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

[bobbyb12345]

What is interesting, though - I had the viewpoint last year that last years match engine was so bad because the aim was to produce realistic results, and the massively screwed up 1v1s and set pieces controlled all of that in spite of everything else.

Now it seems like they've fixed the conversion issues and set pieces being overpowered and now we're getting these results.

[Dagenham_Dave]

Why do we need ANOTHER thread on this? 

[dannysheard]

42 minutes ago, Daveincid said:

IF SI would allow to increase the injuries-ratio from 80%, compared to real life back to 100%, the problem would already be much smaller....because of the intensive pressing-style a lot more players would end up being on the physio's table than on the pitch....but they made that because people were moaning about too many injuries...... A little change in the editor, problem solved.

Can you change that in the editor?

[swippy]

18 minutes ago, Daveincid said:

I set the detail level to full so it is the match engine

I'm skeptical holidaying with full detail simulation uses the same ME algorithm as when watching the games yourself. But I could be wrong.

[dannysheard]

33 minutes ago, Daveincid said:

never guaruantee something 100%

Ok, 60% of the time, it works every time.

[Daveincid]

Gerade eben schrieb dannysheard:

Can you change that in the editor?

not exactly. That's why I hope SI would allow this. You can change the ratio which injuries happen how often, what I did for fm20. So you can't change the total amount of injuries, but which one happen how often. I increased the light ones and lowered some others a bit. If you increase especially the muscular injuries which happen ingame, you should struggle with the high intensive tactic.

[Daveincid]

vor 2 Minuten schrieb swippy:

I'm skeptical holidaying with full detail simulation uses the same ME algorithm as when watching the games yourself. But I could be wrong.

I trust SI with their statement. 

[dannysheard]

7 minutes ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

And have you uploaded any of these saves to the bugs forum for investigation? You make a lot of noise about the game being too easy without actually being proactive in getting it looked into. 

Apologies, I haven’t kept every single one of my last 20 saves over the last five years.

Here’s some quick instructions for SI to investigate an easy game:

1. Start new game

2. Investigate it

[Daveincid]

Just take a look in here. I was involved in this project.

 

[dannysheard]

24 minutes ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

I've argued this since the introduction of the gegenpress into FM - It has to be countered with players getting knackered or injured if managers persist on playing that style for 90 mins match on match. That's the biggest failing. Of course that approach is going to win games without that risk involved. Every team in the world would play this way constantly if there was no fear of burnout. 

If SI do this, they will be absolutely flooded with 'too many injuries' complaints, which has already, frustratingly, led them to reduce the injuries in game to 80% of real life, The sooner they put this back to close too 100% the better. These types of aggressive tactics need to have a consequence, otherwise there's no real strategy involved. 

100% agree on injuries at 100% and pressing teams getting knackered and being countered.

Ironically, the new fitness icons would hide this anyway as you can’t accurately tell how knackered your players are.

[craigmoore02]

12 minutes ago, Piksi#10 said:

156 people voted for this option. It's not like we're talking about 3 or 4 people here.

The majority of people that actually play this game will not be signed up to this forum let alone vote in this poll. They'll be blissfully unaware of the discussions about the ME or the AI. This poll is asinine. 

[Dagenham_Dave]

3 minutes ago, dannysheard said:

Apologies, I haven’t kept every single one of my last 20 saves over the last five years.

Here’s some quick instructions for SI to investigate an easy game:

1. Start new game

2. Investigate it

This is the answer I expected. 

[RandomGuy.]

11 minutes ago, bobbyb12345 said:

But if a counter-attacking 4-4-2 tactic is an exploit, then that is a problem.

True.

Not as if there's any high profile examples of a club vastly outperforming their "status" using a counter attacking 4-4-2 in real life in recent times.

[dannysheard]

14 minutes ago, Junkhead said:

You play only with Liverpool. A team that has literally just won the league with record points. You also said in your other thread that you don't do manual training because you're tempted to rest everyone and game the system by being in better condition than the opposition.

If you have saves where you think it's too easy, upload them. Everyone else should too. Then it won't be too easy anymore.

How hard is it?

Not hard enough.

[Deisler26]

This genuinely sounds like the chatter around Destiny 2 recently. 

