3 up front and ended up getting a truck load of goals as a result? Or was it the near post corner one?

The one where three players in the center were impossible to deal with for the AI was FM18.

[JordanMilly]

Wasn't FM17 the "Always scoring from crosses from the byline" simulator? 

[akkm]

4 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

FM17 was the game where the wide players were so busy marking the touchline and defending so passive even an AI-managed lower division AI side with 3 men in the middle of the park could keep the ball for minutes on end against superior opponents with two.

You could get truckloads of goals from shadow strikers too, but I think a lot of the people who argue about how brilliant the ME was didn't do that, they're just convinced that inadvertently exploiting a permanent man advantage in central midfield against passive opponents was the ME perfectly interpreting their possession football dreams, 

 

oddly u have a bias against fm17 match engine/fans of it for the same reasons you keep repeating...you've convinced yourself the advantage in midfield is the reason people enjoy it...that's myopic bordering on obtuse to keep repeating that conclusion of yours...slightly amusing as well. But yeah if you don't get it you don't get it. Course it had flaws as you point out but there's more to it than your crystallised and flawed conclusion on that.

Whilst you point out valid issues your conclusions being incorrect can stunt the conversation developmentally as to what elements of that engine were stronger than we've seen in recent offerings...it wasn't for reasons as you point out singularly so its redundant to keep pointing them out. It's misleading and will only impede further conversation to identify flaws in the engine to throw such comments out like that

[JordanMilly]

Calm down, @akkm - @enigmaticis entitled to post his view of an old ME, and his conclusions from his personal experience with the game is as valid as anyone else's. Different people prefer different things.

[themadsheep2001]

2 minutes ago, JordanMillward_1 said:

Calm down, @akkm - @enigmaticis entitled to post his view of an old ME, and his conclusions from his personal experience with the game is as valid as anyone else's. Different people prefer different things.

To add to this, we're really tired of having to ask people to be respectful, this really should be a given. Please start doing so or you'll lose the ability to post

[akkm]

Just now, JordanMillward_1 said:

Calm down, @akkm - @enigmaticis entitled to post his view of an old ME, and his conclusions from his personal experience with the game is as valid as anyone else's. Different people prefer different things.

sure thing . was just pointing something out huh

[noikeee]

It was the last one that had patient open play build-up through the middle that worked fairly consistently. Granted, it was because of a pretty glaring flaw in defensive logic, but those of us who enjoy a less direct style of play, obviously tended to enjoyed that version of the game more. 

[naterego93]

Didn't expect an initial flame war but of you're telling me that 20's M.E is better then that's some good banter because it's as stiff as an Italian back-end, the whole game was a step back & it felt so scripted beyond repair, I'll make a more reasonable debate once I am back to my domain 

 

[enigmatic]

People are perfectly entitled - encouraged, even - to disagree with me, but I can't help but think if I was actually wrong about why people found it played through the middle better than any other version I'd be seeing arguments in favour of FM17s unique interpretation of defending rather than assertions that I'm stunting the conversation 

 

16 minutes ago, JordanMillward_1 said:

Wasn't FM17 the "Always scoring from crosses from the byline" simulator? 

Crosses were massively toned down compared with most versions, but if your fullbacks/wingbacks sat narrow and arrived late in the box (usually with opposition wide players still marking the touchline...)  then cutbacks were pretty useful. FM16 was always scoring from crosses from just about anywhere and your right back is player of the season

 

Edited October 15, 2020 by enigmatic

[Impacto]

The key is - variety. On FM 18 you get goals from all kinds of situations - patient build up, counter attacks, mazy runs, crosses, long shots, defence splitting through balls, corners, free kicks(a bit less), mistakes, penalties, cut backs and etc., etc...

In FM 20 I feel like all the goals are coming from the overlapping wing backs, corners or long shots. It's boring. 

[akkm]

3 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

People are perfectly entitled - encouraged, even - to disagree with me, but I can't help but think if I was actually wrong about why people found it played through the middle better than any other version I'd be seeing arguments in favour of FM17s unique interpretation of defending rather than assertions that I'm stunting the conversation 

 

Crosses were massively toned down compared with most versions, but if your fullbacks/wingbacks sat narrow and arrived late in the box (usually with opposition wide players still marking the touchline...)  then cutbacks were pretty useful. FM16 was crosses from just about anywhere...

