FM vs RL

[masno]

So guys,what are your bets for FM to achieve RL footbal?

My guess is on FM 22 we will have players with more indivuality (like neymar and dybala playing like them) and more real life tactics.

What are your bets and hopes for FM future?

[tacticsdude]

I love this game, but the future is bleak. It seems to me that every year the ME and overall game goes down a notch or two. At this rate FM22 will be a sophisticated version of pinball.

[forameuss]

FM will never mirror real life football. Anyone expecting it to will be eternally disappointed. 

[Tony Wright 747]

I would agree with the last two posters, the game is heading further and further away from RL football, certainly the ME anyway.

[masno]

I Am so sad to see you guys being negative xD

I know FM Will never mirror reality,but I am a dreamer,and I think that maybe one Day they can achieve this!

No one knows the future.

[tacticsdude]

21 minutes ago, masno said:

I think that maybe one Day they can achieve this!

I thought they were very close. I was very, very impressed 10-5 years ago when the games were much better. And you are right that the future could be anything. This game, just like PES and FIFA could be truly great if they wanted to. It just seems that being great is not longer a goal amidst the shuffle of releasing yearly on a schedule and inventing rushed BS features that few want purely for marketing reasons and such.

Maybe that changes soon. Maybe a breaking point is coming and the industry will adopt a 2-year release schedule and prioritize for quality because more people will be like me and refuse to buy their lower quality products until they make an effort and start adding 'greatness' high up the priority list. But I'm not holding my breath (instead I'm searching my archives for what I did with my copy of FM 13 to install it on my new PC, and crossing my fingers that it runs on win10).

[Tony Wright 747]

The closest they came in my opinion was FM12

[masno]

4 hours ago, tacticsdude said:

I thought they were very close. I was very, very impressed 10-5 years ago when the games were much better. And you are right that the future could be anything. This game, just like PES and FIFA could be truly great if they wanted to. It just seems that being great is not longer a goal amidst the shuffle of releasing yearly on a schedule and inventing rushed BS features that few want purely for marketing reasons and such.

Maybe that changes soon. Maybe a breaking point is coming and the industry will adopt a 2-year release schedule and prioritize for quality because more people will be like me and refuse to buy their lower quality products until they make an effort and start adding 'greatness' high up the priority list. But I'm not holding my breath (instead I'm searching my archives for what I did with my copy of FM 13 to install it on my new PC, and crossing my fingers that it runs on win10).

I'm with you in this. FM is not wanting to improve, the AI vs AI on FIFA 15 can play a good match that have skill moves,better physics and even emotion from the players, things that FM 18 lacks.

FM really needs to be looking for their backs,because if one of those 2 (EA or Konami) decide to apply their ME on a manager game, FM will lose a lot of players.Like I said before,I hope in the future they finally starts to look on improving the football part, and less the manager one.

[Kcinnay]

For a realistic and dynamic match experiene, massive improvements on the tactical aspects of the ME are much needed. Now, there are a lot of inconsequences. Like the good old dogma that the formation in the tactics screen is the defensive formation, but still, lots of AI managers play 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3 and so on, whereas a 4-4-2(-0) is the most popular defensive formation in real life. A formation that isn't even available for AI managers. Like in real life, the formation should be a hybrid of the defensive and offensive formations. A team can defend in a 4-4-2-0, attack in a 2-2-4-2 and be reffered to as playing a 4-4-2 or a 4-2-3-1. The way FM handles formations is just cumbersome.

It's very difficult (almost impossible) to implement pressing schemes like in real life. It's all or nothing. Blocking passing lanes, different forms of counterpressing, different forms of zonal markings... None of that is possible in FM.

The amount of shots, the ridiculous number of crazy, long shots, the fact that almost no direct free kick ends up between the posts, the fact that every AI team defends corners in the same way, the gap between midfield and attack in the defensive phase, because attackers can't be made to fall back behind the ball without man marking, the absence of obstructions, the absence of indirect free kicks in the penalty area, the lack of variety in red cards... Those things make the ME very unreal and in some ways old fashioned - and not in a good way.

I hope that for the last couple of years, SI have been working on a new ME behind the scenes, which would be a reason for the lack of massive improvements in the tactical aspects of the game in the recent editions. We'll see.

[Lawlore]

The last edition I bought was FM15, but the trend away from actually playing like football was already noticeable by that point. Sad to hear it appears to have continued, but I'd be wary of holding PES or FIFA up as a gold standard, though.

[masno]

5 hours ago, Kcinnay said:

For a realistic and dynamic match experiene, massive improvements on the tactical aspects of the ME are much needed. Now, there are a lot of inconsequences. Like the good old dogma that the formation in the tactics screen is the defensive formation, but still, lots of AI managers play 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3 and so on, whereas a 4-4-2(-0) is the most popular defensive formation in real life. A formation that isn't even available for AI managers. Like in real life, the formation should be a hybrid of the defensive and offensive formations. A team can defend in a 4-4-2-0, attack in a 2-2-4-2 and be reffered to as playing a 4-4-2 or a 4-2-3-1. The way FM handles formations is just cumbersome.

It's very difficult (almost impossible) to implement pressing schemes like in real life. It's all or nothing. Blocking passing lanes, different forms of counterpressing, different forms of zonal markings... None of that is possible in FM.

The amount of shots, the ridiculous number of crazy, long shots, the fact that almost no direct free kick ends up between the posts, the fact that every AI team defends corners in the same way, the gap between midfield and attack in the defensive phase, because attackers can't be made to fall back behind the ball without man marking, the absence of obstructions, the absence of indirect free kicks in the penalty area, the lack of variety in red cards... Those things make the ME very unreal and in some ways old fashioned - and not in a good way.