The streamers were banging on about having harder raids and harder mechanics and we want to have something to do, because we're good and everyone else should just git gud like us

Bungie/Activision (at the time) acquiesced to their demands and the ideas that were put in, meant that over 50% of players, who had achieved the highest level last time, didn't this time and there was a lot of discontent around the playbase, because they'd bowed to a very small, but vocal subset

[rp1966]

1 hour ago, Junkhead said:

Who wants to play like this, really? 

Kids, generally. Just like back when I was one, the arrows in the tactic creator were a thing and I enjoyed blitzing all in my path with a tactic with a long forward arrow taking a speedy midfielder between the two strikers. (Yes, it was major exploit!)

Most people grow out of it and learn that FM is more about the journey than the destination.

 

[dannysheard]

12 minutes ago, Deisler26 said:

This genuinely sounds like the chatter around Destiny 2 recently. 

The streamers were banging on about having harder raids and harder mechanics and we want to have something to do, because we're good and everyone else should just git gud like us

Bungie/Activision (at the time) acquiesced to their demands and the ideas that were put in, meant that over 50% of players, who had achieved the highest level last time, didn't this time and there was a lot of discontent around the playbase, because they'd bowed to a very small, but vocal subset

Can you mod that game to make it harder or is it one size fits all?

[Deisler26]

Just now, dannysheard said:

Can you mod that game to make it harder or is it one size fits all?

One size fits all

[dannysheard]

15 minutes ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

This is the answer I expected. 

This is the problem, though.

Lots of us find the game way too easy. Not just one season or one save or one version. Every time we play it.

With a wide range of teams and a wide range of sensible tactics.

[Haribo1681]

Just now, rp1966 said:

Kids, generally. Just like back when I was one, the arrows in the tactic creator were a thing and I enjoyed blitzing all in my path with a tactic with a long forward arrow taking a speedy midfielder between the two strikers. (Yes, it was major exploit!)

Most people grow out of it and learn that FM is more about the journey than the destination.

 

Those were the days. I fondly remember playing Champ Man Italia where 4-3-1-2 was the formation of choice. Whoever you placed in the hole would be a goalscoring god.

I vaguely remember one from either 96/97 or 97/98 that involved two CMs sprinting forward either side of a single St. Ah, good times.

Anyway, back to work.

[swippy]

Honestly I would be fine even with artificial difficulty increases, just to make the AI able to keep up with you. Such as morale boosts, better team cohesion for AI teams.

But honestly they should just make AI use more aggressive tactics and it would make a big difference.

Is there a weak team in some division that uses gegenpressing as a default tactic? It would be interesting experiment to watch their games in the ME and see if they overachieve similarly to a player team. If they don't, maybe there is something else under the hood that makes players so successful than just OP aggressive tactics.

Edited November 19, 2020 by swippy

[craiigman]

1 minute ago, swippy said:

Honestly I would be fine even with artificial difficulty increases, just to make the AI able to keep up with you. Such as morale boosts, better team cohesion for AI teams.

But honestly they should just make AI use more aggressive tactics and it would make a big difference.

Is there a weak team in some division that uses gegenpressing as a default tactic? It would be interesting experiment to watch their games in the ME and see if they overachieve similarly to a player team. If they don't, maybe there is something else under the hood that makes players so successful than just OP aggressive tactics.

I played LASK in Austria with Salzburg, game said they were playing Gegenpress. I smashed them 7-0.

[Junkhead]

42 minutes ago, Piksi#10 said:

156 people voted for this option. It's not like we're talking about 3 or 4 people here. Why do some here need to defend the current state so aggressively? This is not an attack on you, although it does say a lot that you can get offended by such a thread. 

We all love this game. I've been playing since 97/98 and I just want it to be as a good as it can be. I feel like we're really close now, but we just need a stronger AI. These same people programmed the AI to do all the great things it's doing already. Surely there is a way to get them to be even more efficient, be it through better team building, a more aggressive transfer market approach and more aggressive tactics in the ME. 

I play a regular 4-2-3-1 deep btw, with a pressing forward on top, an AP at CAM, an IF and IW on either side. BWD(D) and Segundo Volante and 2 wingbacks on support. No counter press, no extremely high line, no more urgent pressing etc. 

I'm not defending anything. I'm saying, repeatedly, if you think it's too easy then upload a save to the bugs forum.  I am rubbish at the game and actually want it to be a challenge even though I'm rubbish at it.

