Do you want the full release to be harder than the beta?

[swippy]

Its way too easy. Just go to any team and place your players in the gegenpress preset tactic and you will overachieve massively. No need for transfers or any adjustments really. I did this with Burnley and finished 3rd in first season with never using OIs or any tactical changes. I only did teamtalks and watched key highlights.

[Mars_Blackmon]

11 minutes ago, Pattric_b said:

Exactly and squad happiness is a large part of this game. If you took over Everton with Sunday league rep I doubt you’d have such positive results because your players wouldn’t believe in you.  It was just a theory that maybe people are being so successful because their reputation is greater than the club they are managing. 

the fm20 beta seemed easier to me than the official release version so let’s wait and see what happens. 

Not really. i start with no badges and Sunday league rep even tho that isn't what is suggested for vanarama league south team's. 

Doesn't make a difference if you are already winning and doesn't **** your players off. Like throwing the water bottle just for a giggle.

 

But still, unless someone has a rep way higher than the league they are in and the top badge, you shouldn't be overachieving this easily.

i would think most people are using Sunday league or use the suggested settings anyway.

[dannysheard]

1 minute ago, IrrelevantLion said:

Vast majority won’t even know this forum exists, even fewer will know about it, fewer still will directly engage. 
 

I'm sure the reason why SI haven’t really talked about this is because the data that they have tells them a different story. 

That doesn't mean it's not representative necessarily.

[Mars_Blackmon]

5 minutes ago, IrrelevantLion said:

Vast majority won’t even know this forum exists, even fewer will know about it, fewer still will directly engage. 
 

I'm sure the reason why SI haven’t really talked about this is because the data that they have tells them a different story. 

i believe this and that probably why the game got easier every year. The amount of tutorials in the game, simplified concepts with emojis (which I love) is a fact that casual players probably aren't having that much success or understand the game that much.

[IrrelevantLion]

6 minutes ago, dannysheard said:

That doesn't mean it's not representative necessarily.

There will most definitely be a bias, looking through these forums, people are long, long term players of FM. I would say that these players are a minority compared to people who maybe buy it once every few years and play it a bit in their spare time. 

[Savatage1973]

here s how i play fm since fm 19 

--no editor

--no editors scouts

--atribute masks

--don t by that key players that most of us do ..that we know are top wonderkids..or rated players..

---make my tactics

---make my training

and so...with that said...i get very trouble in having sucess..and its a real chalenge that i love and i emerge on to...

cheers

[VP.]

The people who say its too easy, how do you play the game? Do you use tactics you know are OP (see someone mention 3 strikers earlier) If you're a bigger side do you sign known wonderkids or players that you know for certain are going to perform really well (Haaland for example).

Whatever it is you do to find it easy certainly doesn't involve just loading a game up and picking a set tactic from the list then winning every game because if that was all it took then yes, I'd agree the game is too easy but there is no way this is what you're doing.

When I play (usually Arsenal), I always try to make my own tactic but keeping it within how I like football to be played not simply using one that I know will guarantee results with known exploits, I never look at wonderkid lists or any player lists in fact as that's what my scouts are for and I also try to give my youth players a chance (not the usual ones but players who have not yet had many if any first team apps IRL).

I could go on but the game 100% doesn't have to be too easy and If somehow you find it is then change the way you play to make it more interesting for yourselves.

[Heywood JaBlowme]

The Beta is WAAAYYY too easy. 

 

 

 

 

BTW, I'm managing Liverpool. 

[Ivan787]

I admit that I also had the suspect of a too easy game.

Let me explain what I mean. I think I'm far away to be a tactical genius; I always had my first save with Inter, my favourite club, and in previous versions of FM I always had a lot of trouble in finding a good tactic and obtaining good results.

This year I took Inter, as usual, desing a tactic 4-1-2-3 wide and start the game......well 3-0 against Juventus, 4-0 against Milan, 3-0 against Bayern Munchen in CL....After 10 match, 9 win, 1 draw, 36 goals done and 7 conceeded.

Ok, probably Inter team is stronger this year than previuos year, but I don't think I become a masterclass tactician.

 

P.S.: I play without editor, with my tactict and my training schedule.

Edited November 17, 2020 by Ivan787

[dannysheard]

26 minutes ago, SortitoutsiVP said:

The people who say its too easy, how do you play the game? Do you use tactics you know are OP (see someone mention 3 strikers earlier) If you're a bigger side do you sign known wonderkids or players that you know for certain are going to perform really well (Haaland for example).

Whatever it is you do to find it easy certainly doesn't involve just loading a game up and picking a set tactic from the list then winning every game because if that was all it took then yes, I'd agree the game is too easy but there is no way this is what you're doing.

When I play (usually Arsenal), I always try to make my own tactic but keeping it within how I like football to be played not simply using one that I know will guarantee results with known exploits, I never look at wonderkid lists or any player lists in fact as that's what my scouts are for and I also try to give my youth players a chance (not the usual ones but players who have not yet had many if any first team apps IRL).

