Football Manager 2024 Official Feedback Thread

[wazzaflow10]

15 hours ago, El Payaso said:

Leaving training to the assistant manager, which I don't blame you for, tells you that setting up training isn't interesting enough at its current state and that is something that needs to change. 

Not necessarily. I don't want to micromanage every aspect of the game. I like playing through seasons and watching the development happen from afar. I'm not really sure there's an engrossing part of picking what training sessions to run that would make me interested in it. I'm open to suggestions though.

15 hours ago, El Payaso said:

I know that many people find tactics a challenging part of the game but for me setting up a fully working style of play in a less than a minute is too simplified and that area of the game needs something that demands more from us players.

I have for example setup a non-meta mid-block style of play in just 17 seconds and I never had to change anything in it to overachieve and play really nice football. 

With the current tactics there are also limitations that don't exist in real life. For example if you are seeing the opposition centre-backs being able to play the ball too much to their deep-lying playmaker. In real life you would instruct the fitting players to block those passing lanes but on FM you don't have that option. You have some pressing trap instructions, yes, but I'd say they don't work too well. 

I see being able to set up a working style of play quickly as a successful integration of UI to engine. The issue I think is when you know too much of how things work its easier to be successful right away. The AI only adapts once your reputation catches up to your results or the game situation calls for it rather than trying to exploit a tactical weakness of yours. It links back to a "difficulty" setting imo. The AI should be able to attack what it perceives to be a weak link in your squad or a general weakness in just the way you play. But for less experienced players who don't necessarily understand all the fundamentals of the game it might be frustrating if they keep losing the same way without a clue as to why. If SI could somehow provide better in game feedback for these players I could see the game getting "harder".

15 hours ago, El Payaso said:

The third one cannot be fixed with inaccurate data. For me for example squad building should be turned much more to instead of people saying how they bought this or that player into something that they were trying to sign this player but failed either due to the owning team holding on to him or other AI team poaching him. 

Its two sides of the same coin here. If actual attributes were masked and we were shown a more dynamic set based on form, training, etc it would be much harder to spot the truly good players. Its very easy find and buy the best players. SI has gone to great lengths this year to hinder human scouting to the point I feel its broken. I think the solution to a lot of squad building and making long term saves more challenging is to not only do fog of war for unscouted players but fog of war on the actual attributes. No changes to CA or PA just what we perceive on the player profile screen. How many of us have actually bought a truly bad player? Its almost impossible in this game. It makes it significantly easier to build a world class team when you rarely make errors in the transfer market.

edit:

Just to make a point:

Here are two regens in my current save

one is 4 and the other is 4 1/2 stars for leading premier league players. If you just looked at stars (which i know experienced players ignore) you'd think they're pretty close attribute wise.

But even from the spider chart of attributes you can see one player is significantly better. If my scouts think someone is a leading premier league player they should have attributes as such. Its not even close. There's no chance I'd buy Gaari with those attributes. Certainly not for 86M. There's no chance of a human making a mistake, imo, and buying Gaari as a top premier league club manager.

I'm sure someone could turn him into a 30 goal scorer with the right tactic but realistically there's no competition here of who the better player is despite the scouts rating them fairly closely.

 

 

Edited July 20 by wazzaflow10

[Overmars]

On 22/06/2024 at 09:58, Blünderbossu said:

Please god for next year's game tone down the impact of 'being on a run'. You can certainly argue it's realistic but when the player has minimal agency to make any difference to results it's not a very satisfying game.

The most frustrating manifestation of this in FM is with how overpowered player form is. The "match rating last 5 games" statistic has far too much predictive value. Both players and teams are too streaky. Performances should have much more random scatter than what we see in the game.

[El Payaso]

@wazzaflow10 plenty of good points of view in your responses. I think we're not too far away from each other with our opinions.

For me the biggest hopes for the future would be that most of the main features of the game would be both interesting to use and work in a balanced manner. 

In my opinion, for example tactics and training aren't currently interesting and in-depth enough. It is really hard to make big differences, which might be the reason why the general opinion seems to be that people don't pay a lot of attention to setting up for example training and they even delegate this huge area of the game to one of their staff members. I think this shouldn't be the aim. 

I think the tactics creator hasn't brought anything interesting new features ever since the sliders were chopped off. As SI have given us 15 years now to learn and use the tactics creator, it would be finally time to add something that consumes time and challenges us. 

I tend to praise the newish mentoring model, not because it is challenging to setup, but because it works in a way it should: instead of giving us quick rewards and wins, it is a very slow process with a possibility of failure. Exactly how it should. 

When it comes to the ME, I feel that there should be way better repserentation of different style of plays. It should be equally possible to see your team playing a real route-one football if you want to. And I'm not saying that it should necessarily be a successful way to do it. Also some basic logic like a defensive system being more solid defensively than a top-heavy gegenpress is a must.

In short, only sensible style of plays suitable for the team should be bringing decent results. And you should also have a big possibility to fail, even with a sensible approach. 

You made especially an excellent point about purchasing players. It is nowadays almost impossible to make mistakes in the transfer market which is bad.

Obviously when we talk about big leagues and well-known players, this changes, as practically anyone following football knows how good these players are. And this is something that can only be tackled with better transfer AI, introduction of transfer sagas etc. 

Edited July 21 by El Payaso

[KeegBCFC]

Tried to get into a new save but just can't as almost every goal conceded begins from a throw in. The game has been the least enjoyable of all time for me, back to an older version I go whilst I wait for FM25. If this version was supposed to be the "most polished version yet" then who knows what FM25 is gonna be like. 

[El Payaso]

46 minutes ago, KeegBCFC said:

Tried to get into a new save but just can't as almost every goal conceded begins from a throw in. The game has been the least enjoyable of all time for me, back to an older version I go whilst I wait for FM25. If this version was supposed to be the "most polished version yet" then who knows what FM25 is gonna be like. 

