FM - Unplayable?

[Shaneckham]

David Villa has had numerous chances for Barcelona in recent times, didn't stop him going 10+ games without a goal. Even though he was getting the chances, people would say he's underperforming if he goes that long without a goal, no? And this is from one of the greatest finishers in the world. Messi missed some glorious chances against Arsenal at the Emirates. The point is, that even the greatest of players will miss chances. The game is replicating this. If you're missing so many chances in so many games, then it's your fault. Not the match engine.

And i agree that the game is realistic in that sense how ever still happens to often and to many clear cuts u wouldnt see david villa clean through 5 times in a game missing all of them. When a player is clean through no defenders near him and he misses these often with top stats then i cant see how this would be my fault. I clearly got my team playing right to get him into that position, once hes through its down to the player to put the ball in i cant tell that player where to put the ball.

---------- Post added at 12:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:13 PM ----------

David Villa has had numerous chances for Barcelona in recent times, didn't stop him going 10+ games without a goal. Even though he was getting the chances, people would say he's underperforming if he goes that long without a goal, no? And this is from one of the greatest finishers in the world. Messi missed some glorious chances against Arsenal at the Emirates. The point is, that even the greatest of players will miss chances. The game is replicating this. If you're missing so many chances in so many games, then it's your fault. Not the match engine.

---------- Post added at 12:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:05 PM ----------



Have competition in the squad. I have Hernandez, Rooney and Rossi all competing for 2 strike spots. Also have a top regen youth striker who plays regularly, so 4 competing for 2 spots. The perfect ratio. Team talks. If they're determined, expect the best from them and they'll usually deliver. If they're low on confidence naturally or due to form, then don't pressure them. If they score in the first half, then "have faith" and they almost always do even better in the 2nd half.

Teaching/Un-learning the correct PPM's. Got a pacey poacher with decent dribbling, then teaching him to round the keeper is great etc.

Will give it a try mate, iv already ask neymar to round the keeper so just waiting on that one. Il try the team talk thing to cheers bud.

 

[Joel`]

And i agree that the game is realistic in that sense how ever still happens to often and to many clear cuts u wouldnt see david villa clean through 5 times in a game missing all of them. When a player is clean through no defenders near him and he misses these often with top stats then i cant see how this would be my fault. I clearly got my team playing right to get him into that position, once hes through its down to the player to put the ball in i cant tell that player where to put the ball.

Because there's much more to the game than just tactics, as I illustrated above.

 

[dair]

@Joel

I would be happy for you to explain the fault in the tactics. Here a typical example of my game via pictures.

[/URL] Uploaded with ImageShack.us[/IMG]

Opponent is purple, I am red. Their player takes the throw in but my defender reacts quickest and hoofs the ball upfield to my striker. Black arrow show relatively where the ball is hit. White lines show movement. Due to my strikers (#14) tremendous pace he outruns their defender and gets to the ball first (white dot). From there on he dribbles to the penalty box with the GK retreating to the box.

[/URL] Uploaded with ImageShack.us[/IMG]

Oh no! My striker is now completely one on one with the keeper! Gee, I wonder what he will do? Maybe he will go around him? Or maybe put it in the corner? Mighty fine hoofball it was from my defender! My striker is clear of all opposition players! (blue line shows relatively where the opposing defenders are, still not caught up to my striker)

[/URL] Uploaded with ImageShack.us[/IMG]

Just kidding. He was going to shoot straight at the GK all along. Run along son, you'll get another 14 chances like this and MAYBE, if you're lucky you will score.

This happens from whatever position he starts in. Whether running down the middle or cutting inside from wide positions. Go on mate, how is this a problem of tactics.

 

[Joel`]

I repeat:

Because there's much more to the game than just tactics, as I illustrated above.

 

[dair]

I repeat:

Thats all? Rotation and PPM are the only solution you offer? Drogba. Regen in OP. Torres. Anelka. etc.

There is plenty of rotation and I'm well aware of PPMs. **** I could probably buy Higuain just for the heck of it to add more competiton but they would still miss the same amount of chances. (higuain has 19/19 finishing/composure btw)

EDIT: Furthermore this is the exact problem of FM. Far too many such chances. Remind me of one game in the past year where you saw such golden opportunities?

 

[Joel`]

Thats all? Rotation and PPM are the only solution you offer? Drogba. Regen in OP. Torres. Anelka. etc.

There is plenty of rotation and I'm well aware of PPMs. **** I could probably buy Higuain just for the heck of it to add more competiton but they would still miss the same amount of chances. (higuain has 19/19 finishing/composure btw)

EDIT: Furthermore this is the exact problem of FM. Far too many such chances. Remind me of one game in the past year where you saw such golden opportunities?