I hope that for the last couple of years, SI have been working on a new ME behind the scenes, which would be a reason for the lack of massive improvements in the tactical aspects of the game in the recent editions. We'll see.

Finally,someone who understand me.

I really dont understand why SI bring small features,and nothing good and big for the tactics.

In my opinion,They should do a limited tactic opinion with a new ME,with a lot of modern football included in this ME, like better moves,realistic pressing,etc. How should that work? They will look to normal tactics (442,433,4231,451,etc),ou their tipes(442 attack,433 normal,442 defend)and limitate what you can do with this tactic, putting like, if you use 442,you can attack with a 4231 and defend on 442-0, They could work on this formula until They do a balanced competition with tactics (not having overpower tactics) and starts to getting alternative tactics,like tactics without strikers,etc.This could be a way to future improviments.

Limitating the actual system and improving the football part, giving more realistic instructions (like a 442 press like this,352 press like that,putting initial limit and always improving) could bring a great FM in the future.

[Svenc]

2 hours ago, Lawlore said:

 I'd be wary of holding PES or FIFA up as a gold standard, though.

They're pure arcade/dribble fests, right down to the current editions.  They're also one-way soccer sims by nature, as their matches go two by 6 minutes. They also simulate barely any of the stuff that would truly matter for a management sim, including the man management parts. There's still elements in there that FM hasn't much dealt with overly much though. Even tactically, to an extent. And even in some older editions.

If a management game based on any FIFA/PES way of doing football one day would become more popular (didn't happen in the past), it wouldn't be due to super "realism" though either way. It would be because of the opposite. I think from a purely "gamey" perspective it can be more rewarding though in a sense. Traits of football have always been idealized in those games, and individual player characteristics highly overplayed. It's more apparent if you play yourself still, as moving Toni around is almost like controlling a tank in some tank simulation, whilst steering Messi around that's like switching from tank to formula one racing car in an instant. There's an interview conducted with Messi et all too in the highly recommandable The Football Matrix in which he too has to admit that his virtual self is pretty much a highly idealized version of himself. Even if he wanted to, he couldn't replicate.

Recently read an interesting article whether the virtual football (ESports) one day may overtake the real one, as the real one is full of bores and error, whilst the virtual one plays out more like a Nike advert gone fully match. That obviously won't happen. But it's the same argument. Too much "Realism" isn't super sexy for the majority of people, and that applies to all ways of life, in a sense.

[masno]

5 minutes ago, Svenc said:

They're pure arcade/dribble fests, right down to the current editions.  They're also one-way soccer sims by nature, as their matches go two by 6 minutes. They also simulate barely any of the stuff that would truly matter for a management sim, including the man management parts. There's still elements in there that FM hasn't much dealt with overly much though. Even tactically, to an extent. And even in some older editions.

If a management game based on any FIFA/PES way of doing football one day would become more popular (didn't happen in the past), it wouldn't be due to super "realism" though either way. It would be because of the opposite. I think from a purely "gamey" perspective it can be more rewarding though in a sense. Traits of football have always been idealized in those games, and individual player characteristics highly overplayed. It's more apparent if you play yourself still, as moving Toni around is almost like controlling a tank in some tank simulation, whilst steering Messi around that's like switching from tank to formula one racing car in an instant. There's an interview conducted with Messi et all too in the highly recommandable The Football Matrix in which he too has to admit that his virtual self is pretty much a highly idealized version of himself. Even if he wanted to, he couldn't replicate.

Recently read an interesting article whether the virtual football (ESports) one day may overtake the real one, as the real one is full of bores and error, whilst the virtual one plays out more like a Nike advert gone fully match. That obviously won't happen. But it's the same argument. Too much "Realism" isn't super sexy for the majority of people, and that applies to all ways of life, in a sense.

I totally agree  that some players are overpower on pes and fifa,and They dont have the man management, but FM dont have good competition on some aspects against them,unfortunally.

Like I said on my last post, FM should look for better tactics,too much realism can be bad, but I love football the say it is.

[jujigatame]

I don't think they're doing that bad of a job but so far FM18 seems to be a step back in the realism department.  Right now teams all play a little ... samey.  Defensive pressure is so lax that any team can look like Barca, fire off hundreds of passes and retain 50%+ possession, even if they are technically inferior to their opponents.  And on the attacking front, shooting accuracy is ludicrously bad which leads to crossing and direct play being overpowered.

I really think they are close to a great ME, but there's still work to be done.

[masno]

53 minutes ago, jujigatame said:

I don't think they're doing that bad of a job but so far FM18 seems to be a step back in the realism department.  Right now teams all play a little ... samey.  Defensive pressure is so lax that any team can look like Barca, fire off hundreds of passes and retain 50%+ possession, even if they are technically inferior to their opponents.  And on the attacking front, shooting accuracy is ludicrously bad which leads to crossing and direct play being overpowered.

I really think they are close to a great ME, but there's still work to be done.

I don't think They are on the way for a better ME,to be honest, every year We have some gamebraking experience, and none improving. Fullbacks still overpower, and 3 striker formation works without numerical advantage being a thing.

SI have a lot of things to work on to get on to a good ME.

[BamBamBam]

The problem is, the more detailed you get, the more time it takes to play it, and that will put players off playing it.

 

[tacticsdude]

1 hour ago, BamBamBam said:

The problem is, the more detailed you get, the more time it takes to play it, and that will put players off playing it.

I feel that's already settled. There's a detailed staff section so that you can put any jobs on the staff and not have to deal with them yourself. On FM these days you don't even have to find or sign your own players. As long as they have those options, it is perfectly possible to play on a fast track and focus on matches.

