Still too easy?

[Mars_Blackmon]

2 hours ago, Junkhead said:

See this is what I don't get. You are having a realistic experience using realistic tactics with a side that is 19th IRL. It looks to me like you are only 5 games in.

Their real manager is battling against relegation, as are you.

Wealdstone will not be playing a high press attacking tactic IRL.  

This is about the level of club I usually manage at and the results I tend to get. Winning the champions league with Wealdstone as a starting position should be ridiculously hard. Winning it with Wealdstone should be nigh on impossible.

This is why I am not convinced that the game is too easy.  Realistic input tends to mean realistic output.

It does appear that overly attacking tactics are overpowered Vs AI.  The issue is this is how most users naturally play. An overly attacking tactic with Wealdstone is unrealistic. I honestly think this is where the issue is here - people want it to be easier than it should be and are aware of overpowered tactics. They use them and then say that it shouldn't be that easy despite (purposely or not) them using overpowered tactics.

If things are overpowered, report it. If it's already been reported, hopefully it will be fixed.

Using a preferred tactic isn’t applying unrealistic input. Just like in real life, there are some managers who fit players into their tactics and there are managers who fit their tactics to the players. The problem is that some tactics are more OP than others because attributes do not matter as much as they should.

[Junkhead]

6 minutes ago, Mars_Blackmon said:

Using a preferred tactic isn’t applying unrealistic input. Just like in real life, there are some managers who fit players into their tactics and there are managers who fit their tactics to the players. The problem is that some tactics are more OP than others because attributes do not matter as much as they should.

I generally don't disagree with what you are saying. And I 100% agree that some tactics are overpowered and should be fixed. And I want the challenge to be as great as possible.

But playing as Wealdstone using a tactic which relegation threatened sides at that level use is going to produce similar results.  It's just that it shouldn't be as easy as telling the user to switch to an attacking/pressing tactic.  But the issue is going to be that not everyone wants a realistic experience.  They just want to win.

Although we have disagreed at times across these multiple threads, I think we can both agree that what we both ultimately want is a realistic experience.

[Mars_Blackmon]

20 minutes ago, Junkhead said:

I generally don't disagree with what you are saying. And I 100% agree that some tactics are overpowered and should be fixed. And I want the challenge to be as great as possible.

But playing as Wealdstone using a tactic which relegation threatened sides at that level use is going to produce similar results.  It's just that it shouldn't be as easy as telling the user to switch to an attacking/pressing tactic.  But the issue is going to be that not everyone wants a realistic experience.  They just want to win.

Although we have disagreed at times across these multiple threads, I think we can both agree that what we both ultimately want is a realistic experience.

And that’s the problem and why some think it’s too easy. If you’re a team that’s fighting relegation, then your main objective is to not concede too much and stay out of the relegation zone. Finishing above relegation when you were predicted to drop down is overachieving and should be celebrated as if you won the league IMO…

 

You would probably finish at a realistic position if you were to use a more defensive tactic (“realistic input”)  as a bottom team but what’s the incentive for using a lesser tactic when you get better results from using a more offensive tactic? In reality, going more offensive with a lesser team should result in a lot of conceded goals and probably relegated considering the amount of risk you are taking with lesser quality of players.

[zindrinho]

But then again, how many FM'ers gonna want to set up their team for beautiful zonal marking, short distances both in and between lines and then go for the occational counter attack?
When you lay in bed and cant sleep yet you picture exploiting space, drawing defenders out and creating havoc in the oppositions area, not grinding out a 0-0 in a 5-4-1 with no attempts on goal.

Since pressing is so rewarding maybe the AI managers could be set to press more by default, so that the ones who usually stands off more just closes you down a tad more. I've struggled a few times against Sheff U pressing my players and man marking me with their physical approach, all my creative players were left with their backs to the goal, forced to pass backwards. Had a lot of fun trying to work around it tho!

[Junkhead]

1 hour ago, zindrinho said:

grinding out a 0-0 in a 5-4-1 with no attempts on goal.

This is literally the best some of us can hope for 

[Junkhead]

1 hour ago, zindrinho said:

Since pressing is so rewarding maybe the AI managers could be set to press more by default, so that the ones who usually stands off more just closes you down a tad more. I've struggled a few times against Sheff U pressing my players and man marking me with their physical approach, all my creative players were left with their backs to the goal, forced to pass backwards. Had a lot of fun trying to work around it tho!

I am not 100% how the game works, but I suspect that the reason pressing is overpowered is because individual players don't adapt during the game. I suspect (again, might be wrong) that each "press" is an isolated event and eventually mistakes are forced by random chance, or other calculations.  In a real match, a defender would adapt to being pressed, or those around him would adapt their positions to give him an "out" without being told to do so by a manager. This would be natural behaviour.

[zindrinho]

2 hours ago, Junkhead said:

 In a real match, a defender would adapt to being pressed, or those around him would adapt their positions to give him an "out" without being told to do so by a manager. This would be natural behaviour.

Exactly, we as managers have to decide how the players should adapt, when the AI man marks your entire team (at least it feels like it) it can be pretty hard to pass the ball around, I noticed Sheff U were really well suited for that style under the AI Chris WIlder.

When the opposition just sits back and let you play around their penalty box its much easier to win IMO, so even though it could be boring after a while that the AI only uses more pressing/tighter marking at least it could make the game harder (for me)

[twattyatkins]

'Is it still too easy?' - I'm currently managing Chippenham Town in the Vanarama South and can confirm that it's pretty flippin' far from easy

[Outrospective]

So, after 28 games with Wealdstone I'm at 15th place and hope that the survival is possible.

I still consider the game far from easy though.

[sthptngomad76]

On 23/03/2021 at 05:41, Tyburn said:

Why not just start with a “base” that the game provides you with? At least then you can be sure that there are no “exploits” ingrained in the tactic.