Throw-ins have been awful on FM for the last ten years. This is also quite odd as based on stats a throw-in the likeliest place to win the ball back/lose possession. At least this is what they said repeatedly on the Finnish TV broadcast during EURO 2024.

[wazzaflow10]

 

12 hours ago, El Payaso said:

I think we're not too far away from each other with our opinions.

Agreed - just differ on what we want to focus on in the game.

12 hours ago, El Payaso said:

I think the tactics creator hasn't brought anything interesting new features ever since the sliders were chopped off. As SI have given us 15 years now to learn and use the tactics creator, it would be finally time to add something that consumes time and challenges us. 

I remember sliders. I think I still have the TT&F bibles that were written here somewhere on a hard drive. I believe they're still functionally there just covered by the current tactics screen.

The issue I think SI have is that give the human even more freedom to break the game. There has to be some guard rails for the human unless SI somehow comes up with a way to test and fix every possible combination. I don't think we can view the game as an innovate your own tactic. It must exist currently or have existed in the past. I'm sure there's space to add your own little wrinkles but no one is going to be inventing roles in this game.

12 hours ago, El Payaso said:

When it comes to the ME, I feel that there should be way better repserentation of different style of plays. It should be equally possible to see your team playing a real route-one football if you want to. And I'm not saying that it should necessarily be a successful way to do it. Also some basic logic like a defensive system being more solid defensively than a top-heavy gegenpress is a must.

For sure. It can feel like a lot of time every team looks like 2010 Barca whether you're Barca or Barnsley. One of my observations is player seem to be hesitant to play progressive passes, especially on counter attacks. It might be part of the reason why high pressing is generally considered OP as well. I'm hopeful with the new engine we'll see better representation of the ME to graphics and stop having to wonder why a defender ran away from an obvious area they should be covering.

 

12 hours ago, El Payaso said:

Obviously when we talk about big leagues and well-known players, this changes, as practically anyone following football knows how good these players are. And this is something that can only be tackled with better transfer AI, introduction of transfer sagas etc. 

Agree. The AI can always improve. I think the player interaction for transfers can also improve. Players should be able to look at your squad and say its too crowded or you're not good enough for me more than they do.

[Jonthedon26]

I wonder in FM25 whether they will remove the utterly ridiculous interaction where a player kicks off because I rejected an offer for them as they feel I valued them too highly, at £5mil for example, but then come back and say that they will be happy if I accept £15mil.

[Xavin]

There need to be a drastic overall of how players behave. Fm24 is nicknamed whine manager for a reason. 

Very often the behavior of the players is highly unreasonable and would never happen in a professional football club. For instance very often players that have no future at the club will refuse to go on loans and would prefer to play with the B team. 

Otherwise they will refuse a transfer or a loan that makes no sense "I'm not interested in Barcelona because my favorite destination would be Volendam" like for real??? 

On average it is way too difficult to find loans for your players which combine with the ridiculously low sale value when you don't play in the Premier league makes it unworthy to look at that aspect of the game. Very often when I take over a club anyone that is not regular starter, a sub or a strong prospect gets released on a free immediately. 

In reality no club would ever do that as some of these players would be worth a few millions but in FM it's just not worth it. 

[whatsupdoc]

On 20/07/2024 at 17:26, El Payaso said:

I also play with a 3-man defense formation but I approach the game differently than with an approach that brings me the best possible results.

So for example with Torino, who are predicted to finish mid-table, I am happy if my tactic brings me that and also fulfils some of the key metrics that I want to achieve, like for example conceding less than a goal per game. 

I agree that there are clear roles and combinations that work too well. I have for example complained a lot about amount of crosses and wing-back roles (as well as overpowered dribbling) in the past. I spend the latter parts of my own footballing career as a full-back or defensive midfielder and it was quite easy to say that those areas didn't work realistically in the ME. 

I would also claim that there aren't really any ways to tell certain players playing in a certain role to move differently. These are of course all things that should change in the future and they would also bring some interesting extra aspects to the tactical side of the game. 

You can if course play the engine and play FM like that but I would still claim that it is also possible to play the game in a realistic way. I have for example only played either mid or low-block with realistic formations and selection of roles while managing Birmingham (03/04 retro DB), Chelsea, Betis, Palermo and now Torino. I have only won Copa del Rey once with those clubs but that should be expected when none of the clubs should be challenging for titles in the beginning. And I'm 100% fine with that. 

And when it comes to creative central players, I have had great luck with David Dunn and Cole Palmer for example. Now looking to replicate this also with Stefano Sensi and and even though it takes a bit of tinkering still, his stats are showing that we could get there. 

I think in general people should change the point of view from "I need to get the maximum results with this team" to look for a realistic gameplay and actual careers because that would also lead to scenarios where people actually create realistic style of plays and accept that the success might come at some point instead of now. 

I coach football at a decent (semi-pro) senior level and have a b-licence. I also do data/video analysis more or less professionally. Have also played FM since the 90s and I'm currently winning an 8 player network save. I mention the above just to say 'I understand the game and football'. 

Trying to apply football logic in many setups in FM24 has been trickier than most versions. Some very standard concepts in a 4-3-3 are really difficult to make work. When I've tried them I have the strong impression I'm 'fighting the engine' by relying on roles like an Anchor which simply don't work as well as others (as part of a setup or when looked at in isolation).

On the flip-side, I can ask totally unsuitable players to do things they shouldn't be capable of physically or techncially, and easily overperform if I'm using them in roles that simply work better with this engine. Double DMs moving forward are the easiest example, but also attacking FBs/WBs, the AM(a) role, and the advanced forward role relative to other roles. 