 

yeah see it was pass decision making that actually made it better than recent versions in terms of slow/possession/creative build up which enabled chances/opportunities to be created better in the top third so yeah whilst middle third was softer allowing possession in that area of the pitch that with what you say that's not what enabled more creativity in the top third so that's essentially where you are wrong about it . 

Why I kicked back is that pass decision making has regressed since...yeah pressing/better defensive positioning & structure etc have all impacted this but overall it simply isn't comparable engine to engine. Movement (which of course needs significant ramping up and be smarter and more dynamic) was incorrectly diagnosed in fm19 as main reason for stunted creativity and though worked upon didn't have the desired effect last year as bottom line it's pass decision making which in top third is sub par favouring passes out wide/big spaces identified to make a pass/risk...instances of builds last year hitting too frequent passes from deep to create through balls. Movement is complementary to enhanced pass decision making of course to bring in more in line with real world play. Perhaps xg model will enable better simulation this year which we will see shortly enough. 

So yeah incorrectly concluding what you have is stunting the conversation as the real reasons why the disconnect between fundamental footballing decisions aren't being simulated correctly within Fm gets lost that way

Anyway can take it to PM seeing moderating this has become a thing lol. Interesting comment on the crosses from byline simulator in conjunction with your through the middle play. Crosses and directing play out wide is always an issue within FM again down to decision making which favours/is biased towards play out wide but each year it can be on steroids or on downers lol. Interestingly in fm17 i found in transition sometimes a defence was quite vulnerable to ball moving wide then crosses/cutbacks were almost 'undefendable' with that. Defensively much improved since then overall so i wouldn't ever make a case for fm17 engine defending compared to last couple of years but a lot to be improved upon going forward and all going well it starts with this years version next month. Fingers crossed that creativity/pass decision making will be the bump up it has required for a while. that would be awesome

[ajt]

I've been playing FM17 a bit for the past week, but despite the gloried match engine I really missed the updated training etc.

[Marko1989]

When FM 2017 came out, I liked how match engine looked / worked but I was so bad at that fm. Now, because I hate new match engines and probably I will also not like 2021, I have installed FM 2017, and again I JUST SUCK AT THIS FM. I really want to love it. I've tried many downloaded "best tactics" and nothing works for me. My tactics are even worse.

Maybe this is not a place for this, but I would like to ask, since you guys love fm 2017 so much, do you have some recommendations for some really good tactics?

 

[enigmatic]

35 minutes ago, akkm said:

yeah see it was pass decision making that actually made it better than recent versions in terms of slow/possession/creative build up which enabled chances/opportunities to be created better in the top third so yeah whilst middle third was softer allowing possession in that area of the pitch that with what you say that's not what enabled more creativity in the top third so that's essentially where you are wrong about it . 

Was it though? My abiding memory of FM17 low tempo final third play was how tedious it was: unmarked player passes to player with back to goal who returns it, all without any pressure on the ball, until a marker gets a bit sloppy and leaves a gap. There was far less dribbling and fewer skill moves apart from way too many backheels, and I didn't think there was anything at all clever about either the low risk passes to unmarked players or the tiny amount of movement - less than FM20 for sure - players needed to be unmarked. The counter attacks were nice and varied, but counters look nice on virtually all FM builds

Obviously FM20 is vastly superior in pass decision making and movement when playing from the back as well (although again, weird FM20 positional decisions often contribute to how neatly exit strategies work). 

 

I got very close to the same crowd-the-midfield style of play with IWBs in FM19 too with comparable outsize success, but the goal variety was better as well as the defending

[enigmatic]

1 hour ago, Marko1989 said:

Maybe this is not a place for this, but I would like to ask, since you guys love fm 2017 so much, do you have some recommendations for some really good tactics?

Strikerless. Three shadow strikers which opposition defences don't mark properly but will also help you out defensively.

Behind that, a back threes with wingbacks, but a back four with a DM is nearly as good. Set your full/wingbacks to sit narrow or even invert, so you have even more numbers in the middle of the park

Tell players not to bother with long shots or crosses as both are total waste of time, turn passing to short and start winning

[Marko1989]

6 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

Strikerless. Three shadow strikers which opposition defences don't mark properly but will also help you out defensively.