I could go on but the game 100% doesn't have to be too easy and If somehow you find it is then change the way you play to make it more interesting for yourselves.

I play a fairly simple 4-3-3 (4-1-2-2 wide-1 in shape), plenty of pressing as in real life, never more aggressive than Positive really, sensible set of roles (as in WB-S, rather than than WB-A), nothing that dramatic really. Maybe a bit more cautious away at first.

I never buy anyone unless my scout has found them first, and even then I tend to try to play existing young players in the squad rather than buy big names.

I think if you play fairly aggressive (but not crazy) and keep your players happy, you'll win most games.

[Mars_Blackmon]

35 minutes ago, SortitoutsiVP said:

The people who say its too easy, how do you play the game? Do you use tactics you know are OP (see someone mention 3 strikers earlier) If you're a bigger side do you sign known wonderkids or players that you know for certain are going to perform really well (Haaland for example).

Whatever it is you do to find it easy certainly doesn't involve just loading a game up and picking a set tactic from the list then winning every game because if that was all it took then yes, I'd agree the game is too easy but there is no way this is what you're doing.

When I play (usually Arsenal), I always try to make my own tactic but keeping it within how I like football to be played not simply using one that I know will guarantee results with known exploits, I never look at wonderkid lists or any player lists in fact as that's what my scouts are for and I also try to give my youth players a chance (not the usual ones but players who have not yet had many if any first team apps IRL).

I could go on but the game 100% doesn't have to be too easy and If somehow you find it is then change the way you play to make it more interesting for yourselves.

i do none of that and still find it too easy. It's a misconception on people who says the game is easy are the people who find exploits...

 

And yes, you can pick a tactic that is suggested and be an overachiever. Especially if it an positive attacking tactic. AI is too passive on the pitch majority of the time.

[forameuss]

2 minutes ago, Mars_Blackmon said:

i do none of that and still find it too easy. It's a misconception on people who says the game is easy are the people who find exploits...

It's also a misconception that everyone who uses exploits knows they're doing it.

[dannysheard]

2 minutes ago, Mars_Blackmon said:

i do none of that and still find it too easy. It's a misconception on people who says the game is easy are the people who find exploits...

Agreed. I just want to play a 20-year save with Liverpool where:

 - we have a decent chance of winning the league in the first few seasons, but by no means guaranteed

 - City and Utd outspend me over time and end up with better squads

 - my players lose hunger if they win trophies every season, so I have to make changes every few years to keep it fresh (like Fergie did)

 - bigger teams than me (Real, Barca) or richer teams (PSG) try to buy my players and my players want to go because they'll get a lot more money

 - the opposition work out my tactics and counter them

 - my players demand ever-increasing wages if we keep winning stuff

[dannysheard]

3 minutes ago, forameuss said:

It's also a misconception that everyone who uses exploits knows they're doing it.

If there are some known overpowered tactics, make the AI managers use them. That would make the game more difficult straight away. Make Pep really aggressive in his tactics if that exploits the match engine.

[Mars_Blackmon]

3 minutes ago, forameuss said:

It's also a misconception that everyone who uses exploits knows they're doing it.

Give an example

[Dagenham_Dave]

Well, I've just been sacked in my first job, so I would answer this question is a resounding 'NO' 

I do like to keep things as real as possible however, and I hardly ever manage a top club, so the game is always challenging for me, and that's the way I like it. Going a top flight club (especially in England with the absurd finances) is never going to be a challenge until the AI improves considerably. So people who do manage these clubs and who are decent at the game may have to find ways to make the save harder for themselves. 

I know it's a different type of game, but I watch a few streamers play the Dark Souls series of games. Now already, these games are hard enough, but for these guys to do a straight playthrough would be too easy and boring, so they'll set up various challenges (no hit runs etc), and mods to make their game more enjoyable. From Software would be horrified if people asked them to include difficulty levels. 

If you're at the stage where the game's too easy for you, then pick the hundreds of different ways there is where you can test yourself more. 

 

[dannysheard]

7 minutes ago, Mars_Blackmon said:

Give an example

I think we're fighting a losing battle here, mate

This whole debate is like me saying to Usain Bolt that he can't run under 10s because I can't.

The people on here get so offended if you even suggest some of us find the game painfully easy. They start saying downloaded tactics, downloaded shortlists (whatever that is). So frustrating because the game could be so much better.

[dannysheard]

1 minute ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

Well, I've just been sacked in my first job, so I would answer this question is a resounding 'NO' 

I do like to keep things as real as possible however, and I hardly ever manage a top club, so the game is always challenging for me, and that's the way I like it. Going a top flight club (especially in England with the absurd finances) is never going to be a challenge until the AI improves considerably. So people who do manage these clubs and who are decent at the game may have to find ways to make the save harder for themselves. 