Take the Volante for example. The player simply covers too much distance. An average player with poor physicals will still regularly end up moving from DM to the edge of the box / into the area and scoring. A lot of the attributes one would think would influence the ability to effectively cover distance like that, simply don't. The player is hard coded to move in a certain way and it's not influenced enough by physical or mental attributes. I gave another example of this when I put an 16 year old one-star backup GK up front and showed the positions he got into were quite similar to a top level striker. If you doubt the strength/impact of things like the above, you can check the tactic testing tables on fm-arena and note that probably the top 100 setups use double-DMs on support / attack roles. https://fm-arena.com/table/30-patch-24-4-0-db3-0/ - you can scroll to page 10 of the top tactics and still every tactic will use double-DMs.

I don't find it reasonable in any game to know what works / works less well and to intentionally use the sub-par mechanic. I just find it frustrating tbh and I don't get any fun out of watching an "authenic" football setup underperforming relative to a silly one. 

You can take whatever team you've designed, let's say a deep 4-4-1-1 countering team, where you've placed the utmost focus and detail on every attribute and combination of players/roles. Switch that team to a double-DM / attacking FB based system which makes no sense for the players you have and it will perform better. 

Edited July 24 by whatsupdoc

[El Payaso]

55 minutes ago, whatsupdoc said:

I coach football at a decent (semi-pro) senior level and have a b-licence. I also do data/video analysis more or less professionally. Have also played FM since the 90s and I'm currently winning an 8 player network save. I mention the above just to say 'I understand the game and football'. 

Trying to apply football logic in many setups in FM24 has been trickier than most versions. Some very standard concepts in a 4-3-3 are really difficult to make work. When I've tried them I have the strong impression I'm 'fighting the engine' by relying on roles like an Anchor which simply don't work as well as others (as part of a setup or when looked at in isolation).

On the flip-side, I can ask totally unsuitable players to do things they shouldn't be capable of physically or techncially, and easily overperform if I'm using them in roles that simply work better with this engine. Double DMs moving forward are the easiest example, but also attacking FBs/WBs, the AM(a) role, and the advanced forward role relative to other roles. 

Take the Volante for example. The player simply covers too much distance. An average player with poor physicals will still regularly end up moving from DM to the edge of the box / into the area and scoring. A lot of the attributes one would think would influence the ability to effectively cover distance like that, simply don't. The player is hard coded to move in a certain way and it's not influenced enough by physical or mental attributes. I gave another example of this when I put an 16 year old one-star backup GK up front and showed the positions he got into were quite similar to a top level striker. If you doubt the strength/impact of things like the above, you can check the tactic testing tables on fm-arena and note that probably the top 100 setups use double-DMs on support / attack roles. https://fm-arena.com/table/30-patch-24-4-0-db3-0/ - you can scroll to page 10 of the top tactics and still every tactic will use double-DMs.

I don't find it reasonable in any game to know what works / works less well and to intentionally use the sub-par mechanic. I just find it frustrating tbh and I don't get any fun out of watching an "authenic" football setup underperforming relative to a silly one. 

You can take whatever team you've designed, let's say a deep 4-4-1-1 countering team, where you've placed the utmost focus and detail on every attribute and combination of players/roles. Switch that team to a double-DM / attacking FB based system which makes no sense for the players you have and it will perform better. 

Not going to question any of your points here as you are 100% correct. There are big issues in the game and the goalkeeping example is quite clear example of that. And all these are issues that FM has probably had since forever. 

I general I have found it though that if you are not purposedly trying to do something that breaks the game, it is possible to play the game in a satisfying and quite realistic way. 

If you compare this to something like FM 2017 or 18, the difference is quite big as those two versions had such noh issues with the ME that they were impossible to avoid and these two versions of the game in general drove me away from the game for almost 6 years due to them being so poor. 

[XaW]

What a filthy chip! 

[wazzaflow10]

8 hours ago, whatsupdoc said:

I'm 'fighting the engine' by relying on roles like an Anchor which simply don't work as well as others (as part of a setup or when looked at in isolation).

I think a lot of this comes from some of our own perception of how a named role should play in our system v the game. I struggled with this too until I just accepted that some of the named roles just have very specific patterns you need to follow to make them successful. Its a bit like using a Mez and IF on the same side. In real life you might be able make that sort of combination work with them rotating in and out of space but the game just sees two players wanting to attack the same area. The game will always have a bit of a prescriptive element as a result so I understand completely what you're saying. It'd be nice if we could get more options in doing little wrinkles in tactics but I fear that would only further your issue of "meta-ing" the ME.

 

9 hours ago, whatsupdoc said:

Take the Volante for example. The player simply covers too much distance. An average player with poor physicals will still regularly end up moving from DM to the edge of the box / into the area and scoring. A lot of the attributes one would think would influence the ability to effectively cover distance like that, simply don't. The player is hard coded to move in a certain way and it's not influenced enough by physical or mental attributes.

I'd agree with this to an extent. One of my hopes for the game this year was with the positional play introduction you'd actually need players mentally capable of recognizing where the space was and have the physicals to exploit it. I do think the game somewhat adapts the role based on the league level. So you can have a player who's capable of playing an SV role in League 2 but wouldn't be able to in the PL.

[wazzaflow10]

8 hours ago, El Payaso said:

Not going to question any of your points here as you are 100% correct. There are big issues in the game and the goalkeeping example is quite clear example of that. And all these are issues that FM has probably had since forever. 

I general I have found it though that if you are not purposedly trying to do something that breaks the game, it is possible to play the game in a satisfying and quite realistic way. 

If you compare this to something like FM 2017 or 18, the difference is quite big as those two versions had such noh issues with the ME that they were impossible to avoid and these two versions of the game in general drove me away from the game for almost 6 years due to them being so poor. 