Behind that, a back threes with wingbacks, but a back four with a DM is nearly as good. Set your full/wingbacks to sit narrow or even invert, so you have even more numbers in the middle of the park

Tell players not to bother with long shots or crosses as both are total waste of time, turn passing to short and start winning

Thanks a lot, will try!

[akkm]

1 hour ago, enigmatic said:

Was it though? My abiding memory of FM17 low tempo final third play was how tedious it was: unmarked player passes to player with back to goal who returns it, all without any pressure on the ball, until a marker gets a bit sloppy and leaves a gap. There was far less dribbling and fewer skill moves apart from way too many backheels, and I didn't think there was anything at all clever about either the low risk passes to unmarked players or the tiny amount of movement - less than FM20 for sure - players needed to be unmarked. The counter attacks were nice and varied, but counters look nice on virtually all FM builds

Obviously FM20 is vastly superior in pass decision making and movement when playing from the back as well (although again, weird FM20 positional decisions often contribute to how neatly exit strategies work). 

 

I got very close to the same crowd-the-midfield style of play with IWBs in FM19 too with comparable outsize success, but the goal variety was better as well as the defending

ah yeah...yeah it was though. simple as that

wow the banality of the last two years must be sleep inducing if you found that tedious lol. last two years is fun to watch the ball go wide, over the top, flank to flank different iterations...corner/set piece/long shot/cross, poor movement even poorer pass selection, dearth of creativity, skill, vision and that all leads to quite the exhilarating visceral experience...edge of seat spectacle. 

Fair points on improved defending but in fm17 players in attacking phase would move a lot more dynamically come in and out move offside check themselves and come back onside better side to side as well. Openings in fm20 where attacker is enough of a distance from defender and passing option simply isn't taken the majority of the time...at least in fm17 the pass is attempted more often. Attacking movement in last two years is more rigid and 'samey' lacking varied patterns and they don't seem to react to defenders positioning to see space or react to their own team's positional attacking making darting runs to be slotted in or drag opposition defenders out of position for another player to be slotted in or even thinking ahead in a 2nd/3rd phase teammate movement where they in turn could be slotted in. Its all to rigid and structured.

So what you describe as passing it around until marker gets a bit sloppy and leaves a gap is how peps barca used to play...wait for that switch off and use technique, vision skill and movement to slot players in that way...in tight spaces as well. plenty of teams have played waiting for defensive sloppiness waiting for that gap. could there have been better pressing/pressure on the ball yeah in fm17 engine but teams that sit back don't press as much as people think for fear of losing defensive shape/discipline. So yeah it was a lot more clever than last two years...did certain things make it easier for that creative play than last two years...of course but the creative play and attacking movement was just better in itself...any other conclusion is incorrect. In last two years despite more compressed space by defensive structures there have still been plenty of opportunites for players to slotted in/threaded in with guiled/crafty passes which aren't being taken. Thats beyond contestation. So whilst what you describe as lacking in fm17 is valid it's just the conclusion you've drawn overall isn't taking everything into account as to why it's different in it's entirety. The pass decision making in last two year's engines just isn't up to scratch to take openings that arise and that's sorely lacking.

passing/movement from the back is overrated in fm20...patterns repeat quite a bit and players aren't as reactive as they should be once as you allude to pre patterned positioning is changed and exit strategies need to react dynamically to what defenders come up against. I absolutely like to see it nonetheless but its ultimately futile and a little bit of tokenism to present it as a nice to see but once the creative tools are absent top third what's the point of the passing from the back really

 

So the backheels are what makes an Fm engine great...kidding...yeah way too many of those for sure.

yeah stopped using iwbs early as it feels like a cheat crowding midfield and in some iterations crazy powerful forward surges by iwbs...could have been reduced since. Likely it was. So overall you've fair points just overall conclusion is off

 

[zyfon5]

3 hours ago, Marko1989 said:

When FM 2017 came out, I liked how match engine looked / worked but I was so bad at that fm. Now, because I hate new match engines and probably I will also not like 2021, I have installed FM 2017, and again I JUST SUCK AT THIS FM. I really want to love it. I've tried many downloaded "best tactics" and nothing works for me. My tactics are even worse.