And people like me can slow down and enjoy the details - let's be honest, the reason FM is a remarkable game is that it is immersive and time consuming, but that's based on realism. When the game stops feeling like real footy, FM is going in the wrong direction.

[forameuss]

17 hours ago, masno said:

I Am so sad to see you guys being negative xD

I know FM Will never mirror reality,but I am a dreamer,and I think that maybe one Day they can achieve this!

No one knows the future.

What I said wasn't particularly negative.  I've never expected FM to mirror real life.  It's a game in its own right, and one I usually enjoy.  I don't hold it up to standards it can never reach, which is much more productive than the opposite.

[russell9]

I think both ME and UI has gotten worse in FM 2018 compared to 2017.

[masno]

3 hours ago, forameuss said:

What I said wasn't particularly negative.  I've never expected FM to mirror real life.  It's a game in its own right, and one I usually enjoy.  I don't hold it up to standards it can never reach, which is much more productive than the opposite.

No one never expects  a game to mirror reality, because real life have to much things to happen,every game is a total incognita.

5 hours ago, tacticsdude said:

I feel that's already settled. There's a detailed staff section so that you can put any jobs on the staff and not have to deal with them yourself. On FM these days you don't even have to find or sign your own players. As long as they have those options, it is perfectly possible to play on a fast track and focus on matches.

And people like me can slow down and enjoy the details - let's be honest, the reason FM is a remarkable game is that it is immersive and time consuming, but that's based on realism. When the game stops feeling like real footy, FM is going in the wrong direction.

I agree with this, you can always play touch if you don't want to get to much time from your day, the normal FM need to be slow, it is a manager game, you need to manage,think,plan.

11 hours ago, masno said:

Finally,someone who understand me.

I really dont understand why SI bring small features,and nothing good and big for the tactics.

In my opinion,They should do a limited tactic opinion with a new ME,with a lot of modern football included in this ME, like better moves,realistic pressing,etc. How should that work? They will look to normal tactics (442,433,4231,451,etc),ou their tipes(442 attack,433 normal,442 defend)and limitate what you can do with this tactic, putting like, if you use 442,you can attack with a 4231 and defend on 442-0, They could work on this formula until They do a balanced competition with tactics (not having overpower tactics) and starts to getting alternative tactics,like tactics without strikers,etc.This could be a way to future improviments.

Limitating the actual system and improving the football part, giving more realistic instructions (like a 442 press like this,352 press like that,putting initial limit and always improving) could bring a great FM in the future.

Someone even read this system I suggest and think it was interesting?

[isignedupfornorealreason]

17 hours ago, masno said:

the AI vs AI on FIFA 15 can play a good match that have skill moves,better physics and even emotion from the players

Hahaha, are you serious? 

FIFA is a proper arcade representation of football, it is nonsense. FIFA AI in particular is akin to Basketball, back and forth with very little passing and plenty of dribbling.

 

About the closest simulation AI vs AI representation I've seen has been a heavily modded Pro Evo 18, at least in terms of box-action, but even that falls short in other areas.

 

I think the FM engine is okay, but with a lot of room to improve. But then, I'm not especially great on the tactical side of things, and those that are seem to be mostly fine with what goes on in it for most the part anyway.

[masno]

14 minutes ago, isignedupfornorealreason said:

Hahaha, are you serious? 

FIFA is a proper arcade representation of football, it is nonsense. FIFA AI in particular is akin to Basketball, back and forth with very little passing and plenty of dribbling.

 

About the closest simulation AI vs AI representation I've seen has been a heavily modded Pro Evo 18, at least in terms of box-action, but even that falls short in other areas.

 

I think the FM engine is okay, but with a lot of room to improve. But then, I'm not especially great on the tactical side of things, and those that are seem to be mostly fine with what goes on in it for most the part anyway.

You say that FM is okay and disagree with someone about some game,we have something wrong here.

FM is having gamebreaking experiences every year,this current ME is quite broke,and we don't even have how to do somethings that real life teams can.

Current ME is far from ok,and they need to look for improviment.

[Tony Wright 747]

The ME is probably OK, but why settle for OK,  (I seem to recall a TV advert that said something along those lines)  We don't want OK we want good, great, excellent.  Will we ever get that, I think it is in serious doubt.

[Guest El Payaso]

11 hours ago, Svenc said:

 

This is well written once again. FIFA and PES most definitely 'glorifies' football and especially the technical side of football so that the so called football that the game produces is something like watching a compilation of some attacking player doing in one season or more. But if you go to Youtube and look someone like Hazard's performance during one particular match, the truth is quite a bit different and you can notice that for example to produce something through dribbling, no matter how good the player is, doesn't happen anywhere near even once every game. Even teams like Norwich and Brighton have defended successfully against him.

FM glorifies some parts too but without creating actually any too good looking football, especially in FM 2018 I haven't actually seen any especially from the AI. The problem with the AI for me seems to be that they feel like totally one-trick pony and because of that I for example defend against every big team in the PL quite easily as their only game plan seems to be to pass the ball to the overlapping full/wing-back or to rely on the strikers to create something by linking up or the third: winger running past couple of players before putting in a perfect cross. Lots of good AI teams lack goals and chances within the ME as they cannot create decent attacking play. My 'relegation candidate' has been creating the most chances in the Premier league on both seasons that I have managed. 