I know it's a different type of game, but I watch a few streamers play the Dark Souls series of games. Now already, these games are hard enough, but for these guys to do a straight playthrough would be too easy and boring, so they'll set up various challenges (no hit runs etc), and mods to make their game more enjoyable. From Software would be horrified if people asked them to include difficulty levels. 

If you're at the stage where the game's too easy for you, then pick the hundreds of different ways there is where you can test yourself more. 

 

I get what your saying and I do put loads of artificial things into the game to make it more realistic, but beyond a certain point (only buy players with less than two vowels in their middle name) it loses the immersion that we all want from the game.

It surely can't be that we're expecting all the millions of fans of Liverpool, City, Utd, Spurs, Chelsea, Arsenal, Juve, Milan, Inter etc., to not play as their favourite team. That can't be the best answer here, can it?

[forameuss]

14 minutes ago, Mars_Blackmon said:

Give an example

You're one of the thousands of people who play FM but don't visit any social media or community sites for the game.  You like Liverpool.  You think Gegenpressing is a great idea.  You have abnormal success.  You have no idea that that is a weakness in the engine.

Substitute that in for any of the many weaknesses in the engine, and it's easy to see why someone could be inadvertently benefiting from them.

  

14 minutes ago, dannysheard said:

If there are some known overpowered tactics, make the AI managers use them. That would make the game more difficult straight away. Make Pep really aggressive in his tactics if that exploits the match engine.

It's also nowhere near close to a valid solution in SI's eyes I'd imagine.  It's a sticking plaster solution to solve one issue that causes many more.

Edited November 17, 2020 by forameuss

[Viking]

I actually thought my tactics worked when I suddenly won matches in the beta. Turns out the game is "too easy".

I want FM to be reaIistic. If that means it's so hard I have to cheat every single match I play, then so be it.

By the way, It's quite obvious FM needs a "pro" version for the hardcore players and a normal version for those who wants FM to be relaxing. And no, Touch is not it.

[Dagenham_Dave]

Just now, dannysheard said:

It surely can't be that we're expecting all the millions of fans of Liverpool, City, Utd, Spurs, Chelsea, Arsenal, Juve, Milan, Inter etc., to not play as their favourite team. That can't be the best answer here, can it?

You've been killed by your own sword here though, you clearly know what you're doing, and you're managing a top club. That's as close to 'easy level' as you can get in a game. Sucks for you, I guess, but that's where we are. SI can't risk alienating casual players (probably the majority who play) who aren't as good as you by making the game impossible for them. For this type of simulation, difficulty levels is totally unworkable at the moment. 

[SebastianRO]

No difficulty level needed. The game is fine.

[Broken_Record]

I'm happy to see a larger audience demanding this to finally happen. 

In my opinion the game cannot even be too difficult as basically when you start a new save, you have unlimited time to learn how to play it and also you can always start over and try again. 

It's also worth mentioning that none of Football Manager's tools and features are difficult or time consuming to learn. Creating a well balanced tactic for example only takes a couple of clicks and if you don't know how to do it, how long does it take for you to learn? Maybe tens of minutes at maximum. That for example by any means is not too much demanded from a game that is supposed to be a career and simulation type of a game. 

At the moment the game is basically totally missing the career aspect. For example I would like to play a career with my favorite club in Finnish the Finnish second division. In real life this would mean that I would probably face a tough time earning the promotion and also keeping my best players and strengthening the squad during breaks. That would be a career and a challenge. 

What would probably happen in FM is that I would get the team promoted in season one. Would significantly strengthen the squad between the season and would probably will everything in Finland in season two or three. That is not a career or a challenge. 

Playing with any team should be challenging, otherwise the game is totally missing the main idea of itself. 

[Dagenham_Dave]

Just now, Broken_Record said:

I'm happy to see a larger audience demanding this to finally happen. 

In my opinion the game cannot even be too difficult as basically when you start a new save, you have unlimited time to learn how to play it and also you can always start over and try again. 

It's also worth mentioning that none of Football Manager's tools and features are difficult or time consuming to learn. Creating a well balanced tactic for example only takes a couple of clicks and if you don't know how to do it, how long does it take for you to learn? Maybe tens of minutes at maximum. That for example by any means is not too much demanded from a game that is supposed to be a career and simulation type of a game. 

At the moment the game is basically totally missing the career aspect. For example I would like to play a career with my favorite club in Finnish the Finnish second division. In real life this would mean that I would probably face a tough time earning the promotion and also keeping my best players and strengthening the squad during breaks. That would be a career and a challenge. 

What would probably happen in FM is that I would get the team promoted in season one. Would significantly strengthen the squad between the season and would probably will everything in Finland in season two or three. That is not a career or a challenge. 

Playing with any team should be challenging, otherwise the game is totally missing the main idea of itself. 

The game being easy for you doesn't mean it's easy for everyone else. 

