[Red card for CPU makes them better]

5 hours ago, sporadicsmiles said:

The AI does not magically become better, you are not adapting to how the AI has changed its approach after a red card. Typically a team is going to be more defensive after they have lost a player. That means you have to approach breaking them down in a different way. Chances are they will also look to play on the break more rather than controlling the game. It changes the equation entirely when it comes to how to approach the game.

So as HUNT3R says, how are you changing to adapt to what the AI is now doing? The answer is probably not to become extremely offensive and push every single player forward. That is gifting the AI space to exploit on the break, and they are defending compact so you will not be able to just find space. You will have to create it. You should always be able to keep the ball against 10 men. The key is then to probe and keep the AI moving. This will tire their players out, and you should always be able to find a player in space.

If you lose 5-0 to a team with 10 men for most of the match you are doing something drastically wrong in the way you play. There is no "boost" for the AI when they are down a man.

I think some times people give the ME more credit than it's due. I mean in this iteration simply employing any kind of high line/hard tackling gegenpress tactic will yield fantastic results and need never be altered or changed (much to the distress of your assman who thinks we're woefully unprepared tactically), so it's a little funny that when the AI goes down to 10 men all of a sudden you have to play tinkerman, it's also funnier that it's harder to beat 10 men than it is 11 

[Red card for CPU makes them better]

I said this in another topic, yes it is 100% ********. If I go a man down and play 1 up front I'll typically win if I'm the stronger team. I hate it when I'm losing 1-0 and the AI gets a man sent off, I'll go very attacking and often go 20mins without a highlight. It's really annoying. I'm just saying the ME certainly does not reflect the 1 man advantage as it should.

[This is a typical game of FM, it's sad and annoying and needs to be looked at.]

2 hours ago, AytchMan said:

I'll spare you the "It's your tactics" line but, really, there are so many factors that affect performance.  Team morale, mentality, team instructions, player instructions, match sharpness, match condition plus all of the opponent's settings and finally, yes, tactical setup all contribute to whether you generate a lot of shots and miss them or generate a few but put most of them on net or some other combination.  Are you certain that no other factors could be contributing to your team's weak performance?

 

Sorry I was being really ranty but my point isn't I'm not winning (as you can see I've got AFC Telford to the premiership). I'm just a bit fed up of the obvious ME flaws that don't seem to get touched upon. Like this year you can play these worldie crosses from deep that will be smashed in at the backpost, meanwhile 1v1s need about 4 chances for every conversion.

Also it does feel like when you are up against better quality opposition your chances are less likely to get converted... I don't know if that's due to how the ME keeps scorelines realistic, for example I create a lot of 1v1s and key highlights in my tactic, often equal to better opposition, but typically losing more often than winning. Of course the game is somewhat easy at the moment anyways and I'm not saying I want to regularly beat better teams because I have a strong tactic that exploits the ME somewhat (like gegenpress high line is so OP this year), but perhaps the ME could not create so many chances? The chances to conversion rate just seems really off. I don't remember the last time I saw several clean through 1v1s in a real game of football, yet in the ME I get about 3-4 a game (and so does the AI).

Of course you are right some tactics generate a lot of chances and score less and that's really an issue, because in real football you don't score less chances just because you've created loads . I mean sure if they were pot shots or something, but it seems the ME is like "Damn, it's really easy to create 1v1s, let's make them reallllllllyyy hard to score".

I probably should have made this topic once I'd simmered down after my defeat, since it's not really about losing to the AI. The AI has the same issues I do as well. It's the ME just goofing about!

[This is a typical game of FM, it's sad and annoying and needs to be looked at.]

 

Ok I know this is going to sound like a moan topic and I know there's far more crazier scorelines than this. But this is what I would call a "normal" game of FM.

Normal being several things -

1. In the first half Arsenal scored all 4 of their key highlights, all long range shots or crosses from deep (80% of FMs goals).

2. I missed 4 1v1s, including an absolute gimme by the ME that saw my striker tackle a defender and have acres of space to do anything with the ball.

3. As soon as I scored  in the 46th minute of course Arsenal immediately equalize to rub salt in the wounds. (Ok this happens IRL too I guess).

4. Arsenal proceed to get a man sent off, despite hammering their goal not a single goal is scored. This is actually one of my biggest pet peeves. Everytime the AI goes a man down they do this incredible shut up shop tactic. I'd rather play vs 11 men tbh, I think I win about 10% of my games vs 10 men (yes that stat was pulled out my ass but sue me). And in all fairness, I quite often win when I have 10 men as well. If I'm the stronger team it's almost as if being down to 10 men doesn't hinder me at all as long as I make sure it's the striker who is "off".