IMO anything downloaded is going to have certain tweaks that are designed to “beat” the system. You may edit those out I guess, but then why bother downloading it at all?

Is it too much to ask for a game that doesn't require human players to avoid particular tactics not to dominate?

Could we not have a system that is a little more sophisticated?

I can remember playing CM 93-94, waltzing the league with QPR with my odd formation that I learnt from a gamers mag. Sure, they were simpler times.

But its been nearly 30 years from that. Programming and AI has come leaps and bounds since then. I don't care even if SI resorted to sliders, or overpowered AI to defeat super human tactics. Anything to keep my attention in an era where I can go off and find another game that I feel frustrates me a little, but keeps me playing. Without the whole charade being broken by easily replicating a series of tactical inputs I can find on Steam, and then dominating the football leagues with Bradford PA without signing a player.

I just want that feeling of enticing frustration again, without it knowing that I can simply download a tactic and dominate. I want results to rely on things other than just a tactical input- the chase of better players, morale management, coaching. It's 2021, we don't need to be doing this "let's pretend not to break the game to have fun" stuff.

Edited March 26, 2021 by sthptngomad76

[laurentius82]

 

It's too easy.

Edited March 26, 2021 by laurentius82

[Abysmal]

Not sure if I've created myself an unbelievable tactic but I've just thrashed League 1 Sunderland in the FA cup with my national league Wrexham... Granted im predicted to finish first in the league but still.

[baris28]

As previously mentioned if stamina, workrate, and some physical attributes would contribute to pressing I will be more convinced about ME, and still good headers from players they shouldn't, long shots and goals are bit still too much. It is ongoing process I believe. This years engine much better but I think SI look for attributes next year. AI maybe following year? Who knows..

[Pelz]

On 25/03/2021 at 21:10, twattyatkins said:

'Is it still too easy?' - I'm currently managing Chippenham Town in the Vanarama South and can confirm that it's pretty flippin' far from easy

Dabbled with Chippenham a week or so ago... that squad is bloody awful 

[bazhsw]

On 26/03/2021 at 08:54, sthptngomad76 said:

Is it too much to ask for a game that doesn't require human players to avoid particular tactics not to dominate?

Could we not have a system that is a little more sophisticated?

I can remember playing CM 93-94, waltzing the league with QPR with my odd formation that I learnt from a gamers mag. Sure, they were simpler times.

But its been nearly 30 years from that. Programming and AI has come leaps and bounds since then. I don't care even if SI resorted to sliders, or overpowered AI to defeat super human tactics. Anything to keep my attention in an era where I can go off and find another game that I feel frustrates me a little, but keeps me playing. Without the whole charade being broken by easily replicating a series of tactical inputs I can find on Steam, and then dominating the football leagues with Bradford PA without signing a player.

I just want that feeling of enticing frustration again, without it knowing that I can simply download a tactic and dominate. I want results to rely on things other than just a tactical input- the chase of better players, morale management, coaching. It's 2021, we don't need to be doing this "let's pretend not to break the game to have fun" stuff.

It's an interesting post this and I definitely get the point of view.  'If only SI made the game harder' is a valid suggestion and I get the perspective that 'there is 30 years of AI and programming' advances to exploit.  I have mentioned it before but there is a counterbalance to this...

 

30 years of fan development of tactics and how to play the game.  There are over 100,000 posts in the tactics forums, for nigh on 30 years there have been hundreds, maybe thousands of players building on the knowledge of how 'best' to play the game.  The 'knowledge' of how to 'beat' FM has grown exponentially at a far faster rate than SI's developers.  Player advice on how to set up tactics, how to maintain morale, how to hire, train is ingrained in the community.  The only way perhaps to make it 'hard' again would be a completely new game and engine from scratch.  The fanbase's desire to share and help has created the position some players are in now.  

Playing 'realistically' won't solve all those problems of course and every player has to make that choice about what is right (not aimed at you, but 'but I like a tactic where I put a GK in AML on all out attack swapping with the DR' sometimes feels a little unconvincing).

It's a shame of course but unless they start from scratch I don't see how it will change - for instance if there was a super hard AI in the next version two days after release someone would have looked under the hood at the hidden attributes, there would be a list of who they were in the game and a matrix of ten tactics to switch between depending on the behaviour of the AI.  Of course not every player would use these but indirectly, unless the player actively avoided all discussion of the game they still would indirectly benefit from the increased knowledge the community has about 'how to play'.

[twattyatkins]

19 hours ago, Pelz said:

Dabbled with Chippenham a week or so ago... that squad is bloody awful 

Yeah it's horrendous! Enjoying the challenge though

[busngabb]

It's always a difficult one this. The things SI could do to make the game more realistic would only worsen the game. For 95% of players they love the game when they're winning and hate it when they don't win. I know I'm like that. When you have those games where you lose at home and your team just does absolutely nothing all game and there are no highlights, you hate the game as much as the players. You unrealistically win 7-0 and you feel good. It's been mentioned already that if it was more realistic and you spent a 17 year career finishing mid table, becoming unpopular and ultimately getting sacked over and over despite doing everything you've been advised to do, you'd hate it even more.

My suggestion would be to improve the feedback from your staff a lot. They are professional staff and they should give you sound basic advice, the kind the mods and uber geeks on here give you on here. They should tell you the things to look at, even if they don't provide the perfect solution for you. They should also suggest how to train  and develop players better as at the moment it's just a case of assigning training focuses to players and those players being unhappy with them every two weeks. Once they improve the feedback and make it more obvious to players what is working and what is not working and why, they can then make it more difficult.