[dannysheard]

2 minutes ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

You've been killed by your own sword here though, you clearly know what you're doing, and you're managing a top club. That's as close to 'easy level' as you can get in a game. Sucks for you, I guess, but that's where we are. SI can't risk alienating casual players (probably the majority who play) who aren't as good as you by making the game impossible for them. For this type of simulation, difficulty levels is totally unworkable at the moment. 

I don't think it use to be quite this easy, though. I remember having some difficult seasons in previous versions (maybe 5+ years ago).

It's probably correct that as they've added more functionality, the human player uses it well and the AI doesn't, so each year the game gets easier.

I think a Pro mode would make sense, just tweaking the AI stats a little here and there but I know the casual players aren't having it. 

[dannysheard]

3 minutes ago, SebastianRO said:

No difficulty level needed. The game is fine.

Out of interest, do you win lots of trophies/promotions?

[Dagenham_Dave]

1 minute ago, dannysheard said:

I think a Pro mode would make sense, just tweaking the AI stats a little here and there but I know the casual players aren't having it. 

What 'stats' would you tweak out of interest?

[f.zaarour]

2 hours ago, Piksi#10 said:

I don't get how people don't understand that there's no bragging here, a lot of people simply want a challenging game. Look at real life football, how hard it is for teams like PSG and Man City to reach that highest level of winning the Champions League. While on FM you can do that within 4 years with Bournemouth. 

Obviously this game doesn't mirror reality for the full 100% and never should, but there should be a real sense of accomplishment in winning major titles. That's all.

And I'm not talking about nerfing strikers either. Improve defending and AI management and we'll have come a long way already. 

Take it other way around. Its realistic for sure. Look at Leicester. Promoted a few years ago and 2 seasons later they were the PL champions. Take Ajax or Spurs, moving into Semi and last final of the CL. Take Wolves or Getafe in Real life. So ur point has an other side for sure.

[Broken_Record]

8 minutes ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

The game being easy for you doesn't mean it's easy for everyone else. 

Well, take a look at the most popular FM streamers for example. Most of them don't have a clue what they are doing, are only watching games on key highlights and not paying attention to any details or features. And how are they doing with the game: well quite well, I would say. 

That for me is quite good indication about the level of difficulty and it also shows that by having the game as it is, it's not attracting large amount of people to try and learn the features of the game. 

Simply put, all this is encouraging lazy gameplay and making the game basically an arcade. 

You're also once again missing the point in here. One of the main questions that I'm trying to ask is that "is the game supposed to be easy for anyone?". In my opinion no, because this kills the whole idea of the game. 

Edited November 17, 2020 by Broken_Record

[V3ntricity]

what i find strange is that even on a very offensive tactic, I hardly let in goals. playing a high line and a positive mentality should be fairly easy to exploit for many teams.

i've been watching the streamer workthespace, and he has even let in fewer goals. he plays with a high line and even a mezzala with a dlp on center midfield.

Edited November 17, 2020 by V3ntricity

[ajsr1982]

2 hours ago, swippy said:

Its way too easy. Just go to any team and place your players in the gegenpress preset tactic and you will overachieve massively. No need for transfers or any adjustments really. I did this with Burnley and finished 3rd in first season with never using OIs or any tactical changes. I only did teamtalks and watched key highlights.

I did this and got 6 points from 6 games (with a team who were favourites to win the league). I switched to a wing play tactic and did much better (but still ultimately finished 3rd and got sacked).

[ajsr1982]

3 minutes ago, V3ntricity said:

what i find strange is that even on a very offensive tactic, I hardly let in goals. playing a high line and a positive mentality should be fairly easy to exploit for many teams.

i've been watching the streamer workthespace, and he has even let in fewer goals. he plays with a high line and even a mezzala with a dlp on center midfield.

Liverpool play with a very offensive tactic with a high line and had a very good defensive record last season. All it really means is that you choose to defend most intensively in a different area of the pitch.

Edited November 17, 2020 by ajsr1982

[f.zaarour]

2 minutes ago, Broken_Record said:

Well look at the most popular FM streamers for example. Most of them don't have a clue what they are doing, are only watching games on key highlights and not paying attention to any details or features. And how are they doing with the game: well quite well, I would say. 

That for me is quite good indication about the level of difficulty and it also shows that by having the game as it is, it's not attracting large amount of people to try and learn the features of the game. 

Simply put, all this is encouraging lazy gameplay and making the game basically an arcade. 

Sorry but the game can be played in so many different ways. Everyone has his own style of play. There is no 'The right way'. 

[Mars_Blackmon]

4 minutes ago, V3ntricity said:

what i find strange is that even on a very offensive tactic, I hardly let in goals. playing a high line and a positive mentality should be fairly easy to exploit for many teams.

i've been watching the streamer workthespace, and he has even let in fewer goals. he plays with a high line and even a mezzala with a dlp on center midfield.

That's because the AI is too passive. That's a key point that is getting missed in this thread lol.