What the game is missing from real football is both defending and attacking as a team: strikers dropping to defend and defenders joining the midfield when attacking. This creates too many gaps and most definitely nerfs the movement on the pitch that teams need to get the attacking play to flow successfully. This also makes the game really predictable and goalscorers and assisters variate really little. And it also makes easy for managers like Rashidi to beat Barcelona with ease even when leaving three strikers above the ball when so calledly defending. His videos in general are shoqing how bad the AI/ME actually is as he knows exactly how to play against it and how to beat it.

[MBarbaric]

The funny thing is, if SI never introduced graphics representation of the ME, I'd probably still buy, play and enjoy the game. Since it has 2D/3D, I simply can't force myself to play new iterations. The defending doesn't look as football most of the time, and the attacking phase is so simplistic that the more I watch my team attack, more I feel the defending is miles ahead of attacking. 

I've elaborated in depth why the defence is so poor without touching the attack. The worst part is off the ball movement and inability to see and exploit space by attacking players. There is no ability to control the ball in tight spaces, and the worst, players aren't able to assume correct position when receiving the ball in order to turn and face the opposition goal. In majority of occasions, players play with their back towards the goal and aren't aware of the position of their teammates or opposition.

Strange enough, that isn't even taxed in the ME as the defending is so poor that there is no pressure on the receiver so he can receive, turn and pick next pass even if he has his back towards the opposition goal. Literally the first thing you are supposed to learn in football is to orientate your body so you can see as much as possible even before you receive the pass. The natural result of this is then: 

31 minuti fa, El Payaso ha scritto:

only game plan seems to be to pass the ball to the overlapping full/wing-back or to rely on the strikers to create something by linking up or the third: winger running past couple of players before putting in a perfect cross. Lots of good AI teams lack goals and chances within the ME as they cannot create decent attacking play.

Indeed, as orientation of players is non existent and ball control in tight spaces lacks as well, the central zone is cut off and most of the attacks are shifted towards flanks.

[masno]

7 minutes ago, El Payaso said:

This is well written once again. FIFA and PES most definitely 'glorifies' football and especially the technical side of football so that the so called football that the game produces is something like watching a compilation of some attacking player doing in one season or more. But if you go to Youtube and look someone like Hazard's performance during one particular match, the truth is quite a bit different and you can notice that for example to produce something through dribbling, no matter how good the player is, doesn't happen anywhere near even once every game. Even teams like Norwich and Brighton have defended successfully against him.

FM glorifies some parts too but without creating actually any too good looking football, especially in FM 2018 I haven't actually seen any especially from the AI. The problem with the AI for me seems to be that they feel like totally one-trick pony and because of that I for example defend against every big team in the PL quite easily as their only game plan seems to be to pass the ball to the overlapping full/wing-back or to rely on the strikers to create something by linking up or the third: winger running past couple of players before putting in a perfect cross. Lots of good AI teams lack goals and chances within the ME as they cannot create decent attacking play. My 'relegation candidate' has been creating the most chances in the Premier league on both seasons that I have managed. 

What the game is missing from real football is both defending and attacking as a team: strikers dropping to defend and defenders joining the midfield when attacking. This creates too many gaps and most definitely nerfs the movement on the pitch that teams need to get the attacking play to flow successfully. This also makes the game really predictable and goalscorers and assisters variate really little. And it also makes easy for managers like Rashidi to beat Barcelona with ease even when leaving three strikers above the ball when so calledly defending. His videos in general are shoqing how bad the AI/ME actually is as he knows exactly how to play against it and how to beat it.

Exactly this I'm talking about,this ME can't handle somethings,and build-up is pretty poor from AI.

In my opinion,they need to get New tactics system,a new ME to handle real pressing and defence/attack formations.

My idea for a new system that could handle this is a revamp from the role system,the tactic system,and some part of the ME,I will write it down, give me opinions please.

New tactic screens: at beginning of the tactic screen,you will get some formations,nothing different from what we get from nowadays, and after this,we could choose some attacking and defending formations.

Ex: 4-3-3 DM base formation,you can get a 2-1-4-3 on attacking formation,2 defenders,the DM in front of them,the midfielders and fullbacks supporting and your strike and IF.(Just a example of formation,don't complain a lot). On the defensive side,you can pick 4-1-4-1,wingers drop in midfield.

Pressing: the pressing would be picked on the defensive screen,what kind of pressing you want,where to press on the field, press all over the field or only on your field.

Ex: high press as unit,so players should get higher on the pitch and don't let the opposition build their game. Press only 10 seconds after lose possession and/or after short GK kickoff,and them get on defensive shape.

Also zonal marking and marking should be options.

Build-up and attack: this would be on the attack screen, you would choose how you team was supposed to get on box.

Ex: play on the defense,on the defensive pitch,only short pass,not take any risks,no dribbling, the defensive line will be higher so they can keep possession,on offensive pitch,wingers are permited to dribble,and one of the midfielders will be the playmaker,the striker will track back to help on the building.

Role system: This would get totally different from nowadays, roles would be a "unique" thing on tactics, so players wouldn't have to be searching what roles fit,the attacking formation the player pick will work (1:I will explain what is the negative part on this*) without having the puzzle if X role works with Y role.

So what will roles do? They will be especialists roles,players that will play different from the what they were supposed.

Some especialist roles:

Trequartista: a player that can create,he is not a normal playmaker, he can also appears on attack and score,don't appear on the defensive phase,ad have free moviment on build-up and attack phase.

False 9: a player that can track back and make defenders follow him,he is tecnical and will be a playmaker on the attack phase 

Playmaker: a player that can break the build-up instructions,he can create plays, well,everyone knows what he does.

Regista: a playmaker that sits deep and don't defend well

Pros and cons of having roles:

Pros: if you have any excellent player that can works better with a especialist job,than he would be a potential danger. Ex: Iniesta as playmaker.