Also, the CCC stat is useless. What you see on screen is a representation of what the match engine is trying to produce. So what looks straightforward isn't necessarily.

And you say this is the problem with FM. I've proven that it is possible for strikers to score many goals, and so have many other. hence disproving your theory. I'm not going to bother trying to help when you're so arrogant and ignorant that it "absolutely cannot be my fault! It's the game against me!!!", so you won't even listen to suggestions.

There are many, many variables that go into deciding outcomes in FM. I really can't be bothered to list every one of them for someone as ungrateful as yourself. So enjoy playing a game that's fixed against you.

 

[dair]

Also, the CCC stat is useless. What you see on screen is a representation of what the match engine is trying to produce. So what looks straightforward isn't necessarily.

And you say this is the problem with FM. I've proven that it is possible for strikers to score many goals, and so have many other. hence disproving your theory. I'm not going to bother trying to help when you're so arrogant and ignorant that it "absolutely cannot be my fault! It's the game against me!!!", so you won't even listen to suggestions.

There are many, many variables that go into deciding outcomes in FM. I really can't be bothered to list every one of them for someone as ungrateful as yourself. So enjoy playing a game that's fixed against you.

The CCC stat is not useless. Count the amount of chances that are one on ones you get (the ones you actually watch via the match screen) and you will relatively get the same amount.

The game IS NOT fixed against me. In fact, I can win the league with Wolves in the first season. No problem. The problem is STRIKERS. MISSING. ONE. ON. ONE. CHANCES. Why can't you understand this? I don't care about losing. What amuses me is that my striker will score a 30 yard screamer before he finally decides to put in a one on one chance.

The point is that they WILL put only one goal in out of 8-12 chances. Yeah, Torres, and any striker on my team can still finish with over 40 goals. Thats not the problem.

Conclusion: my striker will get 50 goals a season. My striker will only put in 1/10 open chance in a game. The number of CCC/opportunities needs to be reduced. The conversion rate, though, increased.

What I want is only 3 or 2 such chances per game, but with my striker putting one of them in.

 

[TheEquinox]

I don't see this problem in my game (see my blog for details). Surely there are 100% chances from time to time which the strikers fail to convert but that happens in real life often enough as well and the opposing teams have the same problem. Certainly there are matches where your team is domination 89 minutes just to be caught by a counter in 90th minute, but hey - that's football.

I can't say I've got any of the problem I read about here at all. Some other guy wrote it was plain impossible to score with crossings to the head of a target man, hence my target man last season scored about 10 goals that way. If something doesn't work out as you expect, check your tactics and don't blame the game in first line. Up to some level it will always be unrealistic sometimes, but after playing all the other football manager games out there in the past, I can definately say this one is as realistic as it might get.

 

[Mike.]

The CCC stat is not useless. Count the amount of chances that are one on ones you get (the ones you actually watch via the match screen) and you will relatively get the same amount.

The game IS NOT fixed against me. In fact, I can win the league with Wolves in the first season. No problem. The problem is STRIKERS. MISSING. ONE. ON. ONE. CHANCES. Why can't you understand this? I don't care about losing. What amuses me is that my striker will score a 30 yard screamer before he finally decides to put in a one on one chance.

The point is that they WILL put only one goal in out of 8-12 chances. Yeah, Torres, and any striker on my team can still finish with over 40 goals. Thats not the problem.

Conclusion: my striker will get 50 goals a season. My striker will only put in 1/10 open chance in a game. The number of CCC/opportunities needs to be reduced. The conversion rate, though, increased.

What I want is only 3 or 2 such chances per game, but with my striker putting one of them in.

the CCC stat is useless because it is entirely qualitative, and quantative. There is no one specific set of bundaries for it, hence why its not even used as a real statistic. Your conclusion therefore doesn't work. the best strikers in the world have a shots conversion rate to goals of about 16-20%, FM replicates the figure as shown by their numerous stats soak tests.

 

[dair]

I don't see this problem in my game (see my blog for details). Surely there are 100% chances from time to time which the strikers fail to convert but that happens in real life often enough as well and the opposing teams have the same problem. Certainly there are matches where your team is domination 89 minutes just to be caught by a counter in 90th minute, but hey - that's football.

I can't say I've got any of the problem I read about here at all. Some other guy wrote it was plain impossible to score with crossings to the head of a target man, hence my target man last season scored about 10 goals that way. If something doesn't work out as you expect, check your tactics and don't blame the game in first line. Up to some level it will always be unrealistic sometimes, but after playing all the other football manager games out there in the past, I can definately say this one is as realistic as it might get.