 

People keep bringing up play styles, difficult sliders, house rules and missing the main culprit to the problem that makes the game easy...

[dannysheard]

3 minutes ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

What 'stats' would you tweak out of interest?

In games just against me, so it doesn't throw the rest of the game out, the AI teams gets, for example:

 +5 or +10 on fitness at the start of the match

 Boost to morale

Boost of +1 or +2 on all their attributes

 

That would be really easy to do in the ME, I presume, and it wouldn't affect casual players as they wouldn't play that mode, and it wouldn't unbalance the game as it's just against the human player that it happens.

[Broken_Record]

2 minutes ago, f.zaarour said:

Sorry but the game can be played in so many different ways. Everyone has his own style of play. There is no 'The right way'. 

Sure but by no means the general level of challenge should not support lazy gameplay. What's the point of all the features that the game has when you don't need to use them? 

[pats]

Wow.. 71% find it too easy. Can't be a coincidence. 

Count me in 'too easy' camp as well. 

[Viking]

2 minutes ago, Broken_Record said:

Sure but by no means the general level of challenge should not support lazy gameplay. What's the point of all the features that the game has when you don't need to use them? 

So you can use them if you want to?

[herne79]

How exactly would people like it to be harder?  What specific aspects?  It's no good saying just make the ME harder or the AI smarter.  That doesn't actually say anything.  What specific aspects do you find too easy?  So for example:

1) Match Engine.  Lets assume for a moment that SI implement a way that the ME can determine which team is human controlled and which is AI controlled (it can't at present).  This is important if you want the ME to have a difficulty setting.  So, how to give the ME a difficulty setting?  Reduce the human controlled player's Consistency?  Make defenders less likely to tackle?  Have varying degrees of a striker's ability to Finish?  Nerf midfielder's passing ability?  And, above all of this, ensure the ME is kept as realistic and true to actual football as possible, because if you start to see (for example) strikers missing 1v1s or passing constantly going astray, imagine the outcry.

So how specifically to give the ME varying degrees of difficulty (assuming it can be changed to tell the difference between human and AI controlled teams) but keep it true to real football?

2) Tactics.  Lots of people (and I appreciate there are exceptions) talk in terms of using so-called exploit tactics, or perhaps the preset gegenpress tactic.  Well on the one hand, that's on you not the game.  That's your choice, not the game's problem, so don't complain if you find the game too easy from that aspect.  However, on the other hand, perhaps there is scope to limit what tactical strategies you are able to use when setting up your own tactical system within varying difficulty settings.  Maybe limit which Mentalities you are able to set?  Reduce the number of player roles and duties available?  Limit the amount of TIs available to be used.  But then that may also limit the style of play you are able to give your team, so would that be an acceptable trade off?

3) Players.  Perhaps it might be possible to limit attributes for players within human controlled teams?  Maybe limit them to a maximum of say 15 in any given category?  But then what if you sell a player to an AI team?  Those attributes would need to somehow artificially increase.  And what about when you play with <insert elite player name here> and he doesn't bear any resemblance to the actual player?  Is that acceptable?

4) Player development.  Perhaps we could have varying degrees of difficulty in slowing down and/or limiting player development.  Only allow a certain level of CA to be reached.  Allow reduced amounts of CA growth in any given time frame.  Of course this may only have a significant impact if you happen to be a manager who puts great emphasis on in house development and could easily be overcome with transfers....

5) Transfers.  Again, we can see talk of how some people "exploit" the transfer system.  And again, if you do that, that's on you.  That's your problem, not the game's, because you are making the choice to game the system in this manner and use it in unintended ways.  But that to one side, how to give the transfer system difficulty levels?  Make players more expensive for human controlled teams?  Again this would need a system in place to determine who the human controlled team is.  Limit the amount of scouting possible?  Permanently hide certain attributes from scout reports?  Reduce your transfer budget?  Make it so players become more reluctant to join your team?  Stop loans to low level clubs?

And again, how would any of this stay within the bounds of realism?  Or is it just a case of realism be damned and have SI turn things into a more arcade style game?

6) AI.  This is a tough one as unless we are going to give every user a PC the equivalent of Deep Thought, the AI is never going to be as capable as us human managers can be.  Just think about that for a moment - essentially, no matter what, we will always have an advantage over the AI.  The AI can of course be improved, and indeed is with every iteration of FM released, but we get into the realms of hardware limitations.  Who are we to say "yup, give us an AI who can create better tactics, make better transfers and develop their players expertly, but only if we have a top end system and tough luck to all the poor schmucks who don't, let them eat cake".  There have been plenty of threads which have essentially stated just that.  How egalitarian.

(And btw if the AI was even close to being as capable as a human manager nobody would ever win anything lol).

 

Anyway, that's just a few very basic thoughts.  Of course over all of this subject is SI's desire (and indeed their customer's desire) to produce and play a realistic simulation of football and football management, and real life football doesn't have a difficulty setting.  So it's all well and good saying give us a difficulty setting / make the game harder, but how specifically?