Cons: if your player can't fullfil what his role needs to do,he will be useless.And too many roles would do your team to perform bad,because every player would try to do a different thing from what the system tells them

1*: negative points: If you pick a system where you need a target man,and your striker is a false nine, you probably will have bad times. If you pick a fullback that can't go upfield and track back fast,he will let a hole in the defensive shape.

The TI's should be fixed on every player (excluding the players that have roles) and PI's should only tell players thing that don't collides with TI

This is my idea for the new system,sorry for any english error on the text,please give a feedback about it

[Svenc]

12 hours ago, El Payaso said:

 What the game is missing from real football is both defending and attacking as a team: strikers dropping to defend and defenders joining the midfield when attacking. This creates too many gaps and most definitely nerfs the movement on the pitch that teams need to get the attacking play to flow successfully. This also makes the game really predictable and goalscorers and assisters variate really little. And it also makes easy for managers like Rashidi to beat Barcelona with ease even when leaving three strikers above the ball when so calledly defending. His videos in general are shoqing how bad the AI/ME actually is as he knows exactly how to play against it and how to beat it.

I've been of the opinion too that once the game has sussed "defending" as units proper the game may actually become quite a bit harder -- or at the very least, represent football more. This is a repeat, but in football tactics don't decisively "outsmart" opposition. Doesn't happen. It also doesn't cause weaker teams to be over better ones over and over again. The advent of zonal marking proper has killed that. There are no big gaps that teams can just exploit anymore. Whilst it's possible on Fifa too (and this happens on current iterations too) to leave multiple forwards upfield, it's a simple numbers game/trick that wouldn#t happen in a match of football. No defending team would leave two/three opposition players just sitting there unchecked without added cover, etc. As a human player, you can manually adjust to it. The AI naturally only would do so by "chance". E.g. switching to another formation and adding defend duties, typically when it switches to something more defensive, either to retain a score/defend a lead or to avoid a drubbing. That's indeed a dynamic that's not much like footaball.

I hope you're not in the relegation zone though if you create the most chances in the league. Though, in real football, there is rife evidence that can happen to teams on the occasion (Dortmund 2014).

[Guest El Payaso]

46 minutes ago, Svenc said:

I've been of the opinion too that once the game has sussed "defending" as units proper the game may actually become quite a bit harder -- or at the very least, represent football more. This is a repeat, but in football tactics don't decisively "outsmart" opposition. Doesn't happen. It also doesn't cause weaker teams to be over better ones over and over again. The advent of zonal marking proper has killed that. There are no big gaps that teams can just exploit anymore. Whilst it's possible on Fifa too (and this happens on current iterations too) to leave multiple forwards upfield, it's a simple numbers game/trick that wouldn#t happen in a match of football. No defending team would leave two/three opposition players just sitting there unchecked without added cover, etc. As a human player, you can manually adjust to it. The AI naturally only would do so by "chance". E.g. switching to another formation and adding defend duties, typically when it switches to something more defensive, either to retain a score/defend a lead or to avoid a drubbing. That's indeed a dynamic that's not much like footaball.

I hope you're not in the relegation zone though if you create the most chances in the league. Though, in real football, there is rife evidence that can happen to teams on the occasion (Dortmund 2014).

It is though understandable that this type of a game romanticizes the tactical side of football as that is one of the main parts of the game. Though with AIs "ability" to do it, the game does romanticize it even too much and even Youtubers with tactical knowledge of "1" can be tactically "successful" even when doing everything wrong. Look at those Azzupardis and Benjys etc. Good examples of doing everything wrong and knowing nothing about tactics. Sadly so. 

I have though also been noticing that squad building could have bigger effect nowadays and sensible systems are not that much of plug and plays anymore. Tested briefly with Barca compared to Las Palmas and with totally same systems the end result was much more satisfying with Barcelona even though Las Palmas also fits well into the style in terms of type of players. 

You haven't read my report? Not anymore fighting against the relegation, sadly. Was enjoying that a bit more than the "second season overachieve". Magically the team is getting the results now. 

[Svenc]

1 hour ago, El Payaso said:

You haven't read my report? Not anymore fighting against the relegation, sadly. Was enjoying that a bit more than the "second season overachieve". Magically the team is getting the results now. 

Nothing personal! I don't follow stories/reports in general. Most of the time (this goes for any management game), they follow the exact same narrative, even if there is "restrictions" in place.

- player takes over team
- player improves the squad
- players wins stuff

Naturally, the journey is what it's about. So the better ones may spice it up a few in terms of presentation. But in general, it's all the same thing all over. I have never done anything such myself. But if I would, I would deliberately "role play" the worst football manager in the existence of all of sports -- just to spice things a few up.

[Guest El Payaso]

@Svenc and probably it still would be a success story. I was almost celebrating when I lost 4-1 to City (even though I shouldn't have) as it's been so easy so far to 'defend' big teams to get no chances even when they play at home.

I'd the game romanticizes tactics then it should at least demand us to make things decently well but that probably would make the YouTubers sad. 

[forameuss]

On 1/28/2018 at 07:17, Svenc said:

Nothing personal! I don't follow stories/reports in general. Most of the time (this goes for any management game), they follow the exact same narrative, even if there is "restrictions" in place.

- player takes over team
- player improves the squad
- players wins stuff

Naturally, the journey is what it's about. So the better ones may spice it up a few in terms of presentation. But in general, it's all the same thing all over. I have never done anything such myself. But if I would, I would deliberately "role play" the worst football manager in the existence of all of sports -- just to spice things a few up.