My gut also tells me that FM20 and this version were/are a bit easier than the ones before.

What I am also saying though - and I stand by this - is that people setting up an unrealistically attacking tactic off the internet aren't proving the game is too easy, they are proving that some tactics are overpowered. They should then upload those saves to the bugs forum. 

That's not defending the game, that's literally the opposite. Parts of it are clearly broken and some people have saves that prove it. We're in Beta, so upload the save or tactic to SI and let's get things fixed instead of bickering on a forum and running season long saves in holiday mode.

[vukigepard]

9 minutes ago, dannysheard said:

This is the problem, though.

Lots of us find the game way too easy. Not just one season or one save or one version. Every time we play it.

With a wide range of teams and a wide range of sensible tactics.

You have mastered the fm, congratulations. After a lot of different versions, you got good, your tactical knowledge increased, you know exactly which approach will be effective in the long run and work in fm. Enjoy it.

I do, i have played every version from the fm11 to the present and after that long i have learned what works and what doesn't, now i can fully enjoy that, and enjoy the ME. It's a game overall, when you master it, you find different aproach to enjoy it if you can't otherwise, have different goals or move on. For example i am more interested in influencing the fm gameworld, creating good players, improving a bad league than i'm in tactical matters.

But not everyone, not even in these polls where there is a specific group that has this problem opposed to majority of people now enjoying the fm playing it, wants the game to become harder, or to think of their Fm as their secondary job that becomes a chore if you want to become good.

[herne79]

54 minutes ago, dannysheard said:

Apologies, I haven’t kept every single one of my last 20 saves over the last five years.

Here’s some quick instructions for SI to investigate an easy game:

1. Start new game

2. Investigate it

Flippant answers get you nowhere.

If you want to be taken seriously, create a thread in the Bugs Forum.  In that thread you explain in detail exactly how you are playing the game such as your detailed tactics, how you have used the transfer system, how you manage morale, how you manage match day, your training programs and so on.   In other words detail precisely which aspects you have found to be easy.  You then also upload your game save.  Ideally you do all of this across multiple different game saves at different levels of football clubs.

This will allow SI to investigate exactly what you have seen and possible causes.

It is absolutely no use at all saying to SI "just start a new game and look yourselves" in the hope that they somehow magically stumble across the exact same methods you have been using in order to recreate what you have done.  Only you know how you have been playing the game, you need to tell them that so they can investigate precise issues.

And doing all of that will actually take you less effort than you have been putting into this thread and be infinitely more productive and constructive.

Just in case you or anyone else is concerned that SI will ignore such threads in the Bugs forum, speaking from my own personal experience as an ex-Moderator here I can guarantee you that not one single thread in that forum gets ignored and the more effort you put into making a constructive thread with detailed explanations and uploaded game saves with multiple examples, the more traction and attention you will get from the devs.  Moderators will also use their own communication channels into SI in order to help facilitate interaction if necessary.

So to everyone who finds the game easy - go on, play FM21, get some saves going where your season proves to be easy, start a thread in the Bugs forum, detail exactly how you have been playing and upload your game saves.  Then do it again and again and again because the more examples SI have the better they can investigate and design improvements.

Without people willing to do that all we have here is just a lot of noise which won't lead to anything at all apart from your own continued frustrations.

[enigmatic]

2 hours ago, johnsie said:

Who actually thinks that this is what players want to do? 

SI, based on extensive data to suggest an enormous number of players are casual and want to be able to turn on a gegenpressing default and play like Klopp whilst hardcore players fill threads with their aim to get from the bottom to the top in a way which essentially never happens IRL? Not to mention all those paranoid threads about the AI cheating or 'cracking' tactics when they see a very slight reversal of fortune from sides adjusting their tactics to treat the small club as a slightly bigger one (which was a massive deal for Leicester which cost Ranieri his job)

 

Realism works against difficulty too. Realism means other teams don't scout and sign cheap South American wonderkids and that nobody else will play with a flat three on attacking when expected to be in the bottom of the table, even though both of these lead to better results. And yet the human player moans that it's artificial handicaps when people suggest they don't do that...

Edited November 19, 2020 by enigmatic

[dannysheard]

3 minutes ago, vukigepard said:

You have mastered the fm, congratulations. After a lot of different versions, you got good, your tactical knowledge increased, you know exactly which approach will be effective in the long run and work in fm. Enjoy it.