Now, I know I'm being a moaner but really it's so frustrating to see 1 on 1s constantly missed just to see a 25 yard screamer go in. Or knowing that you're going to have "one of those days". You can usually tell from the 10th minute if it's one of those days because you've already had 3 key highlights but the AI scores first. Que your next 10 key highlights being "He'll kick himself for that!". It's just so frustrating to see "It was easier to score than miss!" when you're threw 1 on 1, only to have the AI swing a cross from deep and have it hammered in from the back post (Cause you know IRL every cross to a backpost is scored).

Can we please please please just fix the ME so that it's not so predictable to watch? Can we fine tune 1v1s? Give me less 1v1s. Seriously. If I had went in 0-4 at half time having no highlights I would have said fair cop, but why give me 1v1s endlessly when they are so underpowered? I could score more 1v1s for christ sake. Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Actually my point is kinda this. I swear the ME decides how you score chances based on how good the opposition is compared to you. Like if I play vs a bunch of plumbers from the 11th tier of English football you bet your bottom dollar my strikers will turn into the most clinical finishers you've ever seen. But when you're up against a better team? All of a sudden they can't hit a barn door from 2 feet away (especially 1v1s). I dunno... the ME seriously needs to fine tune the chances it gives because there is no way this can be a realistic simulation of chances to conversions.

[fm20 news]

20 hours ago, jeru said:

As an alleged simulation of elite level football FM19 is a total failure, there is no creative play, every move ends up going wide and a cross attempt, and to keep the score realistic crosses are artiftially blocked because there are far too many of them.  I honestly can't believe anyone thinks that this is how top flight football looks like because it isn't, there are no top flight games that feature 80+ crosses.  Its time for SI to have a complete rethink, the whole mentality scale concept is outdated and has no relation to top flight football at all, control of possesion is dicated by the qualtiy of the players not because the smaller team plays on defensive low risk football, its nonsense.

we need to have some skill in the ME its 10+ years of 3D and we don't even have a simple dip of a shoulder or chop back onto a stronger foot, give me a one two, a proper give and go one two with the attacker driving into space.  Give me a dummy, give me an actual push the ball past an opponent and blow him away for speed.  Give me a David silva style slide rule pass, or a little dink over the defensive line for a runner, give me that most basic football move of a angled pass and a straight run or vice-versa, this is striker movement you learn at under 10's, give me a curved run along the defensive line, give me some actual finishing, let me see a 20 for finishing look different to a 2 because at the moment there is no difference.  Give me a goalkeeper that actaully moves to narrow angles and slides at the feet of an attacker not the stupid nonsense we see now where they stand on their line and take catches over head hight looking more like a cricket wicketkeeper the a goalkeeper.    Give me some actual skill in finishing, give me a messi style dink, give me proper going round the keeper, give me the draw the keeper out and slip it square to a teamate for a tap in.  Just give me some basic football moves that you see at non league level give me something that actaully improves the ME not VAR animations, vanishing spray or other gimicy rubbish, improve the actual football on show after all you claim its a simulation, at the moment it only looks like a hybrid of the david moyes Man Utd vs Fulham Crossing simulator mixed with the Tony Pulis set piece simulator, its just not football...........

 Well said!

I love FM but the ME drives me insane. How many 1v1s does a striker need to score? In fact... how many 1v1s do you often see in a game?! 

When I watch a highlight I know I have more chance scoring from 20 yards than I do from a clean through 1v1. It ruins the immersion... do strikers miss this much in real life? Maybe under defender pressure and off to an angle.. problem is in the ME it's always clean through with acres of time.. I don't think I've ever seen a striker round a keeper in a 1v1  

[Football Manager 2019 Official Feedback Thread]

5 hours ago, Earnie is God! said:

@FMExperimentThis could be done more simply with team meetings if the option was more readily available instead of the usual response of "this is not a suitable time for a team meeting" or whatever it says most of the time. It's been a while since I've tried to hold one so I forget the exact response but it's somethign like that.

But it can be very useful and realistic at the end of a day or even a week of training to just say something like "Great training today/this week, lads. You really worked hard and we're ready for the match on Saturday." but it's a bit clunky as it currently stands. At the moment, you get a 'praise' button for just the one player who has done the 'best' in training and a 'criticise' button for the single player who has done the 'worst'.

As you say, if you want to give praise to a guy whose training rating was still very high but not deemed the best, you have to go through his profile and do it that way. You soon get bored of doing it and I rarely give praise to more than one or two a week, same with criticism. I don't think it helps that you always get the same response either. The criticised guy always apologises and promises to do better but it doesn't seem like that has any effect.