Yes its realistic. but it can be improved. I can't tell you how many times I've been Wenger'd in the last minute. Penalties, headers, stupid Gk. But the point is that I don't care because I always see this types of goals in real life. Chicharito, Kalou, etc. They always happen. What I don't see is strikers shooting at GK every chance they get. What I don't see is defenders being split open and dominated by throughballs. (the problem with AI defending, not mine)

the CCC stat is useless because it is entirely qualitative, and quantative. There is no one specific set of bundaries for it, hence why its not even used as a real statistic. Your conclusion therefore doesn't work. the best strikers in the world have a shots conversion rate to goals of about 16-20%, FM replicates the figure as shown by their numerous stats soak tests.

OK, so next time you play an FM game, just count the number of such opportunities down on paper. I do this. And then I compare to the CCC stat and its almost identical 99% of the time. The reason why CCC is not tracked IRL is because they almost never happen. Maybe one - three times per game.

The conversion rate of strikers is like that because they don't have that many chances in real life. Look how tough it is to create space and run directly at the keeper without any other players bothering you. One has to have exceptional talent to slip from the back line and latch onto the ball.

 

[Joel`]

The CCC stat is not useless. Count the amount of chances that are one on ones you get (the ones you actually watch via the match screen) and you will relatively get the same amount.

The game IS NOT fixed against me. In fact, I can win the league with Wolves in the first season. No problem. The problem is STRIKERS. MISSING. ONE. ON. ONE. CHANCES. Why can't you understand this? I don't care about losing. What amuses me is that my striker will score a 30 yard screamer before he finally decides to put in a one on one chance.

The point is that they WILL put only one goal in out of 8-12 chances. Yeah, Torres, and any striker on my team can still finish with over 40 goals. Thats not the problem.

Conclusion: my striker will get 50 goals a season. My striker will only put in 1/10 open chance in a game. The number of CCC/opportunities needs to be reduced. The conversion rate, though, increased.

What I want is only 3 or 2 such chances per game, but with my striker putting one of them in.

So you're saying that you only score 1/10 chances, but that you score 50 goals a season? So you're saying you'll create 500 CCC's a season, giving an average of 8-10 each game. And YOU'RE complaining about unrealism? Really? You say show a striker that will miss that many chances. Show me a modern team in the top leagues with that chance conversion rate. You can't. You're most likely just using ridiculous hyperbole to prove your point, because if you're scoring that many goals a season - then your strikers are pretty **** fine. As I said before, the CCC stat isn't necessarily clear cut. Especially if you play in 2D, it's difficult to judge what should actually be a goal, and what the computer tells you should. Look at the quality of the chance rather than a computer generated stat.

A clear cut chance is not a quantifiable stat, meaning that the computer cannot give you accurate data on how many there have been compared to say, possession. SI should really remove it because the horrible inaccuracy consistently spawns threads like these.

Your striker scores 50 a season. Why the **** are you complaining?

 

[Mike.]

Joel here's a interesting fact: SI never ever wanted the CCC stat in the game, it was introduced because lots of the fanbase clamoured for it. And they say the customer is always right...

 

[dair]

So you're saying that you only score 1/10 chances, but that you score 50 goals a season? So you're saying you'll create 500 CCC's a season, giving an average of 8-10 each game. And YOU'RE complaining about unrealism? Really? You say show a striker that will miss that many chances. Show me a modern team in the top leagues with that chance conversion rate. You can't. You're most likely just using ridiculous hyperbole to prove your point, because if you're scoring that many goals a season - then your strikers are pretty **** fine. As I said before, the CCC stat isn't necessarily clear cut. Especially if you play in 2D, it's difficult to judge what should actually be a goal, and what the computer tells you should. Look at the quality of the chance rather than a computer generated stat.

A clear cut chance is not a quantifiable stat, meaning that the computer cannot give you accurate data on how many there have been compared to say, possession. SI should really remove it because the horrible inaccuracy consistently spawns threads like these.

Your striker scores 50 a season. Why the **** are you complaining?

Thats exactly why I'm complaining. Too many chances = LOW CONVERSION RATE for one on ones. Otherwise imagine if my strikers put in at least 1/2 of them. That would mean we won each game by like 5+ goals. How else am I supposed to judge a chance? All I can see is a blue ball moving towards a yellow "keeper" ball. Or some low animation 3d figures. All I have is the commentary and the strikers position.

Why the **** am I complaining? See above. Again, read the previous post. Look at the amount of chances that your striker/player has that look golden judging by their position only for them to miss.