I do, i have played every version from the fm11 to the present and after that long i have learned what works and what doesn't, now i can fully enjoy that, and enjoy the ME. It's a game overall, when you master it, you find different aproach to enjoy it if you can't otherwise, have different goals or move on. For example i am more interested in influencing the fm gameworld, creating good players, improving a bad league than i'm in tactical matters.

But not everyone, not even in these polls where there is a specific group that has this problem opposed to majority of people now enjoying the fm playing it, wants the game to become harder, or to think of their Fm as their secondary job that becomes a chore if you want to become good.

Fair enough.

I’d presumed the better players would want to see difficulty levels introduced, but it seems most of them don’t.

Apologies for turning into a keyboard warrior at times 😀

[badgith]

31 minutes ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

This is the answer I expected. 

It is normal you expected it, what would change if we put our saves here on the forum, if even miles arrive to a stream and start smashing, because he stopped the no brain tactic that the guys were using on the showdown. 

They don't need our saves to see that game is to easy, I don't even know how there is people argumenting the opposite, because for me is so clear that IA is not attacking in most of the games, that if you play something that create xG you will be winning. 

 

I have a cup match on curzhon asthon, I was Winning by 3, and it taked to the ia 85 minutes to try to do something, and I was not playing with a exploit, because there is no need of it on this fm. You gonna win because or something is broken in the game, or they trying to make it soft for casuals. It really hurts to see people arguing counter this, when more than 20 people provided information showing that we do not get a challenge, even changing things, if you know how to set up a tactic, it's win win win, and say wtv you want but fm isn't that, I'm all in for immersion, even restrict myself with rules, so I'm not expecting to go 6th tier and play defensive with a team set to relegation (even in real life) and still be leading the league. 

 

I don't even get the ones that say "dont play high line or smthg along this lines" , how I'm I supposed to react to a 2-0 from the opposition? Si need to fix it, we already have 1 year of op gengenpress, I guess they don't need our saves, they know the problem, miles was the ultimate proof . 

[vukigepard]

1 minute ago, dannysheard said:

Fair enough.

I’d presumed the better players would want to see difficulty levels introduced, but it seems most of them don’t.

Apologies for turning into a keyboard warrior at times 😀

No needs for apology. Difficulty levels could potentialy appease everyone, but i don't think SI will ever go with that approach

[Junkhead]

1 minute ago, dannysheard said:

Fair enough.

I’d presumed the better players would want to see difficulty levels introduced, but it seems most of them don’t.

Apologies for turning into a keyboard warrior at times 😀

There are difficulty modes, but people don't like it when it's pointed out.

Barcelona/Bayern/Liverpool = win the top league quickly

Sevilla/Gladbach/Southampton = a bit longer

Huesca/Union Berlin/Fulham = harder

Hospitalet/Sandhousen/Leamington = harder still

[RioImmagina]

1 ora fa, bobbyb12345 ha scritto:

But if a counter-attacking 4-4-2 tactic is an exploit, then that is a problem.

Correct. You can create this tactic easily, starting with a standard 4-4-2 and step-by-step tweaking roles and duties. In the second year you will dominate.

We're not talkin about a very absurd tactic like a 4-0-6 or a 1-2-4-3, something that NO ONE would do IRL. We are talking about a very easy to achive 442

[Junkhead]

5 minutes ago, badgith said:

Si need to fix

Agreed. Can you link your thread in the bugs forum so we can have a read of what is happening?

[bobbyb12345]

13 minutes ago, Junkhead said:

There are difficulty modes, but people don't like it when it's pointed out.

Barcelona/Bayern/Liverpool = win the top league quickly

Sevilla/Gladbach/Southampton = a bit longer

Huesca/Union Berlin/Fulham = harder

Hospitalet/Sandhousen/Leamington = harder still

But those "win the top league quickly" teams shouldn't be *easy* either.

And, as someone who's been managing a Scottish third division side, the "harder still" options have still been incredibly easy.

[badgith]

7 minutes ago, Junkhead said:

Agreed. Can you link your thread in the bugs forum so we can have a read of what is happening?

As I said is pointless to do it, I'm not the first, neither the second with the problem, I even saw some threads about this being ignored on the bugs section. 