But how do you make it more difficult? In real life players are more volatile and managers lose the dressing room over minor things. It should be more difficult to sign players, for example if you manage as United you can sign Haaland, Sancho, Donnarumma and Upamecano in the first season or two easily. In real life they'd struggle terribly to get any of those, as we've seen with the last few transfer windows. A major signing can be completed in less than a week on FM. Imagine it took 18 months of negotiations, commercial discussions and media rights issues to resolve? Tactics could be made more impactful, so your tactical mistakes are more harshly dealt with. I'm not sure how doable that is as the current engine already seems extreme with going 3 or 4 down in 20 minutes for no obvious reason already a part of the game. All of these things will be a huge turn off to all but the most diehard experts of the game. The shout for difficulty levels is a valid one for me. Default would be as it is now, but you can lower it to a game where your players just improve to their full potential if you play them and where there are no tactics beyond the formation and attacking intent. Upping the difficulty could incorporate some of the features I mentioned above, making it more difficult to build a squad, making it almost impossible to keep players happy and making it very difficult tactically.

I still think making it more challenging is unlikely to be a good commercial decision for SI. The 5% who've figured the game out might appreciate it, the average user who is suddenly getting sacked rather than gleefully collecting trophies with his plug and play high line gegenpress 4-2-3-1 as Swindon or United are going to hate it and stop playing. So are those who just win by assembling a fantasy squad and playing with a default formation.

Edited March 27, 2021 by busngabb
spelling

[99]

14 minutos atrás, busngabb disse:

It's been mentioned already that if it was more realistic and you spent a 17 year career finishing mid table, becoming unpopular and ultimately getting sacked over and over despite doing everything you've been advised to do, you'd hate it even more.

Exactly! Most manager's careers IRL are like that, FM can't be like that, incredibly frustrating.

[Mars_Blackmon]

For every manager that spent 10+ years struggling to get a promotion, there is one that shot up the ladder very fast.

All people want is a sense of an accomplishment. 
 

not to mention if someone wants to win right away then they should be selecting a team that’s predicted to be at the top.

 

edit- I think a good addition would be the ability to test a tactic out anytime during the season against  your U23 or Second XI squad 

[baris28]

When the simulation has this much sales it won't be a simulation. Just a game for everyone to enjoy. But AI department needs a bit of work, severe ME problems have been mostly solved. Maybe next  year opponent manager AI should be looked at.

[Outrospective]

So, I've finished the first season with Wealding on the 16th place, playing direct counter (balanced home, cautious away).

Started second season, won five matches out of the first seven with nearly same tactic. Too easy, case closed /s

[sthptngomad76]

8 hours ago, bazhsw said:

It's an interesting post this and I definitely get the point of view.  'If only SI made the game harder' is a valid suggestion and I get the perspective that 'there is 30 years of AI and programming' advances to exploit.  I have mentioned it before but there is a counterbalance to this...

 

30 years of fan development of tactics and how to play the game.  There are over 100,000 posts in the tactics forums, for nigh on 30 years there have been hundreds, maybe thousands of players building on the knowledge of how 'best' to play the game.  The 'knowledge' of how to 'beat' FM has grown exponentially at a far faster rate than SI's developers.  Player advice on how to set up tactics, how to maintain morale, how to hire, train is ingrained in the community.  The only way perhaps to make it 'hard' again would be a completely new game and engine from scratch.  The fanbase's desire to share and help has created the position some players are in now.  

Playing 'realistically' won't solve all those problems of course and every player has to make that choice about what is right (not aimed at you, but 'but I like a tactic where I put a GK in AML on all out attack swapping with the DR' sometimes feels a little unconvincing).

It's a shame of course but unless they start from scratch I don't see how it will change - for instance if there was a super hard AI in the next version two days after release someone would have looked under the hood at the hidden attributes, there would be a list of who they were in the game and a matrix of ten tactics to switch between depending on the behaviour of the AI.  Of course not every player would use these but indirectly, unless the player actively avoided all discussion of the game they still would indirectly benefit from the increased knowledge the community has about 'how to play'.

I can get that too, but the rate of AI development in gaming across 30 years coupled with increase in PC processing power could surely outpace that of the Football Manager player forum?

Let's say that you were right though, and say the Programmers couldn't develop an engine that could counter all tactics- I would take an additional difficulty with 'rubber band logic' (overpowered AI etc) which, when balanced enough, could at least provide the illusion of a challenge. Surely that's attainable? It's been happening in other games for years.

[amadeo]

I'm have struggled playing with a top side in Denmark and a lower league side in Denmark as wel...far from easy. I know football, but apparently I can't crack FM 21 tactics!!! 

[Svenc]

9 hours ago, sthptngomad76 said:

 

Let's say that you were right though, and say the Programmers couldn't develop an engine that could counter all tactics- I would take an additional difficulty with 'rubber band logic' (overpowered AI etc) which, when balanced enough, could at least provide the illusion of a challenge. Surely that's attainable? It's been happening in other games for years.

I personally think that's a very bad suggestion. One of the strenghts of FM is indeed that it never had done such rubberbanding. Of course, this also means that there's a "one size for all" kind of AI, and with FM players you still have many who confuse having more shots/possession/(and now xG) was all there ever was to match management (the AI has always had an edge over any such player, as it actually reacts to events/scorelines/time left on the clock during a match with subs and tactical shifts).

Besides, there are numerous theories about AI cheating/rubberbanding as is. Funnily in parts because it's always that attainable/easy to just waltz the leagues (download a trial&error tested wildly popular and available AI/ME busting super tactic from someplace, push continue, consistently every season far outperform any player ability, climb the tables). 

In fact, it's often the players who have continued success beyond all ability who go for such theory. The logic being: "My tactic / management is obviously this superior to the AI, and it's so easy to do too, all it can do to stop me winning the league from the get go with West Ham is my forwards having a couple additional scripted shockers, and the AI scoring with every few shots".

