Ive played this game since I came over from Championship Manager 4, which was a great game too. Every year I have loved this game and played it for days on end. This year has been no different except for one thing....I can't regularly win with any team. I'd never been on a FM forum until 09 because I was always good enough to make my own tactics and make them stick. For instance: in FM07 I started at the central coast Mariners, I won that a bunch of times, went to yeovil, got them to the top tier, joined liverpool, won everything, join inter, won everything. This year it doesn't seem to matter what I do I can't win anything. I know my transfers are good, I regularly pay players and sell them for 5-15 times what I paid. I used all the top recommended tactics from this site, I read that 30 page guide back the front, morale is usually great but nothing.... anyone else finding this? is it because im only using 9.1.0 or am I just going insane <) Any thoughts?
FM09 Vs FM05-08 Is it harder then it used to be?
- Thread starter Michzm
- Start date
- Replies 27
- Views 3K
BigAgballer
Member
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 229
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
I think the engine has improved to a point where crazy win streaks is much harder, unless you find the right chemsitry/exploits in the game lol... But I find if you stick with the same group of guys, let them gel, they evetually become a force to be reckon with.
BigAgballer
Member
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 229
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Try the tactics suggested by the man utd guy, his works real well. Post ur team, maybe we can help u out.
9.3 is a much better match engine than 9.1. 9.1 favours the long ball through the middle far too much - defend with a low d-line and play long balls down the middle to a decent target man and you'll win more than you lose.
Game is definitely much more difficult than 05. Not a bad thing. There are still exploits but the match engine is becoming absolutely fantastic because there isn't really a 'killer tactic' which will work all the time against every team. (I think there's potentially one which will win 99.9% of games but I've no interest in proving what is theoretically possible - Tylerbode's 4-3-2-1 remade by someone who knows how to create a defence would perhaps be close to it).
Game is definitely much more difficult than 05. Not a bad thing. There are still exploits but the match engine is becoming absolutely fantastic because there isn't really a 'killer tactic' which will work all the time against every team. (I think there's potentially one which will win 99.9% of games but I've no interest in proving what is theoretically possible - Tylerbode's 4-3-2-1 remade by someone who knows how to create a defence would perhaps be close to it).
I agree, it appears to be a much nicer game engine then previously, it just seems like this one is far more frustrating, it seems more likely to lose in the last 20 minutes then you used to, more shoots - less goals. but again this is just my opinion
The game rewards close attention to detail more than it used to I think. So if you fail to respond to AI changes of tactics and formations then you'll get caught out. Likewise, the impact of condition and the trade-off between pressing levels and condition are also much more accurate. It's very possible now to emulate the top teams manner of wearing the opposition down through possession football before moving in for the kill on a tired defence in the last 20 minutes.
Shots vs goals is a tactical issue more than anything. If you're having lots of shots and very few goals then either your strikers are performing like numpties (in which case you need to look at motivation and confidence levels) or your tactics aren't creating good enough chances for your strikers to finish off.
Shots vs goals is a tactical issue more than anything. If you're having lots of shots and very few goals then either your strikers are performing like numpties (in which case you need to look at motivation and confidence levels) or your tactics aren't creating good enough chances for your strikers to finish off.
I agree, but there is still a problem with some of the one-on-ones on fm09. time and time again i draw because my players are through on goal and then shoot straight at the keeper even when they have the 'places shots in the corner' (or something similar) prefered move and high finishing
its not like i dont create the chances but they arent taken a lot of the time
its not like i dont create the chances but they arent taken a lot of the time
The best real-life players score around 40% of one on ones. (Tactical analysis of real games has proven this - classic example was Torres goal against the Mancs at Old Trafford - VDS came exceptionally close to saving it). Lesser players score far less. At least in the game you can improve that figure with PPMs (perhaps up to 60% with lobs keeper and run round keeper).
There really isn't any problem with the game's replication of real-life here. The problem is the perception of the 'average' football fan weaned on a diet of highlight packages which fail to explain basic fundamentals and treat a missed one-on-one as something exceptional rather than praising the skill required to successfully convert such a 'chance'. All chances are not equal - and a striker running straight at the keeper in a one-on-one situation is one of the least favourable for the striker. Better is to have an angle on goal which forces the goalkeeper to narrow one specific angle and leaves the other far more exposed and easier to aim for.