 

Why would they need my save if I started 2 in very different circumstances, with 2 different tactics, and I overarchieved in the 2? 

 

I buy this game for more than 10 years, this is not a bug, this is doing the game easy, so why would I report it as a bug if seems more like an approach from SI? 

[vukigepard]

21 minutes ago, RioImmagina said:

Correct. You can create this tactic easily, starting with a standard 4-4-2 and step-by-step tweaking roles and duties. In the second year you will dominate.

We're not talkin about a very absurd tactic like a 4-0-6 or a 1-2-4-3, something that NO ONE would do IRL. We are talking about a very easy to achive 442

It's really hard for me to understand when an experienced fm player that has played probably 1000's of hours of different versions has a suprised pikachu face when his tactical set up proves to be good and effective, and then goes on to the forums to complain about the game he spent his good portion of life being easy. You already know all about the morale, form, types of attributes that you need, what is a good tactical set up, how hidden attributes work, what ppm's are useful, opposition instructions, roles, how the ai plays, how to build a team. And if you want to be just average with that knowledge, that is a problem, because at that point, there is nothing left to make you good except fishing for exploits.

And at that point, all you are asking for is more rng, more randomness, that the result from certain play style could go either way, and that is a very bad idea that has frustrated a lot of people in fm19 and 20

Edited November 19, 2020 by vukigepard

[Junkhead]

3 minutes ago, badgith said:

As I said is pointless to do it, I'm not the first, neither the second with the problem, I even saw some threads about this being ignored on the bugs section. 

 

Why would they need my save if I started 2 in very different circumstances, with 2 different tactics, and I overarchieved in the 2? 

 

I buy this game for more than 10 years, this is not a bug, this is doing the game easy, so why would I report it as a bug if seems more like an approach from SI? 

[Junkhead]

6 minutes ago, bobbyb12345 said:

But those "win the top league quickly" teams shouldn't be *easy* either.

And, as someone who's been managing a Scottish third division side, the "harder still" options have still been incredibly easy.

That's not been my experience in the past, but I am not a good measuring stick because I play differently to most people and am not very good at the game.

If you've got a save where this is happening, I'd upload it as @herne79has suggested 👍

[swippy]

25 minutes ago, Junkhead said:

There are difficulty modes, but people don't like it when it's pointed out.

Barcelona/Bayern/Liverpool = win the top league quickly

Sevilla/Gladbach/Southampton = a bit longer

Huesca/Union Berlin/Fulham = harder

Hospitalet/Sandhousen/Leamington = harder still

But Sevilla/Gladbach/Southampton are the kind of teams you can win the league with during the first season with absolute minimal effort, just use the gegenpress preset. How does it take longer than with Liverpool? I mean you'll probably draw or lose a couple times more but it doesn't delay winning the title more than a few matches.

 

And cruising through the lower leagues makes it take longer yes...but IMO the matter of easy is not about how long something takes but how much effort goes in it. My wish is that doing smart transfers, scouting, training, man management and most importably tweaking your tactics makes the difference in being successful and not. As is right now you can ignore half of the game features just because how easy it is to succeed.

 

 

Edited November 19, 2020 by swippy

[Christmas]

I'm just been promoted with Huesca and am about to finish in the euro spots LA LIGA with a mostly good or leading second division team (and, bizzare, Moise Kean on loan).

My complaint on difficulty is that I play the same tactic every single game. Whether bottom Eibar at home or Barcelone away same mega attacking tactic (not the famous one and no PIs). Yet I'm in 3st spot.

I dont want a 'difficult' game where I lose all the time, of course SI would make no money with so.

But I want to be punished for my style. SI talk of tinkering to match opponent, reacting to specific challenge. Does you player have big matches. New FM21 feature, my defender is worried he is not as strong as opponent ST. This is all great stuff.

But do we as players have any reason to belief it is true? NO. 

I do not believe that improvements by putting thought is to game is true. Same tactic, click button, win win win win win. Ps my strikers only have 17 goals (shows not a famous cheat tactic) but I am league top scorer and 6th best defence).

Maybe the discussion is wrong. I don't want a 'harder game' more difficult game. But I want to be made to think about football when I play FM, and how best to utilise football ideas and knowledge.

Maybe FM give us some tools to do that, better than ever before, but still gives no NEED or BENEFIT to do that.