The irony is, of course, should the AI itself actually improve, the theory of scripting/rubberbanding/AI cheating would still increase alongside to it, as it would win additionally points from all players.

 

edit: And speaking about super tactics, if the AI were to one day use knap tactics (/as suggested here), the game would be dead. Awkward to defend super tactics exploiting ME defensive issues and as such outperforming all player ability from the get go had been one of the reasons why FM Live is dead now (imagine you had built a decent squad over years, only for a couple newbies to the game to download an ME buster and lol over it right from the bat.

Edited March 28, 2021 by Svenc

[majesticeternity]

FM really just needs better squad building, along with more adjustments to your tactics. Like AI marking your players out of the game, or going more attacking even when it’s 0-0 in a knockout at 70mins left, or going more defensive when you put more players up front. If both things were improved, it may be then later on still easy to win, but it will feel more like you earned it cuz you had to adjust and watch and react and plan, rather than just setting up a tactic and letting the match run, or picking up 10/10 wonderkids.

[sthptngomad76]

21 hours ago, Svenc said:

I personally think that's a very bad suggestion. One of the strenghts of FM is indeed that it never had done such rubberbanding. Of course, this also means that there's a "one size for all" kind of AI, and with FM players you still have many who confuse having more shots/possession/(and now xG) was all there ever was to match management (the AI has always had an edge over any such player, as it actually reacts to events/scorelines/time left on the clock during a match with subs and tactical shifts).

Besides, there are numerous theories about AI cheating/rubberbanding as is. Funnily in parts because it's always that attainable/easy to just waltz the leagues (download a trial&error tested wildly popular and available AI/ME busting super tactic from someplace, push continue, consistently every season far outperform any player ability, climb the tables). 

In fact, it's often the players who have continued success beyond all ability who go for such theory. The logic being: "My tactic / management is obviously this superior to the AI, and it's so easy to do too, all it can do to stop me winning the league from the get go with West Ham is my forwards having a couple additional scripted shockers, and the AI scoring with every few shots".

The irony is, of course, should the AI itself actually improve, the theory of scripting/rubberbanding/AI cheating would still increase alongside to it, as it would win additionally points from all players.

 

edit: And speaking about super tactics, if the AI were to one day use knap tactics (/as suggested here), the game would be dead. Awkward to defend super tactics exploiting ME defensive issues and as such outperforming all player ability from the get go had been one of the reasons why FM Live is dead now (imagine you had built a decent squad over years, only for a couple newbies to the game to download an ME buster and lol over it right from the bat.

I'd love it, too, if it didn't have to come to rubberbanding. But at present, we have a game that is easily exploitable- I'd argue that it's become more pronounced in later years (the fisherman tactics of 18) though I remember the days of Diablo of 03/04 and the corner bugs of '08, and strikerless formations of '17, and if it means providing it as an additional setting, I'd take it, as at least it provide entertainment.

I wish that we had a match engine that was sophisticated enough, however, to counter tactics that get Chester a series of automatic promotions to the EPL- or at least a match engine that weighted aggregate skill level of a team more than just a tactic. It feels as though the players you have don't matter- you can have the least skilled side in a competition, yet dominate just because a series of (albeit unrealistic) inputs.

Edited March 29, 2021 by sthptngomad76

[Deisler26]

On 25/03/2021 at 14:18, zindrinho said:

grinding out a 0-0 in a 5-4-1 with no attempts on goal.

I would genuinely love an FM where you could do this. It happened a few years ago, but now, you invite too much pressure on yourself and there is *always* a goal

[Junkhead]

1 hour ago, sthptngomad76 said:

I'd love it, too, if it didn't have to come to rubberbanding. But at present, we have a game that is easily exploitable- I'd argue that it's become more pronounced in later years (the fisherman tactics of 18) though I remember the days of Diablo of 03/04 and the corner bugs of '08, and strikerless formations of '17, and if it means providing it as an additional setting, I'd take it, as at least it provide entertainment.

I wish that we had a match engine that was sophisticated enough, however, to counter tactics that get Chester a series of automatic promotions to the EPL- or at least a match engine that weighted aggregate skill level of a team more than just a tactic. It feels as though the players you have don't matter- you can have the least skilled side in a competition, yet dominate just because a series of (albeit unrealistic) inputs.

I mean people can just not download said tactics if they want a challenge. This is where there is disconnect within the thread. I want a challenge and know those tactics exist. I just don't use them.

The issue is that people are coming across the exploits directly and accidentally in their own games.

Can't help but feel that one way to decrease the impact whilst the match engine is improved would be to stop tactic sharing via steam. Granted this would be unpopular and people could just write direct instructions via text, but would be preferable to rubber banding imo.

[duesouth]

1 hour ago, Junkhead said:

I mean people can just not download said tactics if they want a challenge.

Tactics wise, I feel like some people playing this game are outstanding players.  But there are plenty out there who are just OK, or who struggle.  For those players who are struggling and do a quick search for FM tactics to download, that would tend to lead them to exploits - so perhaps we can forgive them rather.  But some people just want to win every game and will consciously download an exploit to "achieve" that - those people can't complain it's too easy - but in reality, they might lack the tactical knowledge to put together a decent tactic and won't spend the time and go through all the to figure it out.

For me, I would say I'm OK tactically - I've watched Daljit/Rashidi a bunch for FM21 and while I am not the grand master that he is, I think seeing how he assesses his squad at the start of a save or with a new club is something I now do (I'll spend a couple of hours or more before I press continue the first time in a save).  So, I've put together tactics that fit my playing squad - square holes/square pegs - and when I do that across quite a few saves now, I think the game is too easy.