I didn't play 17 but I played 18. Three striker formations were the death of my save. I got promoted to the OBOS-liagen and there was nothing i could do to stop the AI from scoring when they went 3 up top. And they almost all did that because my rep was so low. Shame I really enjoyed that save too.

[El Payaso]

9 minutes ago, wazzaflow10 said:

I didn't play 17 but I played 18. Three striker formations were the death of my save. I got promoted to the OBOS-liagen and there was nothing i could do to stop the AI from scoring when they went 3 up top. And they almost all did that because my rep was so low. Shame I really enjoyed that save too.

A simple 4-4-2 was enough. I think teams like Bournemouth and Atlético Madrid produced some crazy results even against the biggest sides. 

But FM 2017 was the worst for anyone who wants to see at least somewhat realistic simulation of football:

 

 

[whatsupdoc]

22 hours ago, wazzaflow10 said:

I think a lot of this comes from some of our own perception of how a named role should play in our system v the game. I struggled with this too until I just accepted that some of the named roles just have very specific patterns you need to follow to make them successful. Its a bit like using a Mez and IF on the same side. In real life you might be able make that sort of combination work with them rotating in and out of space but the game just sees two players wanting to attack the same area. The game will always have a bit of a prescriptive element as a result so I understand completely what you're saying. It'd be nice if we could get more options in doing little wrinkles in tactics but I fear that would only further your issue of "meta-ing" the ME.

The descriptions were a big one for me. Good example is the "advanced playmaker". 
 

What I'd expect from that description is someone who gets into advanced positions (ahead of the ball, between opponent's defence and midfield) to receive the ball. What the "playermaker" role more often does is suck the player towards the ball, regardless of where it is on the pitch. So you end up with someone you're expecting to move between lines and create from the 10 position or half spaces, coming to receive the ball deep, often in front of the opponent's midfield. This is especially true when they are on the same side of the pitch as the ball. If you play a 4-3-3 with an advanced playmaker in the LCM spot, and your LCB back has the ball, often the advanced playmaker will drop quite deep to pick it up from him. Stuff like this makes true "positional play" very difficult to achieve.

 

Even the description in game isn't really accurate with what it does IMO:

 

Edited July 25 by whatsupdoc

[wazzaflow10]

2 hours ago, whatsupdoc said:

Even the description in game isn't really accurate with what it does IMO:

Yeah the lines between playmakers get a bit blurry imo. I couldn't tell you functionally what the difference between an APs with roaming on and a roaming playmaker is really. I know the RPM really roams and likes to push more into the AM strata. But it seems like an AP with roam on should do the same thing - at least in theory right? But I'm sure someone in the tactics forum could breakdown the difference between all of the playmaking roles and when/how to use them at a high level. 

[pompeyfan]

I hope the new version of FM sorts out player interaction and answers as they really suck at present, as they never give the option of the response I want to give so I have to choose something unsuitable and whatever I choose upsets the squad and makes players unhappy for no reason and that ends causing moral issues, for example, a player complains I left him out of the CL squad, now the reason I left him out is because he wants to leave and has demanded a transfer so I prefer to pick someone who wants to stay, another player has just signed and is one for the future then complains he wasn't picked, or a 2* new signing thinking his more valuable and a better pick than 4* and 5* world class players, I've also had new squad player signings complain about lack of matches 2 games in to the season, players complaining about being left out when they'd agreed they needed a rest etc and this all upsets established team members for some reason.  Then there is the issue of players coming to demand a transfer 2 games before the end of season when we're in with a shout of winning the league and have cup finals coming up - surely to be realistic they'd wait till the close season rather than upset the squad, which happens when i tell them to wait till after the season is over, then there is players demanding transfers after the transfer window closes and those complaining about not being sold when it was them rejecting the contract offers from other clubs, or U18 or U21 players complaining to me about not being sold when I've allocated everything to the U18/21 staff - hopefully this will be sorted or at least give an option not to have to mess about with it.

Update:  Just had a player who wanted to leave due to lack of games come to me and say he wants to stay now as he's happy with his game time and to forget the past, so I accept his request, then 2 days later he has the hump again about lack of games and wants to leave and puts in a transfer request, no games have been played in the meantime and he has started every match when he wasn't injured, tired or suspended, so it looks like I have to play him even if injured or tired just so he doesn't moan and the squad get upset and morale plummet.

Update 2: Here we go again with unrealistic player interaction - a week before the cup final (and having just won the Premier League) a player says he doesn't want to renew his contract and wants to leave, I try and persuade him to stay and he gets the hump - no way would a player bring this up now knowing he'd likely be dropped for the final, surely he'd wait till after the season was over before rocking the boat and upsetting the harmony at the club

Edited August 1 by pompeyfan
update

[whatsupdoc]

14 hours ago, wazzaflow10 said:

Yeah the lines between playmakers get a bit blurry imo. I couldn't tell you functionally what the difference between an APs with roaming on and a roaming playmaker is really. I know the RPM really roams and likes to push more into the AM strata. But it seems like an AP with roam on should do the same thing - at least in theory right? But I'm sure someone in the tactics forum could breakdown the difference between all of the playmaking roles and when/how to use them at a high level. 

I'd be curious to see the difference in positioning between a (support) roaming/advanced/deep playmaker all playing in central midfield in a 4-3-3.

Haven't tested it but I think the positioning / moving towrads the ball would be very similar, just the mentality (and all that comes with that) slightly different.

Edited July 25 by whatsupdoc

[PC2024]

Mid-match, trying to scroll any of the overlay panels (such as Dugout, or Touchline Tablet) using the mousewheel will scroll the list as expected

 

But then it will also zoom in/out the match camera too

It's an annoyance that has been in FM for maybe 4-5 years now

PLEASE can we just fix this? 

 

 

[sdx15]

On 24/07/2024 at 06:25, whatsupdoc said:

Take the Volante for example. The player simply covers too much distance.