[Junkhead]

3 minutes ago, swippy said:

But Sevilla/Gladbach/Southampton are the kind of teams you can win the league with during the first season with absolute minimal effort, just use the gegenpress preset. How does it take longer than with Liverpool? I mean you'll probably draw or lose a couple times more but it doesn't delay winning the title more than a few matches.

 

And cruising through the lower leagues makes it take longer yes...but IMO the matter of easy is not about how long something takes but how much effort goes in it. My wish is that doing smart transfers, scouting, training, man management and most importably tweaking your tactics makes the difference in being successful and not. As is right now you can ignore half of the game features just because how easy it is to succeed.

 

 

Fair enough. Have you uploaded a save where this is happening?

[Junkhead]

This thread;

Everyone - we think the game should be a realistic challenge.

Person A - I find it very easy.

Person B - That's bad. Are you cheating?

Person A - No.

Person B - then you should upload your save, no one wants it to be easy.

Person A - No.

Person A - posts again later in the thread moaning it's too easy.

[Christmas]

I think you are very confused about what good uploading a save would do in bug fixing for such a wide issue. There is no ingame editor now so can't cheat with that. Game Status shows number of saves. 

I do not have the view you have a valid point, at all.

[herne79]

23 minutes ago, Junkhead said:

There are difficulty modes, but people don't like it when it's pointed out.

Barcelona/Bayern/Liverpool = win the top league quickly

Sevilla/Gladbach/Southampton = a bit longer

Huesca/Union Berlin/Fulham = harder

Hospitalet/Sandhousen/Leamington = harder still

To an extent I'd agree however sometimes people want to play as Barca/Bayern/Liverpool and still want "hard mode".  So "hard mode" can actually be much more interesting and varied than just picking a "harder" team.  For example:

1)  Lots of talk about playing attacking football.  ok, then design a tactical system which uses no TIs and PIs, the Balanced mentality (or harder yet, the Defensive mentality) but without playing 3 strikers or overloading the AMC position with multiple attacking players, but still play attacking football.

2)  Lots of talk about gegenpress too.  So fine, design a tactical gegenpress system in a similar vein as the attacking system above - so use very limited TIs and PIs.

3)  "Hard mode" can also be transferred over to other aspects of the game.  Have a self imposed limit on your transfer and wage budgets.  Have attribute masking turned on and limit how many scouts you employ.  Allocate all scouting responsibility to your Chief Scout and limit any requests to him that would not blow your newly created wage structure.  Limit your loanees.  Hand over all training responsibilities to your assistant.  Stop trying to create robots and have some players with less than optimal personalities (maybe even have a bad egg or two).  Only purchase players who are transfer listed.

That's just a few off the top of my head and none of that is really beyond the bounds of realism either.  Hell we could even start a "Hard Mode" challenge in the Challenges forum just to see how far people could take this.  There are so many possibilities.

And of course if, after all of that, people still find it easy - upload the game saves with detailed explanations to the Bugs Forum and say "hey SI, here are examples of where we believe the game could be more challenging".

[Christmas]

But why should a football manager think, OK I cannot tell individual players what to do? That doesn't improve FM the game at all, it just provides challenges. Some people like forced challenges/achievements. OK. Some people want to improve FM the game

[The Basque]

I try to explain some more points with the bad english of a german (half turkish).

I explained the main problem some pages before. And i do believe it's very difficult for SI to make the game harder. 

A good start would be a realistic amount of injuries and disregard the players wich are crying. ^^

 

Next point is that the main problem startet with implementing fixed Player Roles and Playing Styles.

Back in the days i played a lot of online-tournaments and in fact, i was the best. Won several titels with up to 40 attendees. It was FM11-13.

The point was, i was winnig because of lead of knowledge about FM and tactics. I created for example an own formation, wich does not appear in FM. 4-1-2-2-1 (with 1 CDM, 2 CM and 2 CAM). 

It was possible to tune up things with player insctructions to be better than others, even with worse teams. 

In Online Saves with up to 4 guys, i made the same successful experience.

 

In the last years almonst everyone, i am playing with, can mess with me. 

And that's not because i am getting worse and not because of everyone is now a Arrigo Sacchi.

Back in the days you could even have a lead only because of figuring out the better training or analyse the next opponent. Slider-Era!