[f.zaarour]

I really am asking this, how many who says its easy play with a high pressing tactic? And not using gegen default tactic or extern tactics but made it themself but at the end tweaked it like those tactics and telling themselfs ye this is my own tactic and having succes. 

Or how many do have succes with lower teams and playing defensivly or with counter tactics? 

I mean isnt it that many just make themselfs those exploit tactics themselfs? Almost every tactic has those high press in their tactic. 

If yes, was does that say? Does the impact of those tactics needs to be lesser effective in game, like fatigue play a big role at the end of a game so that the team cant play gegen all the game long which is just unrealistic. Or does the AI needs to be stronger to outplay those kind of tactics. Look at games like Atletico's simeone vs Liverpool last year or Arsenal vs Man City or Leicester vs Man City etc. 

So in what way is it to easy then? And which part needs improvement to make it more a challenge. 

Edited November 17, 2020 by f.zaarour

[ajsr1982]

3 minutes ago, Broken_Record said:

Sure but by no means the general level of challenge should not support lazy gameplay. What's the point of all the features that the game has when you don't need to use them? 

I'd call that 'optional level of immersion' rather than 'lazy gameplay'. I'd also argue that it's perfectly reasonable to choose not to do some/most of these things, but the proficiency of your staff should make a difference if you choose to delegate things.

[Broken_Record]

Just now, Viking said:

So you can use them if you want to?

That's again encouraging lazy gameplay and discouraging people to actually learn to play the game. And this on the other hand is a huge obstacle for improving the game. 

[Icy]

Sorry guys but your request can't be done quickly as we would like, as there is not a line of code to make the game harder, in fact I'd like to see how are you playing the game, what are in your opinion the reason of it being too easy and your suggestions to fix it other than "Please SI make the game hader or make AI better".

Here are mine as imho it would make the game more competitive for us (I already set house rules myself as always have followed the LLM rules):

- Better squad building AI, that of course is the dream of SI staff as well, and every year it's a little bit better, it's not that because you asked for more difficulty they will release a better AI in the next 10 days sadly.

- It's still too easy in the lower leagues and even in the second league of each country to hire free players that are better than your starting team. Maybe it's also a problem of the researchers at every country, that leave unemployed players in the database that are too good for being without a job. Maybe SI can do a cleanup with a query in the DB and lower the CA of all the unemployed players. My house rule is to never use the search players feature and only hire these propossed by your scouts.

- Too easy to hire the best staff in your league level . My house rule is only hiring staff that has applied to my job offer insetad of serching them myself.

- More punishement for attacking tactics as that is what is the main issue currently. Users are over attacking compared to the AI and the AI can't cope well with it. High attacking and agressive tactics should be punished by the AI with better counter attacks and with higer energy draining if you press high. There was one FM20 ME version that had a ton of balls over the top, and that punished high defenses, but it was soon tweaked (nerfing long balls over defense and 1on1 finishing) as the forums were crying about it.

- AI teams not being as passive and defensive with their tactics. Maybe SI can run a query in the DB to raise the attacking tendencies of all the AI managers and for future created ones.

UPDATE: @herne79just did what should be done with his analysis and proposals while I was writing mines.

Edited November 17, 2020 by Icy

[f.zaarour]

14 minutes ago, Broken_Record said:

Sure but by no means the general level of challenge should not support lazy gameplay. What's the point of all the features that the game has when you don't need to use them? 

First of all, i would not call it 'lazy gameplay' and 2nd, many things could be delegated, ur a Football 'manager' at the end. In Real life managers have so many help around them, field coaches, advisors in game etc etc. So they make it easier for him to manage his team to succes. 

Edited November 17, 2020 by f.zaarour

[dannysheard]

5 minutes ago, herne79 said:

How exactly would people like it to be harder?  What specific aspects?  It's no good saying just make the ME harder or the AI smarter.  That doesn't actually say anything.  What specific aspects do you find too easy?  So for example:

1) Match Engine.  Lets assume for a moment that SI implement a way that the ME can determine which team is human controlled and which is AI controlled (it can't at present).  This is important if you want the ME to have a difficulty setting.  So, how to give the ME a difficulty setting?  Reduce the human controlled player's Consistency?  Make defenders less likely to tackle?  Have varying degrees of a striker's ability to Finish?  Nerf midfielder's passing ability?  And, above all of this, ensure the ME is kept as realistic and true to actual football as possible, because if you start to see (for example) strikers missing 1v1s or passing constantly going astray, imagine the outcry.

So how specifically to give the ME varying degrees of difficulty (assuming it can be changed to tell the difference between human and AI controlled teams) but keep it true to real football?