That's not a position/role-speciifc problem. If you check the distances the players run in the game, you'll find that all positions and roles cover more distance than in real life, regardless of their stamina and fitness. You get a random midfielder with stamina at 12 run more on average than Brozović has ever run in a single match in real life. Recently I was looking at stats in the Spanish U19 league and the top runners were doing 13-14 km as if we're not talking about 16 and 17-year-olds with generally lower stamina. A randon 16-year-old fullback with stamina no better than 12 cover 14km on average. Same as Yazici in my league, whose stamina is 10!

This all of course translates to players covering too much of the pitch in ME. Midfielders way too often, depending on their roles, either attack the channels or just find themselves in perfect shooting positions (while their markers are also in the box but not close enough). Wingers, even those with low workrate and teamwork, eagerly track fullbacks which are then forced to make hasty crosses or turn around and pass backwards. Mezzalas are menaces in attack because they just keep going forwards while also doing their part in defence.

And that's also why centrebacks get jaded easily. They're not the ones you often sub off, but the amount of running they do always makes them almost as tired as midfielders.

[Overmars]

On 24/07/2024 at 00:25, whatsupdoc said:

Trying to apply football logic in many setups in FM24 has been trickier than most versions. Some very standard concepts in a 4-3-3 are really difficult to make work. When I've tried them I have the strong impression I'm 'fighting the engine' by relying on roles like an Anchor which simply don't work as well as others (as part of a setup or when looked at in isolation).

Yes, this is a fundamental problem with the game. It's probably impossible to "fix," but if they ever did then the game would be a lot more fun.

I feel this issue most when thinking of using a support duty striker. No matter what I try, if it's a TF(s), DLF(s), or F9(s), these roles simply don't produce overall team results on par with an AF(a). In FM, you simply need an attack duty striker to make the most of the match engine. And let's not even go down the road of using two attack duty strikers in a 4-2-4, which also seems to produce great results despite no one using two AF(a)'s in real life.

I get that you don't have to try to game the match engine to succeed in FM, but when you're losing 2-1 late in a cup game, are you really going to ignore what works best in the game and stick with something else? That's the problem. We know there is a better option out there, so there is an inexorable push to use it.

[jens_albers]

In my save as the Senegal head coach I had to select players for the African Championship of Nations. That's a tournament only players in the national competition can take part of (in my save only Senegalese players who play in the Senegalese league). However, after I had chosen my selection, all the regular players were upset because I didn't select them! Mané, Koulibaly, Edouard Mendy, Pape Sarr etc etc. Last time I checked, they didn't play in the Senegalese league...

 

 

[whatsupdoc]

17 hours ago, Overmars said:

Yes, this is a fundamental problem with the game. It's probably impossible to "fix," but if they ever did then the game would be a lot more fun.

I feel this issue most when thinking of using a support duty striker. No matter what I try, if it's a TF(s), DLF(s), or F9(s), these roles simply don't produce overall team results on par with an AF(a). In FM, you simply need an attack duty striker to make the most of the match engine. And let's not even go down the road of using two attack duty strikers in a 4-2-4, which also seems to produce great results despite no one using two AF(a)'s in real life.

Yeah. I guess it comes down to the ME being borderline impossible to tweak with predictable outcomes. That being said, how long have formations with 3 AFs up front overperformed?

[dzek]

On 24/07/2024 at 17:34, whatsupdoc said:

The descriptions were a big one for me. Good example is the "advanced playmaker". 
 

What I'd expect from that description is someone who gets into advanced positions (ahead of the ball, between opponent's defence and midfield) to receive the ball. What the "playermaker" role more often does is suck the player towards the ball, regardless of where it is on the pitch. So you end up with someone you're expecting to move between lines and create from the 10 position or half spaces, coming to receive the ball deep, often in front of the opponent's midfield. This is especially true when they are on the same side of the pitch as the ball. If you play a 4-3-3 with an advanced playmaker in the LCM spot, and your LCB back has the ball, often the advanced playmaker will drop quite deep to pick it up from him. Stuff like this makes true "positional play" very difficult to achieve.

 

Even the description in game isn't really accurate with what it does IMO:

 

....and there are still people here who advise you to read the descriptions or the manual to better understand the game.

[whatsupdoc]

18 hours ago, dzek said:

....and there are still people here who advise you to read the descriptions or the manual to better understand the game.

Yeah the AP role mainly does the direct opposite of what is described...

Edited July 31 by whatsupdoc

[Bahoi]

Is it normal that 4-5 seasons after the start of the save, for the "big teams", to field the same players they used at the start? For example, City has 8-9 starters in 2028 that they had in 2024 or have in real life. Same goes for all top 5 league clubs.

I play with a 200.000 player database with many leagues simulating at full. 

[dzek]

5 hours ago, whatsupdoc said:

Yeah the AP role mainly does the direct opposite of what is described...

It applies to almost all instructions and roles. I don't say that in a derogatory way or to belittle the work SI does in the game, but it's really a shame that some details ruin the whole experience.

[DavutOzkan]

8 hours ago, Bahoi said:

Is it normal that 4-5 seasons after the start of the save, for the "big teams", to field the same players they used at the start? For example, City has 8-9 starters in 2028 that they had in 2024 or have in real life. Same goes for all top 5 league clubs.

I play with a 200.000 player database with many leagues simulating at full. 

Yes. 

[Bahoi]

1 hour ago, DavutOzkan said:

Yes. 

Horrible.

[El Payaso]

I think for me the general influence of set pieces definitely has been the biggest gripe in this year's game. 

It's not the amount of goals but how big percentage of highlights start from set pieces and how set pieces in general work. 

These are obviously things that have been part of the match engine for years and years. They actually work almost exactly the same way as on FM 2018 which was the latest version I played before 2024.