 

[Joel`]

Thats exactly why I'm complaining. Too many chances = LOW CONVERSION RATE for one on ones. Otherwise imagine if my strikers put in at least 1/2 of them. That would mean we won each game by like 5+ goals. How else am I supposed to judge a chance? All I can see is a blue ball moving towards a yellow "keeper" ball. Or some low animation 3d figures. All I have is the commentary and the strikers position.

Why the **** am I complaining? See above. Again, read the previous post. Look at the amount of chances that your striker/player has that look golden judging by their position only for them to miss.

The point is that it's computer generated. The visual representation and the actual computer generated outcome in the match engine can't marry up perfectly. Hence the computer will tell you something is clear cut when it isn't necessarily. As I've said, it isn't quantifiable value, so the CCC statistic essentially serves no real purpose. A statistician would frankly be fired on the spot if he added something like that into his data. Consider you have a car race, you aren't told anything about them, you are told they're all very fast. This is essentially you being told what is a clear cut chance. You are then given figures about performance of each cars. Do you consider an opinionated statement or factual evidence you know to be true? Now, you KNOW that your striker scores 50 goals a season. You are TOLD what he should and shouldn't be doing. For the love of God, take the 50 goals and run. You're doing something right, that's a brilliant record for any striker.

You're scoring 50 goals a season, be happy for Christ's sake. And how high do you actually think RL conversion rates are?

 

[Mike.]

Yes its realistic. but it can be improved. I can't tell you how many times I've been Wenger'd in the last minute. Penalties, headers, stupid Gk. But the point is that I don't care because I always see this types of goals in real life. Chicharito, Kalou, etc. They always happen. What I don't see is strikers shooting at GK every chance they get. What I don't see is defenders being split open and dominated by throughballs. (the problem with AI defending, not mine)



OK, so next time you play an FM game, just count the number of such opportunities down on paper. I do this. And then I compare to the CCC stat and its almost identical 99% of the time. The reason why CCC is not tracked IRL is because they almost never happen. Maybe one - three times per game.

The conversion rate of strikers is like that because they don't have that many chances in real life. Look how tough it is to create space and run directly at the keeper without any other players bothering you. One has to have exceptional talent to slip from the back line and latch onto the ball.

Worng, the reason why its not tracked is because its qualitative. Some CCCs are clearer that others, and its very difficult, nay its almost impossible to put a quantifiable boundary on a qualitative stat.

Really? seem to remember a lot of hernandez goals are like that, a lot of goals in spain are scored like that. The conversin rate matches up in the game and real life

If its realistic and can be improved, how is it unplayable?

Do you want a solution or are you just raging, becuase if you are just raging theres a thread for that

 

[Joel`]

OK, so next time you play an FM game, just count the number of such opportunities down on paper. I do this. And then I compare to the CCC stat and its almost identical 99% of the time. The reason why CCC is not tracked IRL is because they almost never happen. Maybe one - three times per game.

The conversion rate of strikers is like that because they don't have that many chances in real life. Look how tough it is to create space and run directly at the keeper without any other players bothering you. One has to have exceptional talent to slip from the back line and latch onto the ball.

This just further backs my statement that the CCC stat in game is inflated. You say what YOU write down is 99% identical to in game. What I write down may be 10% identical. This is the exact reason it isn't a statistic. If someone tells you Barcelona have 65% possession, you cannot argue with that. It can be calculated from pre-defined statistical variables. But if someone tells you "That was easy!" I could easily say "No, not really he was off balance on his weaker foot". You see, you cannot make hard stats from opinions. You simply cannot, and that is why they are not recorded. Your argument that they don't record them because there aren't many of them is laughable, it really is. Why do they record red cards then?

 

[dair]

The point is that it's computer generated. The visual representation and the actual computer generated outcome in the match engine can't marry up perfectly. Hence the computer will tell you something is clear cut when it isn't necessarily. As I've said, it isn't quantifiable value, so the CCC statistic essentially serves no real purpose. A statistician would frankly be fired on the spot if he added something like that into his data. Consider you have a car race, you aren't told anything about them, you are told they're all very fast. This is essentially you being told what is a clear cut chance. You are then given figures about performance of each cars. Do you consider an opinionated statement or factual evidence you know to be true? Now, you KNOW that your striker scores 50 goals a season. You are TOLD what he should and shouldn't be doing. For the love of God, take the 50 goals and run. You're doing something right, that's a brilliant record for any striker.

You're scoring 50 goals a season, be happy for Christ's sake. And how high do you actually think RL conversion rates are?