2) Tactics.  Lots of people (and I appreciate there are exceptions) talk in terms of using so-called exploit tactics, or perhaps the preset gegenpress tactic.  Well on the one hand, that's on you not the game.  That's your choice, not the game's problem, so don't complain if you find the game too easy from that aspect.  However, on the other hand, perhaps there is scope to limit what tactical strategies you are able to use when setting up your own tactical system within varying difficulty settings.  Maybe limit which Mentalities you are able to set?  Reduce the number of player roles and duties available?  Limit the amount of TIs available to be used.  But then that may also limit the style of play you are able to give your team, so would that be an acceptable trade off?

3) Players.  Perhaps it might be possible to limit attributes for players within human controlled teams?  Maybe limit them to a maximum of say 15 in any given category?  But then what if you sell a player to an AI team?  Those attributes would need to somehow artificially increase.  And what about when you play with <insert elite player name here> and he doesn't bear any resemblance to the actual player?  Is that acceptable?

4) Player development.  Perhaps we could have varying degrees of difficulty in slowing down and/or limiting player development.  Only allow a certain level of CA to be reached.  Allow reduced amounts of CA growth in any given time frame.  Of course this may only have a significant impact if you happen to be a manager who puts great emphasis on in house development and could easily be overcome with transfers....

5) Transfers.  Again, we can see talk of how some people "exploit" the transfer system.  And again, if you do that, that's on you.  That's your problem, not the game's, because you are making the choice to game the system in this manner and use it in unintended ways.  But that to one side, how to give the transfer system difficulty levels?  Make players more expensive for human controlled teams?  Again this would need a system in place to determine who the human controlled team is.  Limit the amount of scouting possible?  Permanently hide certain attributes from scout reports?  Reduce your transfer budget?  Make it so players become more reluctant to join your team?  Stop loans to low level clubs?

And again, how would any of this stay within the bounds of realism?  Or is it just a case of realism be damned and have SI turn things into a more arcade style game?

6) AI.  This is a tough one as unless we are going to give every user a PC the equivalent of Deep Thought, the AI is never going to be as capable as us human managers can be.  Just think about that for a moment - essentially, no matter what, we will always have an advantage over the AI.  The AI can of course be improved, and indeed is with every iteration of FM released, but we get into the realms of hardware limitations.  Who are we to say "yup, give us an AI who can create better tactics, make better transfers and develop their players expertly, but only if we have a top end system and tough luck to all the poor schmucks who don't, let them eat cake".  There have been plenty of threads which have essentially stated just that.  How egalitarian.

(And btw if the AI was even close to being as capable as a human manager nobody would ever win anything lol).

 

Anyway, that's just a few very basic thoughts.  Of course over all of this subject is SI's desire (and indeed their customer's desire) to produce and play a realistic simulation of football and football management, and real life football doesn't have a difficulty setting.  So it's all well and good saying give us a difficulty setting / make the game harder, but how specifically?

This is a 3-second thought on this, but would immediately make the game a whole load more enjoyable for the better players... In games just against me, so it doesn't throw the rest of the game out, the AI teams gets, for example:

 +5 or +10 on fitness at the start of the match

 Boost to morale

Boost of +1 or +2 on all their attributes

[Viking]

2 minutes ago, Broken_Record said:

That's again encouraging lazy gameplay and discouraging people to actually learn to play the game. And this on the other hand is a huge obstacle for improving the game. 

And that depends on how people wants to play the game. Some wants to lears stuff, fiddle with tactics and pamper with whiny players, some just wants to buy players, win games and eat tacos after a hard days work.

[Broken_Record]

2 minutes ago, Viking said:

And that depends on how people wants to play the game. Some wants to lears stuff, fiddle with tactics and pamper with whiny players, some just wants to buy players, win games and eat tacos after a hard days work.

A simple question: do you feel that FM should be a type of a game that demands you to put on a bit of effort to be successful and should it also include a real possibilty for you to fail? 

Or do you want it to rather be a game where you will always be successful, no matter how badly you do the gameplay. 

At the moment it's way closer to the latter one than the first that a simulation and career type of game rather should be. 

[ajsr1982]

1 minute ago, Broken_Record said:

A simple question: do you feel that FM should be a type of a game that demands you to put on a bit of effort to be successful and should it also include a real possibilty for you to fail? 

Or do you want it to rather be a game where you will always be successful, no matter how badly you do the gameplay. 

At the moment it's way closer to the latter one than the first that a simulation and career type of game rather should be. 

I don't think anyone is going to change your mind on what you want from the game and how it should be played, so perhaps we should just stop replying to you? You've made your point.

[Mars_Blackmon]

16 minutes ago, f.zaarour said:

I really am asking this, how many who says its easy play with a high pressing tactic? And not using gegen default tactic or extern tactics but made it themself but at the end tweaked it like those tactics and telling themselfs ye this is my own tactic and having succes. 

Or how many do have succes with lower teams and playing defensivly or with counter tactics? 

I mean isnt it that many just make themselfs those exploit tactics themselfs? Almost every tactic has those high press in their tactic. 