There really isn't any problem with the game's replication of real-life here. The problem is the perception of the 'average' football fan weaned on a diet of highlight packages which fail to explain basic fundamentals and treat a missed one-on-one as something exceptional rather than praising the skill required to successfully convert such a 'chance'. All chances are not equal - and a striker running straight at the keeper in a one-on-one situation is one of the least favourable for the striker. Better is to have an angle on goal which forces the goalkeeper to narrow one specific angle and leaves the other far more exposed and easier to aim for.
I do agree with that fact, I do need to pay more attention to the changing tactics during that match, I usually lose when they go 4-2-4. The strikers seem to be a bit manic depressant in my game. Every game, one or both strikers will run a 5.0-5.8
Ironically I was using the tactics you made and recommended to comeone a while back for lower divsions
Ironically I was using the tactics you made and recommended to comeone a while back for lower divsions
When the AI goes to 4-2-4 go to a control tactic which retains possession in the centre of midfield and is capable of counterattacking down the flanks and channels. 4-2-4 struggles to win the ball back and in attempting to do so, either the wing forwards have to drop deep, making it a 4-4-2 or the fullbacks have to push up, making it vulnerable to the counter.
If your strikers consistently get low ratings and the tactic is not at fault (which it may be - the tactics sets I uploaded to here are very, very basic TT&F ones which are designed to be tampered with for best effect), look at their motivation levels and figure out how best to motivate them and maintain their morale and motivation. Motivation levels in match are shown by going to Home Stats or Away Stats and selecting the drop down menu found on the top right hand of the screen. Figure out if the player needs a rocket or sympathy for a team-talk.
If your strikers consistently get low ratings and the tactic is not at fault (which it may be - the tactics sets I uploaded to here are very, very basic TT&F ones which are designed to be tampered with for best effect), look at their motivation levels and figure out how best to motivate them and maintain their morale and motivation. Motivation levels in match are shown by going to Home Stats or Away Stats and selecting the drop down menu found on the top right hand of the screen. Figure out if the player needs a rocket or sympathy for a team-talk.
yeah I knew about that, but I have never been 100% sure how to approach Motivatio. Like if a player is playing complacently, nerviously or poorly what do I say? I understand general team talks. my squad has nearly all suburb
I'm tempted to do a thread on the subject, but I'm very aware that I don't want to take credit away from the excellent thread by SFraser over in the Tactics section of SI. I'll think about doing something though, as I know that the thread isn't likely to be readily understood by a wider audience who just want to know what option to choose and when.
With your specific examples, I want to make a proviso before answering - different players respond differently. And their response will also change depending on circumstances. So the skill is spotting when the circumstances are the same and then use that knowledge for that specific player. It means 'knowing' your players. A good general guide to start learning is that players personalities seems to be linked to how they respond because the responses seem to be based on hidden mental attributes. However, even with personality types there is a wide range of different possibilities...
Complacency - I use 'go out and prove a point' (if available), or the 'not pleased' option. Occasionally 'angry' if the performance is very bad, however if it's that bad, then I'd be more likely to substitute the player. Note that complacency might not be a bad thing - a complacent player is also relaxed and some players play better when complacent (Sam Gargan (starts at Brighton) is such a player, SFraser on the SI boards says Berbatov is another).
Nervous - 'no pressure' or 'have faith'. Low morale would incline me to try 'have faith' as that seems to have an impact on morale. If the player is nervous but playing well, encouragement or pleased might be better options.
Poorly - 'go out and prove a point' (if available) or displeasure. Similar style to how I treat complacency really but with no doubt that poorly is a bad thing. Another thing to check out is why the player is playing poorly - if it's low morale, then 'have faith' or encouragement may be better options. If performance is still good, pleased might help out too.
As I said, these are general guidelines from which I start. There can't be specific rules unless one wishes to do it for every player in the game for every circumstance likely to appear. One thing I have noticed is that 'extra options' (eg 'prove a point', 'expect better') always seem to be provided for a reason. It is not worth using them all the time (counter-productive in the long run) but do help for short-term impact when used sensibly.