Whats the point of Total shots stat? They are only computer generated outcomes that are represented via visuals
Whats the point of Shots on target stat? They are only computer generated outcomes that are represented via visuals
Whats the point of Possession stat? They are only computer generated outcomes that are represented via visuals
Whats the point of any stat? They are only computer generated outcomes that are represented via visuals

The point is conversion rates. Lets say that SI put a conversion rate of 1/10 of total shots on target. Thats fine. I agree, thats true. What I don't agree with is 1/10 conversion rate of one on ones.

The one one one conversion rate should be 3/10 for top finishers. Meaning if they get 10 chances one on one, they should score 3 on average. Maybe sometimes 2 or 1 or 4. But no, it can never happen because that would mean that I would win by 3-5 goals every match.

This just further backs my statement that the CCC stat in game is inflated. You say what YOU write down is 99% identical to in game. What I write down may be 10% identical. This is the exact reason it isn't a statistic. If someone tells you Barcelona have 65% possession, you cannot argue with that. It can be calculated from pre-defined statistical variables. But if someone tells you "That was easy!" I could easily say "No, not really he was off balance on his weaker foot". You see, you cannot make hard stats from opinions. You simply cannot, and that is why they are not recorded. Your argument that they don't record them because there aren't many of them is laughable, it really is. Why do they record red cards then?

Fine, don't use CCC stats. Go on, next time judge by the position of your striker and the opportunity. Write it down and compare how many you scored. How am I supposed to know whether he is off balance? When he is off balance it says so via commentary. For example when my striker takes a shot wide it says "But he doesn't striker it cleanly". I accept that. The match engine is not like IRL and the visual representation is poor.

But then it says 20 times per game that he missed an easy chance and that should have hit the back of the net/missed opportunity. And it really does look like a wasted chance because of the strikers position, but I can only judge on commentary.

They record red cards for discipline reasons. I wonder how someone is supposed to get a 3 match ban if nobody knows how many cards he has?

 

[kandersson]

I think OP makes some valid points.

Sometimes it feels like the game simply won't allow CCC's to be converted into goals to keep the scoreline realistic.

besides, my biggest complain would be the ridiculously high amount of goals (both for and against) from corner kicks and indirect free kicks: not very rewarding to win with a brace of your towering centre-back, still better than losing to a corner/free kick combo from the AI, especially when your international class strikers miss 90% of 1-on-1 chances.

also, I often feel form-morale-reputation (in this order) play a bigger part than tactics and players skills. So called man management (aka teamtalks and private chats) seems to be more decisive than tactical/technical skills. Which might reflect reality in some way (think Capello or Mourinho), but it's hardly enjoyable in a videogame.

I'd like to say I'm not speaking out of frustrations or bad results. I've won a number of championships in several different countries (including taking San Marino from italian 4th tier to winning Serie A), but I must say the game (especially the ME) has been somewhat disappointing for me this year. Still addictive enough though

 

[Joel`]

Whats the point of Total shots stat? They are only computer generated outcomes that are represented via visuals
Whats the point of Shots on target stat? They are only computer generated outcomes that are represented via visuals
Whats the point of Possession stat? They are only computer generated outcomes that are represented via visuals
Whats the point of any stat? They are only computer generated outcomes that are represented via visuals

The point is conversion rates. Lets say that SI put a conversion rate of 1/10 of total shots on target. Thats fine. I agree, thats true. What I don't agree with is 1/10 conversion rate of one on ones.

The one one one conversion rate should be 3/10 for top finishers. Meaning if they get 10 chances one on one, they should score 3 on average. Maybe sometimes 2 or 1 or 4. But no, it can never happen because that would mean that I would win by 3-5 goals every match.

Sigh.

You can DEFINE what a shot is. You can DEFINE when a shot is on target. You can DEFINE possession. You CANNOT define a clear cut chance. What the computer thinks is a clear cut chance. Vice versa you may think something is clear cut and the computer says not. I've seen free kicks from 25 yards out classified as clear cut, and I've seen cut backs to 8 yards out not classed as clear cut. I disagree with both of these, but if I just watched the statistic screen I wouldn't know. This is the whole **** point.

If you're really stupid enough to essentially be told an opinion is factual, then I can't be bothered with you. Read my above post.

 

[ChrisBird]

Meanwhile my striker in typical hilarious fashion decides that he wants the commentator to say "Oh, that was a sitter!" or "How did he miss that?" or "He missed when it was easier to score!" or "Should have done much better with that chance!" and etc, but I'm sure you get the point.

[/URL]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us[/IMG]

Who is the striker there that you have taken a screenshot of?

Also he's scored 4 out of his last 5. How many do you want him to score?