The vast majority do end up being like that, admittedly.  Not all though.  It's a combination of the writer and the story itself - an engaging writer could tell a good story even if they are winning everything - and the best FM story I've ever read was on an old board (sortitoutsi?) and had the guy trying to win the Pentagon.  This very quickly fell apart, so he spent the rest of the save trying to personally destroy his rivals along with developing the one player to retirement.  He wasn't very good at the game, but it was an absolutely brilliant read.  Far too many career threads just devolve into a list of screenshots showing people winning games with very little beyond it.  

[tacticsdude]

31 minutes ago, forameuss said:

He wasn't very good at the game, but it was an absolutely brilliant read

Do you still have the link to that?

[forameuss]

1 minute ago, tacticsdude said:

Do you still have the link to that?

Unfortunately not.  It was an old forum years and years ago, wouldn't even know where to start looking for it.

[Seb Wassell]

On 26/01/2018 at 22:34, Kcinnay said:

For a realistic and dynamic match experiene, massive improvements on the tactical aspects of the ME are much needed. Now, there are a lot of inconsequences. Like the good old dogma that the formation in the tactics screen is the defensive formation, but still, lots of AI managers play 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3 and so on, whereas a 4-4-2(-0) is the most popular defensive formation in real life. A formation that isn't even available for AI managers. Like in real life, the formation should be a hybrid of the defensive and offensive formations. A team can defend in a 4-4-2-0, attack in a 2-2-4-2 and be reffered to as playing a 4-4-2 or a 4-2-3-1. The way FM handles formations is just cumbersome.

Just to clarify, the formation as seen on the tactics screen is not the "defensive formation".

[fmFutbolManager]

22 minutes ago, Seb Wassell said:

Just to clarify, the formation as seen on the tactics screen is not the "defensive formation".

This is interesting. Everyone says it is. So what is it, exactly?

[Seb Wassell]

19 minutes ago, fmFutbolManager said:

This is interesting. Everyone says it is. So what is it, exactly?

It is the player's starting or average position. An MC with an attacking role may indeed see it as his default defensive position, pushing forwards from it when attacking and returning to it when defending; but conversely an MC with a defensive role may drop deeper when defending, returning instead to his 'formation position' in the attacking phase. Positions on the pitch are a starting point, roles and duties then define where that player moves from there.

[sherifdinn_]

38 minutes ago, Seb Wassell said:

Just to clarify, the formation as seen on the tactics screen is not the "defensive formation".

Interesting, I too have said this but everybody seems stuck on the otherwise

[sherifdinn_]

11 minutes ago, Seb Wassell said:

It is the player's starting or average position. An MC with an attacking role may indeed see it as his default defensive position, pushing forwards from it when attacking and returning to it when defending; but conversely an MC with a defensive role may drop deeper when defending, returning instead to his 'formation position' in the attacking phase. Positions on the pitch are a starting point, roles and duties then define where that player moves from there.

I think this is the best way to define it. 

[Guest El Payaso]

6 hours ago, forameuss said:

The vast majority do end up being like that, admittedly.  Not all though.  It's a combination of the writer and the story itself - an engaging writer could tell a good story even if they are winning everything - and the best FM story I've ever read was on an old board (sortitoutsi?) and had the guy trying to win the Pentagon.  This very quickly fell apart, so he spent the rest of the save trying to personally destroy his rivals along with developing the one player to retirement.  He wasn't very good at the game, but it was an absolutely brilliant read.  Far too many career threads just devolve into a list of screenshots showing people winning games with very little beyond it.  

I'm actually trying to do badly in my save or at least somewhat realistically and was doing quite good job in terms of this during the first season. But it somehow feels inevitable that you will start being too successful already in season two. I basically changed nothing tactically as I felt like these systems are the ones that should produce a style of play that I am looking for. We were the best creating team in season one yet fighting against relegation and that trend is close to the truth in season two too but with couple of bargains we have started to win the games now. 

It's kinda sad that this career with Swansea will probably last for two or three seasons as I don't like winning and being too successful. I wish that SI would at some point also provide something for us who want somewhat a realistic simulation and challenge as currently I feel that you have to intentionally sabotage your own career a lot not to be too good. 

[rywilson]

Here's hoping by fm22 they have sorted the regen faces out, as at the moment I reckon a PS1 Malfoy is an improvement on the current ones...

 

[tacticsdude]

6 hours ago, Seb Wassell said:

Just to clarify, the formation as seen on the tactics screen is not the "defensive formation".

It is an odd way to try to display both attack and defense, and thus shows neither.

For example, see my diagram. When you play 2 wide attackers (say in a 4231), but give one an advanced playmaker role and the other a winger role, on the tactical screen they appear in a symmetrical spot across the field, but in-match their movement on the pitch will be very different. The AP/Support walks inwards, stays receded and defends more sharply; the winger pulls outwards and lingers upfront.

Showing these 2 players standing in the same symmetrical placements on the tactics screen is neither their attacking position nor their defending position, as neither of these players will actually play where they appear on the tactical screen. But if you had to say one, it is closest to their defending position (but not really).

I think what the tactical screen is trying to do is simplify the overall selection of a formation. So when you think "I want to play 4231", then the tactical screen is showing you a basic template of what that looks like in theory, with only a small regard for how the players will actually play once you give them some roles (the boxes do move a bit up and down). I personally think this is a mistake, as it adds to the confusion of tactics instead of making it simpler. If we are relying on a visual representation, then it should better represent what's happening on the pitch. For instance, FM08 had arrows giving a sense of the player movement.

[Svenc]

8 hours ago, Seb Wassell said:

Just to clarify, the formation as seen on the tactics screen is not the "defensive formation".