If yes, was does that say? Does the impact of those tactics needs to be lesser effective in game, like fatigue play a big role at the end of a game so that the team cant play gegen all the game long which is just unrealistic. Or does the AI needs to be stronger to outplay those kind of tactics. Look at games like Atletico's simeone vs Liverpool last year or Arsenal vs Man City or Leicester vs Man City etc. 

So in what way is it to easy then? And which part needs improvement to make it more a challenge. 

Read the entire thread. People answered those questions already. Not to mention high press exploit was allegedly fixed for the version.

[ajsr1982]

20 minutes ago, herne79 said:

How exactly would people like it to be harder?  What specific aspects?  It's no good saying just make the ME harder or the AI smarter.  That doesn't actually say anything.  What specific aspects do you find too easy?  So for example:

1) Match Engine.  Lets assume for a moment that SI implement a way that the ME can determine which team is human controlled and which is AI controlled (it can't at present).  This is important if you want the ME to have a difficulty setting.  So, how to give the ME a difficulty setting?  Reduce the human controlled player's Consistency?  Make defenders less likely to tackle?  Have varying degrees of a striker's ability to Finish?  Nerf midfielder's passing ability?  And, above all of this, ensure the ME is kept as realistic and true to actual football as possible, because if you start to see (for example) strikers missing 1v1s or passing constantly going astray, imagine the outcry.

So how specifically to give the ME varying degrees of difficulty (assuming it can be changed to tell the difference between human and AI controlled teams) but keep it true to real football?

2) Tactics.  Lots of people (and I appreciate there are exceptions) talk in terms of using so-called exploit tactics, or perhaps the preset gegenpress tactic.  Well on the one hand, that's on you not the game.  That's your choice, not the game's problem, so don't complain if you find the game too easy from that aspect.  However, on the other hand, perhaps there is scope to limit what tactical strategies you are able to use when setting up your own tactical system within varying difficulty settings.  Maybe limit which Mentalities you are able to set?  Reduce the number of player roles and duties available?  Limit the amount of TIs available to be used.  But then that may also limit the style of play you are able to give your team, so would that be an acceptable trade off?

3) Players.  Perhaps it might be possible to limit attributes for players within human controlled teams?  Maybe limit them to a maximum of say 15 in any given category?  But then what if you sell a player to an AI team?  Those attributes would need to somehow artificially increase.  And what about when you play with <insert elite player name here> and he doesn't bear any resemblance to the actual player?  Is that acceptable?

4) Player development.  Perhaps we could have varying degrees of difficulty in slowing down and/or limiting player development.  Only allow a certain level of CA to be reached.  Allow reduced amounts of CA growth in any given time frame.  Of course this may only have a significant impact if you happen to be a manager who puts great emphasis on in house development and could easily be overcome with transfers....

5) Transfers.  Again, we can see talk of how some people "exploit" the transfer system.  And again, if you do that, that's on you.  That's your problem, not the game's, because you are making the choice to game the system in this manner and use it in unintended ways.  But that to one side, how to give the transfer system difficulty levels?  Make players more expensive for human controlled teams?  Again this would need a system in place to determine who the human controlled team is.  Limit the amount of scouting possible?  Permanently hide certain attributes from scout reports?  Reduce your transfer budget?  Make it so players become more reluctant to join your team?  Stop loans to low level clubs?

And again, how would any of this stay within the bounds of realism?  Or is it just a case of realism be damned and have SI turn things into a more arcade style game?

6) AI.  This is a tough one as unless we are going to give every user a PC the equivalent of Deep Thought, the AI is never going to be as capable as us human managers can be.  Just think about that for a moment - essentially, no matter what, we will always have an advantage over the AI.  The AI can of course be improved, and indeed is with every iteration of FM released, but we get into the realms of hardware limitations.  Who are we to say "yup, give us an AI who can create better tactics, make better transfers and develop their players expertly, but only if we have a top end system and tough luck to all the poor schmucks who don't, let them eat cake".  There have been plenty of threads which have essentially stated just that.  How egalitarian.

(And btw if the AI was even close to being as capable as a human manager nobody would ever win anything lol).

 

Anyway, that's just a few very basic thoughts.  Of course over all of this subject is SI's desire (and indeed their customer's desire) to produce and play a realistic simulation of football and football management, and real life football doesn't have a difficulty setting.  So it's all well and good saying give us a difficulty setting / make the game harder, but how specifically?

In the interest of trying to be constructive, the only issue I sometimes see is AI managers using unbalanced setups, particularly in midfield - there seems to be a liberal use of Mezzalas with nobody in there to compensate. That's the sort of thing I'd expect to be punished for if I did it. On the flip side of that, when the AI tactic appears nicely balanced, the game seems to be perfectly challenging. So if anything what I'm seeing is that tactical mistakes are more heavily punished than before.

Because it probably needs to be said, I'm very happy with the game so far.