 

I startet (2008) with a weekend only reading about FM using the Tactical Theorems and Framework. Learning that everything has influence, even pitch condition...weather and so on.

Nowadays all the things are not that important anymore. 

 

You can break it down to

- Less injuries

- Gegenpressing combined with Offensive duty

- High Coach Attribute like former National Player and UEFA licence. 

 

No need for analysis, match preperation, good scouting (wich was also more difficult in the past), not even training. Let the assistant do it and everything will be ok xD

 

What i wish is, that it makes a difference whether i am an expert or not. 

Please don't get me wrong. It's not the point that i think i am an FM Guru, there are others for sure, but it should matter if i am able to analyse, prepar (including training) and scout, or not. 

 

The main point is, that it is much much more joy to win a title if you must do a lot of coaching and invest time in it. That's the beauty of success. Not click and go!

Edited November 19, 2020 by The Basque

[upthetoon]

2 hours ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

I've argued this since the introduction of the gegenpress into FM - It has to be countered with players getting knackered or injured if managers persist on playing that style for 90 mins match on match. That's the biggest failing. Of course that approach is going to win games without that risk involved. Every team in the world would play this way constantly if there was no fear of burnout. 

If SI do this, they will be absolutely flooded with 'too many injuries' complaints, which has already, frustratingly, led them to reduce the injuries in game to 80% of real life, The sooner they put this back to close too 100% the better. These types of aggressive tactics need to have a consequence, otherwise there's no real strategy involved. 

fantastic post. straight to the jugular.

have also been saying that gegenpress must have more penalty when playing with players with low stamina, natural fitness, concentration, decision.
right now, gegenpress works regardless of player attributes. logically, an obscure team should never be able to play a gegenpress system as they will never have the players for it.

[Junkhead]

22 minutes ago, Christmas said:

I think you are very confused about what good uploading a save would do in bug fixing for such a wide issue. There is no ingame editor now so can't cheat with that. Game Status shows number of saves. 

I do not have the view you have a valid point, at all.

Fair enough, happy to agree to disagree.

If your alternative is to moan about it on here though, that will do even less good. 🙄

[MrPompey]

When people talk about wanting FM to be harder, exactly what do they mean?  Since CM / FM began, the ability to get a non-league side into the Champions league has always been an FM possibility but 99.99% unrealistic in real life. The other options include:

1) no data editing

2) no FM Scout

3) no reading of FM's best Super Kids

4) no reading of forums detailing super tactics, corner bugs, etc

5) no save, play, reload

Would FM gamers really be happy grinding out season after season in the same league like many clubs do in real life? There is no difficulty setting that some games have, we know a real life manager manages his squad so much better than the AI manager

One of the most consistent asks for each FM release is better AI Squad management, I suspect you could also add a request for better AI Management of tactics during matches. I'd say harder releases for the FM Manager will only likely occur as a direct result of better AI Squad Management and AI Tactics. I think this is the answer going forwards

I dont really think we want any ME changes for FM21 as this looks like one of the best

 

 

[Daveincid]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Dagenham_Dave:

I've argued this since the introduction of the gegenpress into FM - It has to be countered with players getting knackered or injured if managers persist on playing that style for 90 mins match on match. That's the biggest failing. Of course that approach is going to win games without that risk involved. Every team in the world would play this way constantly if there was no fear of burnout. 

If SI do this, they will be absolutely flooded with 'too many injuries' complaints, which has already, frustratingly, led them to reduce the injuries in game to 80% of real life, The sooner they put this back to close too 100% the better. These types of aggressive tactics need to have a consequence, otherwise there's no real strategy involved. 

I warmly encourage everybody in this thread  to take some minutes, use my custom injuries-file. open fm20 and simulate it for 1 or 2 months and then open the injuries overview of your club or the league. First screenshot of the injuries-table gets a thumb up

injuries ad absurdum.fmf

[pheelf]

Some of the results being posted here are really making a mockery of this game which is quite a sad state of affairs.

It seems like we are eternally destined to travel in this vicious circle.

Every version that is released is a reaction to the main issues within the previous version.

In FM20, people were railing about strikers constantly missing one on ones so they worked on that for FM21 and now people are complaining that there are too many goals being scored and that the game is too easy. This is the opposite to what happened between FM18 and FM19.