With your specific examples, I want to make a proviso before answering - different players respond differently. And their response will also change depending on circumstances. So the skill is spotting when the circumstances are the same and then use that knowledge for that specific player. It means 'knowing' your players. A good general guide to start learning is that players personalities seems to be linked to how they respond because the responses seem to be based on hidden mental attributes. However, even with personality types there is a wide range of different possibilities...
Complacency - I use 'go out and prove a point' (if available), or the 'not pleased' option. Occasionally 'angry' if the performance is very bad, however if it's that bad, then I'd be more likely to substitute the player. Note that complacency might not be a bad thing - a complacent player is also relaxed and some players play better when complacent (Sam Gargan (starts at Brighton) is such a player, SFraser on the SI boards says Berbatov is another).
Nervous - 'no pressure' or 'have faith'. Low morale would incline me to try 'have faith' as that seems to have an impact on morale. If the player is nervous but playing well, encouragement or pleased might be better options.
Poorly - 'go out and prove a point' (if available) or displeasure. Similar style to how I treat complacency really but with no doubt that poorly is a bad thing. Another thing to check out is why the player is playing poorly - if it's low morale, then 'have faith' or encouragement may be better options. If performance is still good, pleased might help out too.
As I said, these are general guidelines from which I start. There can't be specific rules unless one wishes to do it for every player in the game for every circumstance likely to appear. One thing I have noticed is that 'extra options' (eg 'prove a point', 'expect better') always seem to be provided for a reason. It is not worth using them all the time (counter-productive in the long run) but do help for short-term impact when used sensibly.
That makes for some interesting reading, the only down side to those 3 afflictions is that I found a lot of the time it tends to be a problem with the subs in the second half. Now if I give them a talk something along those lines at the end of the match do you believe that it rolls over to the next match, or it more something within the personality.....or am I reading a little too deeply into little coloured pixellated men?
Very good question and one for which there isn't a definitive answer, because there isn't a way to track motivation between the AM's teamtalk feedback post-match and before the next pre-match teamtalk.
My personal feeling is that the AM's feedback gives you an idea of the motivation level at the end of a match(but he only seems to pick up extreme reactions...) but that there are changes of motivation between matches. I believe this is why learning how to manipulate press conferences and other 'media' discussion helps - it may not only impact upon morale but also upon motivation levels. Apart from that, you have no control over the change in motivation between matches (and it does vary, of that I have no doubt, and my suspicion is that it does involve the hidden attributes).
edit: as for reading too much into the game... well it is possible, but I think this aspect of the game is surprisingly realistic (it certainly seems based upon modern motivational theory) and that, while it is not well understood by most players of the game, it is exceptionally complex and a credit to SI in terms of implementation if not in explanation or documentation
My personal feeling is that the AM's feedback gives you an idea of the motivation level at the end of a match(but he only seems to pick up extreme reactions...) but that there are changes of motivation between matches. I believe this is why learning how to manipulate press conferences and other 'media' discussion helps - it may not only impact upon morale but also upon motivation levels. Apart from that, you have no control over the change in motivation between matches (and it does vary, of that I have no doubt, and my suspicion is that it does involve the hidden attributes).
edit: as for reading too much into the game... well it is possible, but I think this aspect of the game is surprisingly realistic (it certainly seems based upon modern motivational theory) and that, while it is not well understood by most players of the game, it is exceptionally complex and a credit to SI in terms of implementation if not in explanation or documentation
Not something I've noticed to be honest. It could be that you're using counter-attacking against the wrong tactics? Counter-attacking works best when the opposition are pushing up against you, the AI is more reluctant to do this if it thinks it doesn't have absolute superiority so that might be what you're seeing.
The need to have a well gelled team is now more important than ever.There are to many impatient people playing expecting instant miracles from players and tactics constantly chopping and changing and making whole sale changes to the squad.This leads to a shambles of a team and a ****** off bored user.
A level headed methodical approach is needed,give players and tactics plenty of time to work.Then identify positions your weakest and carefully build your team.Don't be too hasty in throwing new signings straight into a team,allow them a settling in period.
The game is getting more realistic year on year,and with realism comes an increased level of difficulty and a steeper learning curve.
A level headed methodical approach is needed,give players and tactics plenty of time to work.Then identify positions your weakest and carefully build your team.Don't be too hasty in throwing new signings straight into a team,allow them a settling in period.
The game is getting more realistic year on year,and with realism comes an increased level of difficulty and a steeper learning curve.