The big problem for SI is trying to cater to people playing the game very differently - from complaining when they lose 2 games in a season - to people who really struggle with tactics and keep getting fired, leading to giving up the game and therefore not buying future editions.

In a perfect world, perhaps 2 versions of the ME would help - one where exploits are punished - and another where they aren't so much.  But I can't see SI wanting to double their development and bug fixing time by doing this.  However, if they don't they have the current problem - as soon as exploits are punished, a large percentage of their customers complain (and just go look at knap's thread - 3.1 MILLION views ) - but when they don't close the door on them, it's too easy.

I played CM when I was younger, but went away from it after CM03/04 as I didn't have a good enough PC.  I came back into it with FM19, but after buying FM20 and 21, I won't buy FM22, as - for me at least - the whole experience hasn't been great the last 2 years.  Even in this last lockdown, I've played very little FM21 as I've found very little challenge in the various saves I've tried and the same annoyances (complaining players really annoy me - but so many teams on a new save have too many important players/regular starters, so you know they'll be complaining soon and that has got old for me).  I think I've tried 7 or 8 different saves searching for something - and I ended up deciding it was the game not the saves.  But good luck SI fixing the problem - very difficult indeed and it seems no matter what they do they get slated.  Personally, I'd prefer it if they punished exploits with their ME and patched it to continue to battle them - but they won't as it would annoy too many customers.

[Mars_Blackmon]

2 hours ago, Junkhead said:

I mean people can just not download said tactics if they want a challenge. This is where there is disconnect within the thread. I want a challenge and know those tactics exist. I just don't use them.

The issue is that people are coming across the exploits directly and accidentally in their own games.

Can't help but feel that one way to decrease the impact whilst the match engine is improved would be to stop tactic sharing via steam. Granted this would be unpopular and people could just write direct instructions via text, but would be preferable to rubber banding imo.

So prettty much anyone who have some knowledge of how to create a functional tactic will find the game easy, players that can’t create a functional tactic with solidarity, support and penetration will struggle.

There is a problem when someone who played the game for the first time like Soulja Boy can use a in game preset tactic and win his first game without even making any in-game tactical adjustments (because the AI rarely does so)

[Svenc]

Just now, duesouth said:

The big problem for SI is trying to cater to people playing the game very differently - from complaining when they lose 2 games in a season - to people who really struggle with tactics and keep getting fired, leading to giving up the game and therefore not buying future editions.

I've previously argued before that they are actually simulating the perfect job. Real managers delegate all kinds of stuff to assistants if they want to, either due to time restrictions, a lack of commitment to a certain area of their job or even knowledge (including tactics, see Klinsmann and Löw, ten Cate under Rijkaard at Barceclona, etc.).

Assistant managers are AI all the same. Therefore ever improving AI would benefit everybody.

Edited March 29, 2021 by Svenc

[Junkhead]

5 hours ago, Mars_Blackmon said:

So prettty much anyone who have some knowledge of how to create a functional tactic will find the game easy, players that can’t create a functional tactic with solidarity, support and penetration will struggle.

There is a problem when someone who played the game for the first time like Soulja Boy can use a in game preset tactic and win his first game without even making any in-game tactical adjustments (because the AI rarely does so)

I agree that this is a problem. What is in dispute is why that is.

Do you think SI has accidentally created an out of the box tactic which exploits the ME?   

I have most success on the counter, and have had for many versions.  Anecdotally, I used a version of Gegenpress as Como earlier in this version having read lots of these threads. I lost nine league games in a row and drew the tenth before giving up.

I am honestly not sure it is as simple as an all encompassing "the AI doesn't attack enough". 

For the record though, I'm not saying there is no problem. 

 

[busngabb]

Looking at my current squad on FM and I'm now thinking the biggest issue with the game is the finanances and squad building. In the game it's just far too easy to build a super squad. You can sign 7 or 8 players that improve your side per season, even with a relatively modest transfer budget, just by abusing future fees and sell on clauses. Sure at some clubs that will have consequences, but at a lot of the bigger teams that people will use and those who grow and get taken over, the owner will just throw money in to cover it.

In my current save I'm only a few seasons in but I've only got about three players who were there when I joined. That kind of turnover can happen, but it's rare and it's very unlikely to be successful.

Having so much freedom as the manager with transfers is probably incredibly unrealistic. In real life Carlo Ancelotti isn't going to be ringing Delia and offering her £5m up front, £40m over the next 3 years and a 40% sell on clause for Max Aarons randomly one day. He'd have chats with Brands building up to the transfer window to identify the targets he feels the club needs, Brands would likely push back on those and there would be compromises. After establishing the budget and the areas needed, they'd then have meetings to identify the targets and prioritise them. Brands would then negotiate with Delia and Max Aarons would be signed a day before the window ends . He also wouldn't be able to say 'we need a right back and a world class centre-back' and then throw a £20m package in installments out for a South American wonderkid striker who hasn't been scouted and isn't known to the club.

As with my ealier post I'm not suggesting SI make it so hard to buy players that you sit tearing your hair out and throwing darts at pictures of your chairman. But just signing five wonderkids on big deals on installments with no scouting at all probably shouldn't be allowed. You should be given the budget, be able to ask for more etc. Then you should have to select what you need in the window and prioritise the targets and draw up a shortlist. E.g we need a left winger and a striker, 75% of the budget on the striker for the first team, 25% on the winger as backup. You choose the players you want, if you choose players who haven't been suggested by the scouts you should have to scout him first, even if it means waiting a window. The club then does the negotiations realistically. If you then spot that Lewandowski has been transfer listed or you want another player you should have to approach the board for that and the success would be based on your reputation, the finances and the need for the signing. It makes it more difficult, it would make youth development more valuable and it would add a challenge to the game. It would also open up media stories about the board backing the manager and allow ex-players to come out and say the club needs to spend and ex-managers to say they'd have won the league with that level of spending etc. It would also open up the kind of long-term stories you get with clubs trying to get a certain player over multiple windows.