The only way I can conceive of actually breaking this cycle is to re-imagine this game and overhaul a lot of the systems that the game uses.

Having difficulty levels or nerfing aspects of the ME are never going to truly address the issue. Adding difficulty levels begins to veer this game away from being a simulation and more into an arcade title which I'm sure the majority of people arguing for a more difficult game don't actually want. For a direct comparison with a game in the same genre, there was difficulty levels in the FIFA Manager series, they didn't actually make the game any harder though because the AI was poor.

Be careful what you wish for with wanting difficulty levels, the only difficulty levels I've observed in computer games involve the AI cheating in some way. All that difficulty levels do is reduce the granularity of ways in which you can win, they don't actually make the game any 'harder'. For e.g. take the Civilization series which has difficulty levels. Players which play on the highest difficulty have a very narrow way of winning which results in them all playing the game in exactly the same way and min-maxing because any deviation from that results in them losing. That doesn't make the game fundamentally any harder, all it does is it drives players towards doing everything in a very methodical way which once you've mastered makes even playing on the hardest level easy.

Apply difficulty levels to FM and what you would end up with is all players using tactics which provide some kind of path to overcome the inherent advantages programmed into the AI on the higher levels which isn't all that different to where we are now. There is a reason why all these results are being produced with overly attacking tactics and that is because the AI doesn't have an effective way of countering them. The AI is not programmed to deal with teams which are considered relegation candidates playing a gegenpress style. No AI team which is a relegation candidate would ever play such a style.

In fact, the AI is programmed very simplistically when it comes to tactics. Higher reputation, play on a higher mentality, lower reputation, play on a lower mentality. The issue being that the counter to an attacking style in game is actually playing an attacking style and not a defensive style which intuitively would make more sense and is how teams in real life would play. Attacking styles leave a lot of space when attacking, so if the ball is turned over there is much more space for the weaker team to attack.

This is a problem because every system you can conceive of playing should have strengths and weaknesses. At the moment, that doesn't really seem to be the case as the AI has very fixed ways of playing and are incapable of punishing these attacking setups. Teams playing with 3 strikers should be the easiest to program the AI to be able to counter, just give the defensive line the PIs to play more direct and to the flanks.

If you feel that changing aspects of the ME will solve this problem then that also has issues. Fixing the ME is akin to playing 'whack-a-mole'. You fix one issue and that creates another issue leading to the vicious circle I mentioned earlier. The problem is that it doesn't matter how much you fine-tune the ME, the basis upon which it is built is flawed and until you address those flaws you're not going to get any closer to a better simulation.

The only thing which would work to make the game more difficult is actually improving the AI which can only happen when the average customer has a computer which can handle it. The more options the AI can 'see' the better it will become but in order to 'see' those options you need processing power.

I think steps were being made with the move to stadia but then again those aren't supercomputers, so aren't really the step change which many were perhaps hoping for.

Both sides of this argument make valid points. I can understand why people from a pragmatic point of view would suggest that if you want to get realistic results that you don't use tactics which you know exploit the ME and give your team an unfair advantage. On the other hand however, I can see the other side of the argument, why should you neuter the way you want to play the game when all your doing is using the same tools that are available to the AI?

It's not the users fault that certain tactics are OP, they are more efficient in the transfer market than the AI, can rotate their players properly, know how to train and develop players etc. The problem isn't that the user can do those things, the problem is that the AI can't. 

Maybe a compromise can be sought with allowing players to decide how much detail they want with the calculations the AI makes. You give the AI a longer processing time, it allows them to go through a larger range of choices which could lead them to making better choices overall. Possibly even include breaks in the progression of a match. For e.g. Your team scores early, the game is paused and the AI then has 30s to run through its options and make changes to counter how the game is going. It would make for a much slower game but then again if people want a stronger AI then maybe they have to be willing to put up with that. This is much like how it works with computer chess, the longer you give the AI to go through all the possible permutations, the stronger the move they decide to make tends to be.

I don't want to sound pessimistic but the whole purpose of this thread and poll is kind of a moot point anyway. How much improvement do you think it's possible for them to make to the AI in such a short space of time between the beta and the full release? The only changes which could happen in such a short period of time would be nerfing which as I stated earlier just perpetuates the same cycle.

All the best

Edited November 19, 2020 by pheelf