The more accurate thing to say was arguably, from my end anyways:
What you see on the tactics screen has always been roughly your defensive shape.

However: How much so depends on the release / tweaks / overhauls.  For instance, from my experience, defend duty players in tendency dropping a tad deeper has been a recent addition (FM 16 AFAIK, where it was also lots more pronounced).

4-4-2 on FM 2013 (deeper forward coded to typically drop deeper, flat banks of four).

4-4-2 by FM 2015 (forwards coded to eventually sit up top, still flat banks/lines of four). Prior to the patch, it was possible by the pick in duty to have all advanced players either keeping up top (on attack duty, such as Arsenal in the 4-2-3-1 here) or tracking back (support duty -- even the forward would drop deeper than a midfielder on attack).

The 4-4-2 by FM 2016 unfortunately I don't have a screenshot of. But having one of the CMs on defend duty he would hang REAL back, creating problems as both CM could be easily isolated (e.g. the more advanced sup/attack duty one closing down and consequently being without cover, etc). And if you had BOTH on a defend duty, they would completely concede all central midfield space for it to collapse, which may have been something you didn't at all want to. You may put them on defend simply so that they would lock the central space / not move forward in attack.

The 4-4-2 by FM 2017 (forwards still the same ever since FM 2015, wide midfielders covering out wide -- no connected banks of four anymore, central players isolated)


Such overlaps almost always create conflict. Would it be easier if the formation screen just was the defensive formation? Likely. Are the constant changes needed? Up for the coders. If you dial it all back, the duties inititially were perceived, or at the least, could be translated to simple football stuff (with a few exceptions). Football teams to simplify generally have players: Attacking and getting at the end of things / get ahead of play. Supporting. Defending and covering. So whenever the duty wasn't largely about stuff in possession, but also without, this created conflict, for the AI too. This is my perception, but there are signs that some of the more influential opinions on the Tactical side of things have been gone in general. In particular Rich Claydon, who probably was able to translate FM's mechanics into "football stuff" like barely any other. I also don't see how possibly creating such conflicts/overlaps makes it easier on the AI's end too. But without knowing the thought process behind each subsequent change, it's hard to judge.

 

[MBarbaric]

While I don't always agree with Svenc, I have to say it is always a great contribution. 

 

7 minuti fa, Svenc ha scritto:

 Would it be easier if the formation screen just was the defensive formation? Likely. Are the constant changes needed? Up for the coders. If you dial it all back, the duties inititially were perceived, or at the least, could be translated to simple football stuff (with a few exceptions). Football teams generally have teams: Attacking and getting at the end of things / get ahead of play. Supporting. Defending and covering. This is largely my perception, but there are signs that some of the more influential opinions on the Tactical side of things have been gone in general. In particular Rich Claydon, who probably was able to translate FM's mechanics into "football stuff" like barely any other. I also don't see how possibly creating such conflicts/overlaps makes it easier on the AI's end too. But withouth the thought process behind each subsequent change, it's hard to judge.

 

3

Purely from defensive phase perspective, it appears FM13 was much more robust iteration than anything that happened later on. I think constant changes in this part, as illustrated by screenshots attached by Svenc, are mainly due to ME balancing. If I remember well, FM13 introduced sort of collision. However, if the defensive shape was fine, I wonder what happened later on that led to such an atrocious defensive behaviour we are witnessing from FM16 onwards? Or is it simply a kind of bias and FM13 never really was so sound?

[herne79]

8 hours ago, Seb Wassell said:

Just to clarify, the formation as seen on the tactics screen is not the "defensive formation".

Defensive "formation" or defensive "positioning"?

Take away the pitch overlay from the Tactics screen and look purely at the "formation".  Doesn't that show a representation of the formation a team uses when defending?  On the other hand, put the pitch back in - now the positioning of that formation looks wonky.  The Striker (for example) doesn't take up a defensive position up near the opposition box, but in pure formation terms (ie., no pitch) he'll still be the most advanced player.  Midfielders don't stand on the half way line when defending, but in pure formation terms it represents where they are in relation to the rest of their teammates.

So for me the formation as seen on the tactics screen does represent the defensive formation, but is not necessarily reflective of player positioning when defending.

7 hours ago, Seb Wassell said:

It is the player's starting or average position. An MC with an attacking role may indeed see it as his default defensive position, pushing forwards from it when attacking and returning to it when defending; but conversely an MC with a defensive role may drop deeper when defending, returning instead to his 'formation position' in the attacking phase. Positions on the pitch are a starting point, roles and duties then define where that player moves from there.

imo, this issue of the formation being defensive (or not), or showing starting / average positions is missing the point as it's merely a picture on a chalkboard to give a basic idea of a formation.  For me the issue is simply the pitch overlay and where players get placed in relation to that.  With a pitch overlay in place, the start or average positions of a tactical system using the Attacking mentality should be very different when compared to a system using the Defensive mentality (for example).  But take away that pitch overlay and it's not different at all - because there's no reference point or context.

The context of the pitch overlay is where the issue is imo and I've previously raised it as a feature request.

(Side note - a better indication of how players move during the attacking phase may also be handy).

[BigRoboCrouch]

Unfortunately, the future of FM is not looking very good at the moment, mainly due to a total lack of competition.

The biggest issue imo is that the ME is extremely outdated and in serious need of a major overhaul, as it’s not capable of representing modern tactics decently (see: Guardiola getting sacked from City in the first 5-6 months nine times out of ten).

[masno]

6 minutes ago, BigRoboCrouch said:

Unfortunately, the future of FM is not looking very good at the moment, mainly due to a total lack of competition.