[Mars_Blackmon]

48 minutes ago, busngabb said:

Looking at my current squad on FM and I'm now thinking the biggest issue with the game is the finanances and squad building. In the game it's just far too easy to build a super squad. You can sign 7 or 8 players that improve your side per season, even with a relatively modest transfer budget, just by abusing future fees and sell on clauses. Sure at some clubs that will have consequences, but at a lot of the bigger teams that people will use and those who grow and get taken over, the owner will just throw money in to cover it.

In my current save I'm only a few seasons in but I've only got about three players who were there when I joined. That kind of turnover can happen, but it's rare and it's very unlikely to be successful.

Having so much freedom as the manager with transfers is probably incredibly unrealistic. In real life Carlo Ancelotti isn't going to be ringing Delia and offering her £5m up front, £40m over the next 3 years and a 40% sell on clause for Max Aarons randomly one day. He'd have chats with Brands building up to the transfer window to identify the targets he feels the club needs, Brands would likely push back on those and there would be compromises. After establishing the budget and the areas needed, they'd then have meetings to identify the targets and prioritise them. Brands would then negotiate with Delia and Max Aarons would be signed a day before the window ends . He also wouldn't be able to say 'we need a right back and a world class centre-back' and then throw a £20m package in installments out for a South American wonderkid striker who hasn't been scouted and isn't known to the club.

As with my ealier post I'm not suggesting SI make it so hard to buy players that you sit tearing your hair out and throwing darts at pictures of your chairman. But just signing five wonderkids on big deals on installments with no scouting at all probably shouldn't be allowed. You should be given the budget, be able to ask for more etc. Then you should have to select what you need in the window and prioritise the targets and draw up a shortlist. E.g we need a left winger and a striker, 75% of the budget on the striker for the first team, 25% on the winger as backup. You choose the players you want, if you choose players who haven't been suggested by the scouts you should have to scout him first, even if it means waiting a window. The club then does the negotiations realistically. If you then spot that Lewandowski has been transfer listed or you want another player you should have to approach the board for that and the success would be based on your reputation, the finances and the need for the signing. It makes it more difficult, it would make youth development more valuable and it would add a challenge to the game. It would also open up media stories about the board backing the manager and allow ex-players to come out and say the club needs to spend and ex-managers to say they'd have won the league with that level of spending etc. It would also open up the kind of long-term stories you get with clubs trying to get a certain player over multiple windows.

Agree with this. I also thing transfer/loan interest should play a bigger role. It should be like recruiting as far as generating interest from players especially if you are a low rep team. It’s way too easy to sign those U18 prem league players that no one else in your league get to sign. By default, they should have little interest in signing with you if you are level 6-7 etc. gain interest by scouting and make enquiries. On the flip side, making enquiries on a player that at a position where a first teamer is currently at should be unsettling some players depending on personality.

[Fatkidscantjump]

I don't know man, some AI teams are really hard to beat, especially away. I'm not sure which tactics and strategy you're using, but if you use the standard gegenpress into overachieving into buying all the argentinians & brazilians op regens, it's no wonder you're doing good.

[Mcfc1894]

I feel away games are a bit more of a challenge. When you become a even half decent side Home game becomes much easy as most teams don't press so its easier to create chances to score 

Edited March 30, 2021 by Mcfc1894
.

[zindrinho]

Most people (myself included) find it way easier to win by playing direct football, IRL there's no doubt breaking down defensive sides is the hardest thing to do in football. I always get the questions on why we do so well away from home in press conferences. 

[Icy]

hace 15 horas, Mars_Blackmon dijo:

Agree with this. I also thing transfer/loan interest should play a bigger role. It should be like recruiting as far as generating interest from players especially if you are a low rep team. It’s way too easy to sign those U18 prem league players that no one else in your league get to sign. By default, they should have little interest in signing with you if you are level 6-7 etc. gain interest by scouting and make enquiries. On the flip side, making enquiries on a player that at a position where a first teamer is currently at should be unsettling some players depending on personality.

Agree, as Crewe I signed a few u18 players for free or under 100k from the premier when I was in League 1, played and developed them while winning and reaching the Premier with Crewe, they are now superstars still on cheap contracts (1M per year) and with market values of over 20M.

[Platinum]

On 30/03/2021 at 02:00, busngabb said:

Looking at my current squad on FM and I'm now thinking the biggest issue with the game is the finanances and squad building. In the game it's just far too easy to build a super squad. You can sign 7 or 8 players that improve your side per season, even with a relatively modest transfer budget, just by abusing future fees and sell on clauses. Sure at some clubs that will have consequences, but at a lot of the bigger teams that people will use and those who grow and get taken over, the owner will just throw money in to cover it.

In my current save I'm only a few seasons in but I've only got about three players who were there when I joined. That kind of turnover can happen, but it's rare and it's very unlikely to be successful.

Having so much freedom as the manager with transfers is probably incredibly unrealistic. In real life Carlo Ancelotti isn't going to be ringing Delia and offering her £5m up front, £40m over the next 3 years and a 40% sell on clause for Max Aarons randomly one day. He'd have chats with Brands building up to the transfer window to identify the targets he feels the club needs, Brands would likely push back on those and there would be compromises. After establishing the budget and the areas needed, they'd then have meetings to identify the targets and prioritise them. Brands would then negotiate with Delia and Max Aarons would be signed a day before the window ends . He also wouldn't be able to say 'we need a right back and a world class centre-back' and then throw a £20m package in installments out for a South American wonderkid striker who hasn't been scouted and isn't known to the club.