Maybe this is not a place for this, but I would like to ask, since you guys love fm 2017 so much, do you have some recommendations for some really good tactics?

 

Try 4231 with full backs putting crosses in for your striker. Doesn't matter who is the striker he will score. Tried this with arsenal back in FM2017(my first FM game btw) and won the league with zero transfers.

[Tony Wright 747]

4 hours ago, enigmatic said:

People are perfectly entitled - encouraged, even - to disagree with me, but I can't help but think if I was actually wrong about why people found it played through the middle better than any other version I'd be seeing arguments in favour of FM17s unique interpretation of defending rather than assertions that I'm stunting the conversation 

 

Crosses were massively toned down compared with most versions, but if your fullbacks/wingbacks sat narrow and arrived late in the box (usually with opposition wide players still marking the touchline...)  then cutbacks were pretty useful. FM16 was always scoring from crosses from just about anywhere and your right back is player of the season

 

This would appear to be the general opinion of FM16, but I play FM16 and my stats tell me that I score more from through ballsthan crosses and I don't think my right back has ever been player of the season

[alian62]

8 hours ago, dREIS said:

You're joking right? How many posts and threads are there on this very subject.  You keep posting the same thing over and over and over. 

Because he is allowed too . It his opinion and he has every right to express it . As for FM17 it is well thought of as being the best for the 3D presentation and ME going on all polls done on this site . Its not bad that you can go three years back to a game and still get enjoyment out of it as i do . 

Edited October 16, 2020 by alian62

[FrazT]

OK, guys- points have been made, so let's move on please

[naterego93]

I just hope SI releases some news about the ME in FM 21, I hope to God it's somewhat realistic finally. Heck, hire a former coach or two to critique how the game plays out, just anything besides what we put up with last year. Give us the ability to mod some certain aspects of the engine or give us some sliders to play with...anything.

[EazyEee]

I get the feeling FM20's match engine was meant to be different but after the one-on-one and endless balls over the top of the defence problem, they patched it up to a point where it worked without being great. The first version of the ME kind of made sense as if you played a high press system the ball over the top would get you, it was just way OP and then the one-on-one issue meant strikers were missing crazy amounts of chances. 

In its most recent iteration, the ME just seems a bit stiff, very few through balls etc, lots of the goals scored feel similar, the way full backs cross to each other looks a bit unnatural too.

[Cal585]

I've been playing some FM17 recently because it was one of the last times Schalke had a good side (I miss Huntelaar) and wanted to play an A League save with Tim Cahill. I've really struggled to get into it though and actually get my team playing how I want, conversely to what others say. Maybe because I'm not going for possession based systems? I definitely think different versions lend themselves to certain playstyles more than others, so guess people will always favour a version where their playstyle was king.

That said, I do really enjoy the stadiums for the 2D mode and I do miss that side of things from the later versions even if I understand why they got rid of it.

[naterego93]

TBH I've just been letting the A.I face-off against each other lately while I still decide to remain "unemployed" so I can just test things out from a tactics perspective when compared 17 to 20. Far from successful on my end but a whole of a lot more entertaining to watch it play out compared to the latest release. The animations just seem a whole lot more natural (especially the keepers reactions on shots) compared to the "sliding effect" going on with set piece manager 20 lol PS use Classen's 225+ nations mod with TCM's mega logo pack. I'm on maximum detail level so it's been about three days of swimming and viewing  random matches July through November. Gonna be long but intriguing until I decide to pick a crap tier club haha

[Erimus1876]

FM17 is still way ahead of the last three versions imho.  Yes it was flawed (like every version of FM has been), but to me it was the best version SI have produced.  The last three have been a big step backwards, not just in the ME itself, but also aesthetically.

As someone who enjoys watching matches in 3D, the difference between FM17, and 18/19/20 is like night and day.  17 produced a lot more variety in gameplay like passing, chance creation, types of goals scored.  Animation looked far better too, with less 'skating' than we see in todays ME.