I haven't counted actual percentages but I would claim that over 50% of highlights do start from some kind of a set play, mainly from corners and throw-ins. 

The chaos factory that the set pieces create has also been a big issue. Even though the defensive team is able to deal with the initial deliveries, even free headers rarely reach safer areas and even stay inside the penalty area. Then on the other hand, the same players are able to put some power to their headers when they are attacking. 

What also influences is that you basically don't see bad deliveries from set pieces, but instead they are almost always the perfect height for someone to connect. In real life and over or under hit delivery is a real common scenario, even at top level of football. 

An overhaul on how set pieces play out would probably be one of the biggest things I would wish for on FM 2025. Wouldn't mind seeing absolutely zero build-ups starting from throw-ins for example. In real life they are not a good place to start buildup but instead the most common place to lose the ball. 

I have attached a prime example of set pieces to this message. I would encourage people to watch the comprehensive highlights, especially those in the tactics area who are claiming that set pieces aren't a problem. 

If anyone from the SI team would be willing to check this example out and give their insight, it would be highly appreciated. 

Just to remind you: please don't bring up the stats but instead, look at how big an influence set-pieces have for example in this match. 

Torino v Monza.pkm

[LucasBR]

Player demanding a new contract after playing some games as starter is absolutely nonsense LOL

Player interaction on this game is nothing but ridiculous.

[CrowManager]

On 20/07/2024 at 15:02, wazzaflow10 said:

Not necessarily. I don't want to micromanage every aspect of the game. I like playing through seasons and watching the development happen from afar. I'm not really sure there's an engrossing part of picking what training sessions to run that would make me interested in it. I'm open to suggestions though.

I see being able to set up a working style of play quickly as a successful integration of UI to engine. The issue I think is when you know too much of how things work its easier to be successful right away. The AI only adapts once your reputation catches up to your results or the game situation calls for it rather than trying to exploit a tactical weakness of yours. It links back to a "difficulty" setting imo. The AI should be able to attack what it perceives to be a weak link in your squad or a general weakness in just the way you play. But for less experienced players who don't necessarily understand all the fundamentals of the game it might be frustrating if they keep losing the same way without a clue as to why. If SI could somehow provide better in game feedback for these players I could see the game getting "harder".

Its two sides of the same coin here. If actual attributes were masked and we were shown a more dynamic set based on form, training, etc it would be much harder to spot the truly good players. Its very easy find and buy the best players. SI has gone to great lengths this year to hinder human scouting to the point I feel its broken. I think the solution to a lot of squad building and making long term saves more challenging is to not only do fog of war for unscouted players but fog of war on the actual attributes. No changes to CA or PA just what we perceive on the player profile screen. How many of us have actually bought a truly bad player? Its almost impossible in this game. It makes it significantly easier to build a world class team when you rarely make errors in the transfer market.

edit:

Just to make a point:

Here are two regens in my current save

one is 4 and the other is 4 1/2 stars for leading premier league players. If you just looked at stars (which i know experienced players ignore) you'd think they're pretty close attribute wise.

But even from the spider chart of attributes you can see one player is significantly better. If my scouts think someone is a leading premier league player they should have attributes as such. Its not even close. There's no chance I'd buy Gaari with those attributes. Certainly not for 86M. There's no chance of a human making a mistake, imo, and buying Gaari as a top premier league club manager.

I'm sure someone could turn him into a 30 goal scorer with the right tactic but realistically there's no competition here of who the better player is despite the scouts rating them fairly closely.

 

 

I'm a bit late but can confirm, fog of war on actual attributes makes the game more fun as now you can actually make signing mistakes.

[wazzaflow10]

6 hours ago, CrowManager said:

I'm a bit late but can confirm, fog of war on actual attributes makes the game more fun as now you can actually make signing mistakes.

Yeah I'm of the opinion we don't necessarily need some super human AI transfer logic. It can be improve just like everything else can be improved. SI should stop giving humans such an advantage with perfect information about everything and then see if the human can dominate the transfer market in the same way.

My only complaint about some of the attribute masking skins is they're still based on concrete values. So you still know (albeit with slightly lower resolution) the attribute is absolutely within a range based on the color. My hope is one day they can roll out some sort of feature that its all based on perception of the player from factors within the game. I can't wrap my head around purely attribute-less because there's then there's no perception of the player b/c the scouting reports aren't detailed enough for my liking. I want to know more than just strength/weaknesses.

[El Payaso]

36 minutes ago, wazzaflow10 said:

Yeah I'm of the opinion we don't necessarily need some super human AI transfer logic. It can be improve just like everything else can be improved. SI should stop giving humans such an advantage with perfect information about everything and then see if the human can dominate the transfer market in the same way.

My only complaint about some of the attribute masking skins is they're still based on concrete values. So you still know (albeit with slightly lower resolution) the attribute is absolutely within a range based on the color. My hope is one day they can roll out some sort of feature that its all based on perception of the player from factors within the game. I can't wrap my head around purely attribute-less because there's then there's no perception of the player b/c the scouting reports aren't detailed enough for my liking. I want to know more than just strength/weaknesses.

This would fix some of the things but obviously at top leagues anyone following real life football will know how good the players are. 

I'm in the opinion that this should definitely be combined with AIs better ability to develop and rotate players. If the AI has for example a good player to play in a backup or rotation role, they should be able to give them enough game time to keep the players happy and be usable options within the team. Same goes with prospects, if there is a player with a 5-star potential who is close to a first team level, the AI should do their utmost to include them in the team and realise that potential. 

I would also love if the AI would be more competitive within the transfer market and for example could decline to negotiate for a deal or stall and try and get the best possible price from other AI teams. It's quite sad to say that an older version like FM 2007 was way more challenging in terms of transfers. 