As with my ealier post I'm not suggesting SI make it so hard to buy players that you sit tearing your hair out and throwing darts at pictures of your chairman. But just signing five wonderkids on big deals on installments with no scouting at all probably shouldn't be allowed. You should be given the budget, be able to ask for more etc. Then you should have to select what you need in the window and prioritise the targets and draw up a shortlist. E.g we need a left winger and a striker, 75% of the budget on the striker for the first team, 25% on the winger as backup. You choose the players you want, if you choose players who haven't been suggested by the scouts you should have to scout him first, even if it means waiting a window. The club then does the negotiations realistically. If you then spot that Lewandowski has been transfer listed or you want another player you should have to approach the board for that and the success would be based on your reputation, the finances and the need for the signing. It makes it more difficult, it would make youth development more valuable and it would add a challenge to the game. It would also open up media stories about the board backing the manager and allow ex-players to come out and say the club needs to spend and ex-managers to say they'd have won the league with that level of spending etc. It would also open up the kind of long-term stories you get with clubs trying to get a certain player over multiple windows.

Try using your director of football and put him in charge of transfers, thats how it works in real life and it will even the playing field in terms of transfers.

[Fatkidscantjump]

Le 26/03/2021 à 09:54, sthptngomad76 a dit :

Is it too much to ask for a game that doesn't require human players to avoid particular tactics not to dominate?

Could we not have a system that is a little more sophisticated?

I can remember playing CM 93-94, waltzing the league with QPR with my odd formation that I learnt from a gamers mag. Sure, they were simpler times.

But its been nearly 30 years from that. Programming and AI has come leaps and bounds since then. I don't care even if SI resorted to sliders, or overpowered AI to defeat super human tactics. Anything to keep my attention in an era where I can go off and find another game that I feel frustrates me a little, but keeps me playing. Without the whole charade being broken by easily replicating a series of tactical inputs I can find on Steam, and then dominating the football leagues with Bradford PA without signing a player.

I just want that feeling of enticing frustration again, without it knowing that I can simply download a tactic and dominate. I want results to rely on things other than just a tactical input- the chase of better players, morale management, coaching. It's 2021, we don't need to be doing this "let's pretend not to break the game to have fun" stuff.

Wait what ? I don't get it. It's (mostly) a single player game. If you feel the game is too easy with exploit tactics then why use those tactics ? Just because they exist it bothers you ? What if other players like using them ? Do SI have to make the game not enjoyable for all those players just because you can't help yourself to play with those tactics even if you don't like it ?

[Platinum]

On 30/03/2021 at 18:17, Icy said:

Agree, as Crewe I signed a few u18 players for free or under 100k from the premier when I was in League 1, played and developed them while winning and reaching the Premier with Crewe, they are now superstars still on cheap contracts (1M per year) and with market values of over 20M.

When a player is performing above the level of his current club there should definitely be more instances where the player pushes for a move more

[Freakiie]

Yeah it seems incredibly easy to hold onto big players this version. So easy that even the AI seems to hardly struggle with it at all. I generally start my saves quite a bit in the future and I've seen various big names that stuck to their clubs their entire lives,

For example when I took over at Real Sociedad somewhere in the 2030s, Mikel Merino, Oyarzábal and Barrenetxea were all still there. Last one might have rolled low PA (But since he was still a solid squad player for me in his thirties I doubt it) and even now years later, their absolute star player that I picked up while I was there is sticking around, despite them not winning anything and often even missing out on the CL and the guy regularly being one of the names considered for World Player of the year and plenty of rumors around him swirling around.

I've also seen various Ajax/PSV wonderkids that end up playing in the Netherlands nearly their entire lives, which even with the increased reputation (The Eredivisie is the 6th league in my save) and financial options seems rather unlikely, as they're still very far behind the big 5. It took PSV having an absolute stinker in the competition and somehow ending 6th for their star player (and only their star player) to kick up some fuss and request a transfer for not playing in the CL.

[grade]

7 minutes ago, Freakiie said:

Yeah it seems incredibly easy to hold onto big players this version. So easy that even the AI seems to hardly struggle with it at all. I generally start my saves quite a bit in the future and I've seen various big names that stuck to their clubs their entire lives,

For example when I took over at Real Sociedad somewhere in the 2030s, Mikel Merino, Oyarzábal and Barrenetxea were all still there. Last one might have rolled low PA (But since he was still a solid squad player for me in his thirties I doubt it) and even now years later, their absolute star player that I picked up while I was there is sticking around, despite them not winning anything and often even missing out on the CL and the guy regularly being one of the names considered for World Player of the year and plenty of rumors around him swirling around.

I've also seen various Ajax/PSV wonderkids that end up playing in the Netherlands nearly their entire lives, which even with the increased reputation (The Eredivisie is the 6th league in my save) and financial options seems rather unlikely, as they're still very far behind the big 5. It took PSV having an absolute stinker in the competition and somehow ending 6th for their star player (and only their star player) to kick up some fuss and request a transfer for not playing in the CL.

This is unrealistic, but for me in the ideal world love for smaller european clubs to retain more the star players, instead of being constantly poached by bigger clubs.

One hand, yes, the came is bit unrealistic in the form, but on the other I would like for the real world go more of a FM approach.

[Outrospective]

So, after 2 seasons of Wealdstone I was poached by Torquay. Finished the season at the fourth place and noticed a weird thing: in the last 15 games of the league only cautious mentality helped to win my matches. In all other cases I was thrashed no matter who was the opponent.

After the first season at Torquay I brought a bit of new players but seriously struggle in the league - to the point that I feel a bit burned out. No matter what tactic I use (tempo, passes, instructions, etc.) the players make like 15 shots and 2 on goal. I have disallowed goal (at least one) in every game. I'm in the middle of the table and I genuinely don't know, how the **** can somebody say that this game is easy.