The biggest issue imo is that the ME is extremely outdated and in serious need of a major overhaul, as it’s not capable of representing modern tactics decently (see: Guardiola getting sacked from City in the first 5-6 months nine times out of ten).

The future is bright for FM at the moment,exactly because of the lack of the competition,they have time to think what they going to do,but the ME and the tactic part are obsolete.

If we are very lucky,this year we can get some nice things in the tactical screen. 

[RinusFM]

I think we need some independent group of people who test the quality of FM. Like ME, interface and others. If they, lets say, SI games don't surpass the test with a good result then these group can either fine SI games (money goes to charity), postpone release or even demand SI Games to be fully open to it's customers on the selling page at Steam. etc. 

I think this would be ideal to make sure SI Games won't slack it's quality cause of the monopoly-position.  

[tacticsdude]

1 hour ago, RinusFM said:

I think we need some independent group of people who test the quality of FM.

I think the industry just needs more accurate reviews. It is the same problem with PES and FIFA, every year they release a new steamier pile of garbage, and they call it the best footy game ever made. Every year there are glaring, unrelenting, deep flaws in the mechanics, serious issues that make the game unplayable to the serious aficionado, but the gaming review sites take a 1-hr look at the graphics only long enough to make a "gameplay" Youtube video and give it a 9.5/10 the most realistic experience ever!

FM is harder to assess. I like to start my career in the second or third division, so by the time I feel I have certainty that the problems are the ME not my tactics+players, I've already sunk at least 50 hours into the game. At 300+ hours FM17 feels like I'm playing an indie game that ran out of budget early in the release cycle. Many things about FM are truly great, it is the most genuine management game I can remember playing. But at this point the ME is also truly a joke.

Perhaps the review should be:
FM17 is an outstanding management experience with some deep flaws that should not exist for a game with such history, and have become simply unforgivable this far into the franchise. Rating: 4/10. The serious aficionado should stay way clear and instead dust off an earlier version, the casual gamer wanting to spend less than 50 hours may find it fun and rewarding in spurts.

 

(BTW, if you don't agree with my views on FM17 and think I'm being too harsh, please read this:

[masno]

15 minutes ago, tacticsdude said:

I think the industry just needs more accurate reviews. It is the same problem with PES and FIFA, every year they release a new steamier pile of garbage, and they call it the best footy game ever made. Every year there are glaring, unrelenting, deep flaws in the mechanics, serious issues that make the game unplayable to the serious aficionado, but the gaming review sites take a 1-hr look at the graphics only long enough to make a "gameplay" Youtube video and give it a 9.5/10 the most realistic experience ever!

FM is harder to assess. I like to start my career in the second or third division, so by the time I feel I have certainty that the problems are the ME not my tactics+players, I've already sunk at least 50 hours into the game. At 300+ hours FM17 feels like I'm playing an indie game that ran out of budget early in the release cycle. Many things about FM are truly great, it is the most genuine management game I can remember playing. But at this point the ME is also truly a joke.

Perhaps the review should be:
FM17 is an outstanding management experience with some deep flaws that should not exist for a game with such history, and have become simply unforgivable this far into the franchise. Rating: 4/10. The serious aficionado should stay way clear and instead dust off an earlier version, the casual gamer wanting to spend less than 50 hours may find it fun and rewarding in spurts.

 

(BTW, if you don't agree with my views on FM17 and think I'm being too harsh, please read this:

Real madrid never won anything when I was playing.
Juve Always get 3-4th place.
Barcelona always get really bad, Man city too.
And the worst,I rarely lose to any of them,using big or middle teams,they always get a drawn or lose to me.
Last time I got against PSG in my first season with OM,they lost 5-1 with their first team.

I don't really know what happens with FM, but they are supposed to be big,competitive and dangerous, I'm more afraid from relegation teams than big teams.

[Svenc]

6 hours ago, RinusFM said:

I think we need some independent group of people who test the quality of FM. Like ME, interface and others.

I'd stop after precisely the above sentence. However, input from outside the scene sounds encouraging. Those independent group of people not outta be just independent group of people though. However, in some areas, I have a feeling the game may be becoming a bit too inbred too. This goes for the coders, who, mechanically, know everything inside out. This also goes for the majority of testers who have accostumed to FM anyway so much that they don't necessarily see where there are possible disconnects from game between reality, as they have lived the game for so long (purely a gut feeling... plus own playing experience. I'm oft amazed what's brought up by others too as I'd never have thought of it that way).

Neither may that independent group hang SI, threaten to beat anybody up -- or sign up to community.sigames.com to Arthur Spooner all over the place. They may simply point out where FM may be some off the rails, not much football, and object in a constrcutive and detailed manner -- and suggest alternatives. There's one group  in particular who could do so, and that's football staff, and there's loads of some level at least leasurely playing the game ... some even researching, as evidenced in the game's credits year in year out. It's argued there's involvement, but watching a manager going into this would be curious -- in particularly the tactical AI/UI, and its more recent overhauls throughout the years (which to me are "regressing" to where the UI was ten years ago,.. to a degree). Some like that, but that's in parts what I mean with the game possibly becoming too "inbred".

There seems a push behind the scenes to re-enter micro details of a purely engine mechanics level. Else the purely SI concept of "mentality" wouldn't have explicitly popped up again, and several overhauls more. Not disputing any those. But that too has always been "FM vs RL", and bringing it all back into the fold explicitly, seems like side-stepping the initial course of development in a sense. If the main feedback wasn't from coders and FM regulars alike, I'd argue that would never have happened. In particular if the replacement arguably is  less "football" than what was in before (debatable), and at best / only really to be explained to anyone or fully understood by grasping necessary game mechanics (not as much debatable).