I do agree with you two with how it should be more difficult to know how good a player is. For example here in Finland it is almost a total lottery when local clubs sign players from abroad and they usually start to show signs of how good they are after weeks or even months. For example last season's best goalscorer in Finland, Peter Michael, looked almost useless player for the first two months or so but was on fire with a huge scoring streak in the end. On FM your coaching staff can make a really good prediction on 15-year-olds who have only just arrived to the club. 

[wazzaflow10]

1 hour ago, El Payaso said:

This would fix some of the things but obviously at top leagues anyone following real life football will know how good the players are.

For a short period in the game yes. I'd reckon most people who are playing with this possible setting aren't the ones typing "Mbappe" in the player search to buy him immediately, nor are they seeking out every wonderkid list.

If you're playing at least a few seasons or longer your real world knowledge isn't applicable anymore. Its a setting that extends the long term save which is where your transfers really matter. The game makes it incredibly easy to just rebuild/replace your squad with even better players currently.

1 hour ago, El Payaso said:

I'm in the opinion that this should definitely be combined with AIs better ability to develop and rotate players. If the AI has for example a good player to play in a backup or rotation role, they should be able to give them enough game time to keep the players happy and be usable options within the team. Same goes with prospects, if there is a player with a 5-star potential who is close to a first team level, the AI should do their utmost to include them in the team and realise that potential. 

For sure the squad management in season could be better. Its, in my unpopular opinion, been better this year compared to others recently. But this also comes back to the human having an incredible advantage where we know things like you said below here:

1 hour ago, El Payaso said:

On FM your coaching staff can make a really good prediction on 15-year-olds who have only just arrived to the club. 

So of course we prioritize these players. We never waste time on players our scouts think are bad because there's no reason to do anything other than use them for youth league fodder and sell them when their contract is expiring. The AI has a different prioritization that seems more focused on the present.

 

1 hour ago, El Payaso said:

It's quite sad to say that an older version like FM 2007 was way more challenging in terms of transfers. 

I don't recall that being the case but its been nearly 20 years since I've played 07. I'd have to dig out the disc somewhere! I took Brighton to the PL with Mido and Victor Moses so I don't know if it was really that different.

 

1 hour ago, El Payaso said:

I would also love if the AI would be more competitive within the transfer market and for example could decline to negotiate for a deal or stall and try and get the best possible price from other AI teams.

I'd love to see the top teams be more aggressive on scooping up talent from mid table sides. Crystal Palace lost Olise, and will probably lose Guehi and Eze either this summer or next. Its too easy to hold onto players. I know people complain here about player interactions but there's no pressure on us to sell. The AI reliably gives up and we just have to wait for the player to calm down which takes about a month after the window ends. There should be more peril to blocking transfers or interactions where you have to a promise of success (i.e. CP finish in CL places) to keep these players and failure to do so will result in the player downing tools or refusing to negotiate completely until they're sold.

It's odd we can be the Fergie in squad building, Daniel Levy of negotiating, Arsene Wenger of player development, and Guardiola of tactics. We're playing the game in god mode most of the time.

Edited August 7 by wazzaflow10
spelling

[El Payaso]

2 minutes ago, wazzaflow10 said:

 

It's odd we can be the Fergie in squad building, Daniel Levy of negotiating, Arsene Wenger of player development, and Guardiola of tactics. We're playing the game in god mode most of the time.

Yep and even while making errors and not putting too much effort on different aspects of the game. In general all main areas of the game mentioned should have way bigger possibility to fail on. Most of the managerial careers should be turbulent and end in failure. 

[wazzaflow10]

1 hour ago, El Payaso said:

Yep and even while making errors and not putting too much effort on different aspects of the game. In general all main areas of the game mentioned should have way bigger possibility to fail on. Most of the managerial careers should be turbulent and end in failure. 

As long as the failure is fun then yes 100%. Still have to remember the game should be fun to play.

Almost wish they'd bring back the touch edition for people who want to play more casually while keeping the full fat version as the "hardcore" mode.

[dannyfc]

Completely agree with the notion that the user being omnipotent is the root cause of the game being 'too easy'. Obscuring information, or at least making it more ambiguous, would bring it much closer to the experience of a real life manager.   

I like the idea of attributes becoming more concrete the longer a player is at the club. Physicals should always be very apparent, but technical and particularly mental ones should have room for error until the player becomes established at the club. (and maybe intentionally mislead based by form, e.g. an in-form striker receives a perceived higher finishing attribute) 

This would open up much more ambiguity on who your best XI is, as in real life. You'd be much more likely to experiment and be surprised by emerging stars. Right now you basically write-off 90% of your youth intake on day 1 based on a quick glance of their attributes. 

 

 

[dannyfc]

On 07/08/2024 at 20:38, wazzaflow10 said:

As long as the failure is fun then yes 100%. Still have to remember the game should be fun to play.

Almost wish they'd bring back the touch edition for people who want to play more casually while keeping the full fat version as the "hardcore" mode.

You can achieve both in the full version. It just needs customization settings based on the player's preference. Similar to the attribute masking option that exists currently. 

I'd suspect the vast majority of the userbase just want to cruise through the seasons at lightening pace to accumulating the best wonderkids. Which is completely fine an SI need to appease that to remain commercially viable, but it would be nice to allow a bit more depth for us nerds. 

Edited August 9 by dannyfc

[Purple Bane]

Honestly can't believe the playing time thing doesn't seem to have been addressed over so many versions now. Starters missing a few cup or home euro games against minnows and coming to you with ultimatums, the alternative being they play every game and are constantly shattered and you can never develop players. Or some because they don't believe they'll ever be good enough to start...Martin Odegaard that.

Wild how the player interaction thing feels like it was tossed in years ago with no thought and has not been touched since.

Edited August 9 by Purple Bane

[wazzaflow10]

7 hours ago, dannyfc said:

You can achieve both in the full version. It just needs customization settings based on the player's preference. Similar to the attribute masking option that exists currently. 