The ME logic itself will always divide opinions, and its probably something SI will never be able to please everyone on, but there's no excuse for them to degrade one of the really nice things about FM they were gradually getting right, right up until FM17, and that was the yearly graphic improvements, animations, the variety of pitches, and the wealth of options we once had.  Basically; The overall matchday experience.

That experience has been lacking in the last 3 versions.

I look at FM20 and its a sterile game, with rigid looking animations, predictable build-up play, lacks a variety of goals that the older versions had, and even simple things like the pitches have lost their charm.  On older FMs when I was managing a lower league club, you knew they were a poor club by the state of their ground and the pitch they played on.   I manage the same lower league clubs on FM20 and they're all playing in generic 10,000 seater stadiums (despite having a capacity of 500) and worse of all, on pitches that look like Wembley.  Bring back the muddy quagmires!   I know its not a major 'issue' - like the engine itself - but its little things like that that add variety to the overall experience.  There's no variety anymore. I manage a team in the Indian 3rd division, and its like managing a team in the English conference, there's no variety in the ground, the backdrop, the state of the pitch.

I really wish SI would put more work into the match day experience.  Its in desperate need of some attention.  Even if they bring back the options we had on previous FMs, as those alone allowed us to tailor how we wanted to experience a match day.  FM18, 19 and 20, have been a step backwards on that front.

 

Match day graphical options no longer available since FM17.  Bring them back, SI.

 

3D Match day camera options no longer available since FM17....

. 

[naterego93]

Safe to say FM 18,19,20 & looking at 21 right now were not good M.E's at all, something was up when they changed the lighting in 18 and it looked like crap lol jumping to 20 and now it plays like crap. A lot of unhappy folks could use a "hug" with the new features that are coming out 

Edited October 18, 2020 by naterego93

[bielsadidnothingwrong]

25 minutes ago, naterego93 said:

it plays like crap. A lot of unhappy folks could use a "hug" with the new features that are coming out 

 maybe all these threads should start off with "throws waterbottle" to show SI we mean business! 

[alian62]

On 17/10/2020 at 16:40, Erimus1876 said:

FM17 is still way ahead of the last three versions imho.  Yes it was flawed (like every version of FM has been), but to me it was the best version SI have produced.  The last three have been a big step backwards, not just in the ME itself, but also aesthetically.

As someone who enjoys watching matches in 3D, the difference between FM17, and 18/19/20 is like night and day.  17 produced a lot more variety in gameplay like passing, chance creation, types of goals scored.  Animation looked far better too, with less 'skating' than we see in todays ME.

The ME logic itself will always divide opinions, and its probably something SI will never be able to please everyone on, but there's no excuse for them to degrade one of the really nice things about FM they were gradually getting right, right up until FM17, and that was the yearly graphic improvements, animations, the variety of pitches, and the wealth of options we once had.  Basically; The overall matchday experience.

That experience has been lacking in the last 3 versions.

I look at FM20 and its a sterile game, with rigid looking animations, predictable build-up play, lacks a variety of goals that the older versions had, and even simple things like the pitches have lots their charm.  On older FMs when I was managing a lower league club, you knew they were a poor club by the state of their ground and the pitch they played on.   I manage the same lower league clubs on FM20 and they're all playing in generic 10,000 seater stadiums (despite having a capacity of 500) and worse of all, on pitches that look like Wembley.  Bring back the muddy quagmires!   I know its not a major 'issue' - like the engine itself - but its little things like that that add variety to the overall experience.  There's no variety anymore. I manage a team in the Indian 3rd division, and its like managing a team in the English conference, there's no variety in the ground, the backdrop, the state of the pitch.

I really wish SI would put more work into the match day experience.  Its in desperate need of some attention.  Even if they bring back the options we had on previous FMs, as those alone allowed us to tailor how we wanted to experience a match day.  FM18, 19 and 20, have been a step backwards on that front.

 

Match day graphical options no longer available since FM17.  Bring them back, SI.

 

 

3D Match day camera options no longer available since FM17....

.  

Yes totally agree . They even tout a new full screen for the 3D match in FM21 ? Hello we had this in FM17 with the Auto-Hide feature . Camera angles now are very stagnant . The change came in FM18 when i think they outsourced the graphics too another company but i could be wrong on that ?

Edited October 19, 2020 by alian62