I think the only benefit to criticizing is raising morale, but technically speaking that can improve training because higher morale players do better in training.

But like you said, it's just a bit clunky. And trawling through all players just for that little morale boost might yield a small improvement in performances but isn't worth it. But the fact that it's there and just ignored because it's so boring bothers me 

[Football Manager 2019 Official Feedback Thread]

I think the "Praise" system needs to be changed desperately. At the moment you could (if you wanted to) praise players for different things every week to give a small boost of morale, for example I tested the idea of alternating praise every 2 weeks.

Praise for Conduct/Last Match on Week A.

Praise for Training/Recent Performances on Week B.

The results yielded were positive and essentially the system would reliably bump up every players morale by 2 points every week, thing is this is an arduous and dull task. Of course no-one is forcing me to do it, but in my experience, it's better to create a system that's easier to interact with, rather than it being ignored because it's too time consuming.

Perhaps I would suggest streamlining the praise/warning interactions. You could have a screen dedicated to praises/warnings that allows a one click interaction, kind of like a table view of some sort with the options to praise/warn instantly accessible, rather than individually right clicking - praise - praise training - dialogue box - chose dialogue. 

Any thoughts?

[No tactic* and lots of experimental shouting]

With FM there are a variety of ways to give yourself an edge outside of tactics. A well managed team will have consistently high morale, high fitness levels, good coaching staff to maximize attribute progression, and also a high level of team cohesion. Then buying suitable players if the biggest advantage you can have over the AI. Plus maximizing team shouts and team talks for always positive reactions gives you more of an edge. With all that in mind tactics are only part of the equation so I don't think it's unreasonable to overachieve by succeeding in the many other parts of FM.

Whilst one may argue showing a lack of tactical nuance should be "punished", I do think it's wise to remember this game is played in many ways by millions of people, and having tactics be part of success and not all of success is a much more enjoyable user experience across the board.

But also whilst you can overachieve with a template tactic and no TI's or PI's, you will still do better if you tweak those to what the ME considers better. So yeah, there's something for everyone here. Play to have fun and create your own style! Winning is part of the game but ultimately meaningless, better to enjoy the experience how you see fit

[FM19 Tactics by TFF]

2 hours ago, Jamoritch said:

Has anybody tried this tactic with lower leagues in England? Looking to try it with Shrewsbury Town in League 1

I think it works in all divisions.

Tbh this tactic is reliable but I wouldn't say it works miracles, it does rely on a bit of set piece abuse. Then again.. it's not like any tactic should be insta-win. If you want actual success then you need this tactic in combination with morale management and buying good players.

But yes, I do think you can over achieve with this tactic with any team in any division.

[FM19 Tactics by TFF]

Having great results with this tacti. I have 2 questions for @Totalfootballfan if you don't mind

1. What's the reasoning behind hard tackling? I follow your advice to set to "ease off tackles" when players get a yellow so I rarely get players sent off, but is there meant to be a benefit to hard tackling?

2. Do you change mentality or keep balanced? When/Why would you change it?

Other than that tactic is working fantastic.

[FM19 Tactics by TFF]

On 16/11/2018 at 11:21, Totalfootballfan said:

 

If you are talking about FMRTE or FM Scout Editor then I can say that these in-game editors aren’t capable to handle the task too.

Few years ago, there wasn’t any problem to maximise the tactic familiarity but SI changed the way familiarity worked, they made that every player got his own tactic familiarity rating and since that change the issue appeared and so far I haven’t seen that any in-game editor were cable to maximize  the tactic familiarity without any issue. As I said in-game editor offer such option but it work unstable and unpredictable.

 

 

I’m not really sure that I correctly understand what you are talking about but if you are talking the role ratings which are based on your assistant manager’s opinion then I suggest you to ignore them because they don’t mean anything and they were added to the game just to give a newbies some tips like the default tactics.  

 

 

Isnt it more accurate to say the squad depth star ratings are based on selected coaches opinions of ability based on their CA and PA judging stats, but the coloured role circles are a reflection of the games rating based on a players attributes relative to your league. I've not seen anything to indicate role circle ratings are being decided by assmans. You can fire your assman and all coaches and see they don't change (unlike star ratings which are obviously coach related and a different thing altogether).

My point being that I usually take the star ratings with a grain of salt. But think the role coloured circles are quite helpful in how well a player is suited to a role, since if you toy with the editor you can see that increasing key attributes will increase the role suitability rating. Or do you think the games rating of people's role suitability doesnt have a large practical effect on how they perform?

I will say I have players with "awkward" role suitability playing well, but since the suitability ratings come directing from attributes surely "competent" would be undeniably better?