I'd suspect the vast majority of the userbase just want to cruise through the seasons at lightening pace to accumulating the best wonderkids. Which is completely fine an SI need to appease that to remain commercially viable, but it would be nice to allow a bit more depth for us nerds. 

My only skepticism with having it all "customizable" in the same exe is it becomes difficult to keep track of what the game needs to run.

I don't know if you could customize "no tactical familiarization" and/or "minimal interactions" and/or "AI Managers learn your tactics over time" and/or whatever else can be turned on/off in the same code base and keep it logical. Seems like there's the potential for a lot of if-then branches to work through and a lot of paths to debug with each possible customization combination. A set lite and full version would make it much easier to develop and maintain. However, I doubt they'd do that just because it splits their already limited and finite resources across two functionally similar games. It would be nice if there was a way to cater to new/don't feel like dealing with deep management fans while also giving the hardcore players more of a challenge without having to resort to house rules.

[FaMoUsS ON ACE]

Hi guys!

my experience: I have been playing FM since 2006

some feedback for 2024:

1)
Really in short - The "expectations are very often not realistic"

as we can see I am playing with Sampdoria, which are newcomers, I have 10 injured players, and I am in the 19th position of the table.

I am playing vs 2 placed "Bolongia" which are very good.

Why and how on earth do the supporters and board expect me to win, without 10 of my players and I am playing with the "kids"

I think, that, when the "expectations" been made we must calculate the injured players and their importance by the club

Because:
If Real Madrid has all superstars injured in real life, the board will not expect to win, right?

here url images:

https://ibb.co/qxFrWmm
https://ibb.co/R9yN2jy
https://ibb.co/60FN8zP
https://ibb.co/SVk57Qk
https://ibb.co/0MJQdWz
 

[tezcatlipoca665]

Pretty tired with what seems like every goal being scrutinized for potential offside. This isn't even close!
 

Spoiler

 

[El Payaso]

Had a good run with FM 2024 but recently been feeling that it is time to let go. When almost every single highlight (and goal) from the AI starts from a set piece, it is really hard to enjoy the game anymore. Corner kicks and indirect free kicks are one thing but throw-ins on the other hand are something that you can't do anything at all. 

[Kevinho7]

True story tho 😅 Could care less about graphics for fm. As long as the actual simulation is on point…

[Koffing]

I have won League two by 115 points first year. The second year, game punishes me with this

I have the best keeper, best forwards in the game, I have the best coaches, . but they refuse to score. I play standard tempo check uncheck workballinbox, mid block pres. They wont score , while every trash AI players with long shot 5 can hit from 30 yards into net? It is always AI teams to get superkeepers? Every other game ( literally 12 out of 24 I rage counted ) Aı keeper gets a 7.0+ rating while my best defenders making individual assists to thrash AI forwards? I have no other explanation then the game trying to normalize my first year overachieve with 115 points.What is the solution for this?

[wazzaflow10]

21 hours ago, Koffing said:

I have won League two by 115 points first year. The second year, game punishes me with this

I have the best keeper, best forwards in the game, I have the best coaches, . but they refuse to score. I play standard tempo check uncheck workballinbox, mid block pres. They wont score , while every trash AI players with long shot 5 can hit from 30 yards into net? It is always AI teams to get superkeepers? Every other game ( literally 12 out of 24 I rage counted ) Aı keeper gets a 7.0+ rating while my best defenders making individual assists to thrash AI forwards? I have no other explanation then the game trying to normalize my first year overachieve with 115 points.What is the solution for this?

What is your tactic/formation?

[caco4003]

please fix set pieces and trow ins for FM25. its so annoying to play fm24 right now

[Sunstrikuuu]

It would be very nice if in FM25 an agent saying 'my client wants a squad player role and £100kpw' meant 'my client wants a squad player role and £100kpw', not 'my client wants a squad player role now and a starter role in a year and an important player role in two years, and he wants £150kpw now with an annual escalator clause and a £60kpw raise after five international appearances'.  "

[josel15]

It is trully amazing how SI has been letting us, the customers, down year after year.

 

I know that it is not easy to deliver a perfect game, but I have not felt like the game has improved from FM17 or FM18. Matter of fact, I had a load of fun creating tactics in FM17. Some would work, some wouldn't, but I could get a grasp of why that would happen, now I can create a tactic that will create a lot, but if I restart the game and play that game some 10 times there is no consistency...at all.

 

Some more concrete complains:
- the set pieces. Don't need to expand on this one, but of the last 11 goals conceded, 8 started with a throw in.
- the injury list is absurd, I am in october and didn't have yet my full first XI playing together, plus, I'm always with 2/3 injuries. Like clockwork, one of my player recovers, and another has an injury.
- the finishing. A lot of the times the first shot of any team goes in (usually after a throw-in)
- the passing. Any kind of progressive passing I have when playing out of the back is intercepted, is ridiculous as my player is free in space, the moment the pass is on to him the opposing team flies to the ball and gets it, or if my player gets the ball he will immediately lose it via tackling.
- defending, I have a question - why do I mark tightly a player, put one of my players always marking him, reducing the pressing trigger in order to always being on top of the player, but at the minute 90 my player just goes "well, I don't want to press him, I will let him go and score". It was the 90th minute, this player was their regista, I had a player marking him individually and tight marking on team instructions. The guy dribbled on a straight line from his own half until he shot and scored. Again: it was the 90th minute, the guy dribbled some 40m. He has tight marking and a player specifically marking him. No one in my team went near him and just let him go until he scored. Why?

 

I know that some of the things I'm complaining, the AI can complain aswell, but good grief.

All being said, I spent money on this, and the last FM. I haven't played them that much. The excitement isn't there. I don't get mad I lose. I get mad for the ways I lose.