Probably need to take a break from FM,

Edited April 1, 2021 by Outrospective

[Platinum]

1 hour ago, Outrospective said:

So, after 2 seasons of Wealdstone I was poached by Torquay. Finished the season at the fourth place and noticed a weird thing: in the last 15 games of the league only cautious mentality helped to win my matches. In all other cases I was thrashed no matter who was the opponent.

After the first season at Torquay I brought a bit of new players but seriously struggle in the league - to the point that I feel a bit burned out. No matter what tactic I use (tempo, passes, instructions, etc.) the players make like 15 shots and 2 on goal. I have disallowed goal (at least one) in every game. I'm in the middle of the table and I genuinely don't know, how the **** can somebody say that this game is easy.

Probably need to take a break from FM,

This shows how different the game is for everyone. I would focus on getting team morale up by talking to your players (praise good players and tell poor players it hasnt been good enough) and schedule Team Bonding training sessions, and then focus on the weaknesses in your team. Are you conceding too many goals and how are you conceding them? Are you not making enough good chances? Change your tactic and player roles to address these issues.

[Outrospective]

3 hours ago, francis#17 said:

Are you conceding too many goals and how are you conceding them? Are you not making enough good chances? Change your tactic and player roles to address these issues.

Yeah, yeah.

What would you do with goals disallowed in every match? Which tactical option determines the amount?

I've quit Torquay in the end, it's unbearable. When you watch the matches in such situations, it becomes painfully obvious, that ME shows just some caluclations result and nothing close to the real-time simulation. You either guess the required parameters or not. At least other strategy games are responding to your actual inputs and not show you the predetermined video based on previously pushed buttons.

Rant over.

Edited April 1, 2021 by Outrospective

[Platinum]

43 minutes ago, Outrospective said:

Yeah, yeah.

What would you do with goals disallowed in every match? Which tactical option determines the amount?

I've quit Torquay in the end, it's unbearable. When you watch the matches in such situations, it becomes painfully obvious, that ME shows just some caluclations result and nothing close to the real-time simulation. You either guess the required parameters or not. At least other strategy games are responding to your actual inputs and not show you the predetermined video based on previously pushed buttons.

Rant over.

It depends on why they are disallowed. If it is because of offsides then you could be making your attacking players stay on the last man/push up too high and your players dont have good enough off the ball movement to stay onside. In this case I would lower my attacking line or change the role of my attacking players.

Im not quite sure what you are talking about with the rest of your message.

[Svenc]

2 hours ago, Outrospective said:

I'vequit Torquay in the end, it's unbearable. When you watch the matches in such situations, it becomes painfully obvious, that ME shows just some caluclations result and nothing close to the real-time simulation. You either guess the required parameters or not. At least other strategy games are responding to your actual inputs and not show you the predetermined video based on previously pushed buttons.

Dunno about the disallowed goals (my sympathies). But you've been registered for ten years and still don't know how the game engine works (nothing like this at all. You're not alone, btw). I think this is a major issue in terms of (long-term) development. At least insofar: How could there ever be AI growth if after so many releases players get the game so fundamentally wrong? And how would you personally address this?

The game isn't documented very well, plus the tactical UI has pitfalls and plenty of "FM speech" yet not properly translated to football speech. It also remains questionable that the game as a sim of semi-pro football allows nonsensical input that has nothing to do with semi-pro football. But nowadays you've got at least channels such as Bustthenet (in prior years also a couple decent threads on how to read a match, analysis play etc). Plus more in-game match feedback and analysis tools than ever before (when ten years ago, there was pretty much zilch).

Would you personally hire (tactical or otherwise) assistants if they were available and decent? The way I'd personally implement those is players still optionally having a say. Tactical for instance over the a) style of football played and b) match plan/management (e.g. ok, we've now scored the 2-0, assman, it may be time to put the foot off the gas / decrease our risk and be happy with what we have -- please put that to action now etc.) That way, as a player you can still judge or misjudge match situations and be burnt/rewarded for it rather than just leaving it all to an assistant so that all the match fun is gone. 

That said, SI are never gonna make the game deliberately much easier/harder. It's not their thing (and they've always been happy with how things generally are.)

 

Edited April 1, 2021 by Svenc

[EazyEee]

Has anyone form Sigames ever talked about this subject? My view at the moment is that the people who find this game too easy are too small of a minority tor really matter. 95% love playing it.

Unfortunately I stopped playing this version after I found myself urging on the AI side to beat/challenge me.

Ease of Squad Building and Ease of raising moral aside, I don't see how both sets of players can be satisfied without having a hard/realistic mode. Making the game harder would only alienate the casual players who are the vast vast majority.

[Outrospective]

1 hour ago, Svenc said:

in prior years also a couple decent threads on how to read a match, analysis play etc). Plus more in-game match feedback and analysis tools than ever before (when ten years ago, there was pretty much zilch).

And still, 10 years ago, when I was actively playing (had a gap for 6-7 years before FM20 and 21) the game was much easier and I knew for sure what my actions will contribute to. For now it's a black box and guessing game for me.

Back then when scouting report was limited to "competent", "exceptional" or "mediocre" team description I just new what game mentality I should use to win. Now I get the tactical analysis which is pointless beacuse I can't switch my tactics on a whim - at least, between those I did not train specifically.

Also, I mean, I don't really know how ME works and calculates. My problem is that there is no difference in 3D match, be it Yeovil or Barcelona, they just run, pass and score 30-meter screamers. The worst part is that screamers are scored not because the logic of the game dictates the player with high long shots attribute to try shooting. The game just calculates that one of the teams should score, so a LB with 3 in long shots pulls off Roberto Carlos all of a sudden.

And after this I come here and see how some internet user with downloaded tactic designed to break the ME complains how the game is easy. FML.