Kenny Peeters

Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
61
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I tried everything, I did everything, I lose everything...too bad the other way around (tried nothing, did nothing, lose nothing) isn't that successful too. I've searched on the internet for everything
- Analyzing opponents
- Analyzing own team
- How to create tactic
- How to set training
- How to set opposition instructions
- How to exploit the weakness of opponent
- How to use shouts

I don't know where it all goes wrong...and I just keep buying the game because I like to play it but I obviously suck at it. I like the game, but I don't have fun with it. It just seems like you have to quit your hobby's and quit your day job to overanalyzing something, just to win a game.

I would LOVE to know what the learning curve for this ******* game is, because it's taking too **** long !

Losing again...because defenders make a fault they learn NOT to make in youth training
- Stay off the ball if you can't touch it good enough to get it anywhere save
- Don't defend to the center
 
Last edited:
Alot of problems people have is that they are too impatient with what they have to work with. I had a problem where I was constantly overhauling my tactics because it failed for 2 or 3 games. Here's what I would suggest:

1. Find a basic formation and stick with. Constantly tweaking your formation and tactics never works well for me.
2. When you sign a ton of new players, it takes a while to adjust. I believe Chemistry is a strong hidden feature in this game. It takes a while for guys to get used to playing with each other. I have some of my worst seasons after I sign a bunch of new players. They usually don't start playing well together until halfway through the first year.
3. Pay attention to morale. Get low morale guys out of lineups, and get high morale guys in. Teams with confidence play better.

Nothing flashy here, just keep it simple and I think you'll find more success. I personally enjoy the little bit of struggle. To me, these guys who take their Blue Square clubs up to the Premiership in 5 seasons is not my idea of fun or realism. I have no interest in "super tactics" that unrealistically steamroll squads that are much more talented than mine.
 
have you tried FMC, slimmed down game mode that may suit you.
 
Yup, patience is a big thing in this game. I'm currently playing as Vitesse Arnhem manager, and initially my 4-1-2-1-2 tactic was failing horribly, but I knew I had the right personnel for it to work. If you go to your tactics page and look at the familiarity your team has with your formation, I personally find once it gets to around 3/4 familiarity my team plays a lot better. I only managed 5 points in my first 5 games, which considering we're touted as title contenders is not good. Since then, and sticking with the same tactic, our performances dramatically improved, and we're now top of the league half-way through the season.

I know the temptation to chop and change is there, especially when your team expectations are high, but just stick it out for a little bit. If it doesn't turn around, then you really know it's time to try something different. But not after a small stretch of games.
 
I've enjoyed this game less than other FM's.

No matter what the mods say, it is not a fair or balanced game.
 
I've enjoyed this game less than other FM's.

No matter what the mods say, it is not a fair or balanced game.

The match Engine is the same for user and AI. No matter how much you say otherwise. This is a fact stated over and over. You can choose not to believe it, but you'd be wrong. Unless of course you are openly calling the makers of the game liars.
 
The match Engine is the same for user and AI. No matter how much you say otherwise. This is a fact stated over and over. You can choose not to believe it, but you'd be wrong. Unless of course you are openly calling the makers of the game liars.

Maybe so, but I don't know how you "program" a ME of AI, but it's normal that something programmed can make a series of "right" decisions.

But, if you have "experience" in the game, I do believe you can succeed with (almost) anything you want in the game.
 
Maybe so, but I don't know how you "program" a ME of AI, but it's normal that something programmed can make a series of "right" decisions.

But, if you have "experience" in the game, I do believe you can succeed with (almost) anything you want in the game.

Anything the AI can do, you can do, and usually much better too. The AI has got better, but its simply not on our level, not by any means.
 
Anything the AI can do, you can do, and usually much better too. The AI has got better, but its simply not on our level, not by any means.


Where I would start is head over to the SI forums, and read some of the threads by Cleon and Wwfan in the tactical section there, or have a look at some of the tactical threads by thebetterhalf here
 
I remember not long ago people were complaining that previous games were to easy, now that its been made more difficult ( more realistic ) people are going crazy over it. Be truthful would you rather play a game that's far to easy or a game that's challenging and takes patience ?
 
Forget about defending on the current patch because it's not happening, attacking is the way to go if you want success. Think Keegan's Newcastle.
 
JP Woody - defending can happen on the current patch. Using 4-5-1Madrid! Tactic I've achieved 14 clean sheets in 26 match with Cambridge United in the prem (predicted 9th) and only conceded more than one goal in a game on 2 occasions!
 
JP Woody - defending can happen on the current patch. Using 4-5-1Madrid! Tactic I've achieved 14 clean sheets in 26 match with Cambridge United in the prem (predicted 9th) and only conceded more than one goal in a game on 2 occasions!

That's good, speaking from my own personal experience though im finding Attack is the best form of defence. On the last patch i was playing a defensively sound counter attacking style with great success, if i try that now though i find i just get peppered with shots.
 
I find that a tactic that solely focuses on attacking tends to be a lot less consistent than a more balanced tactic, lots of big wins, but loses against lower league teams who hit on the counter or against big sides who overcome with quality (Found this with tactics i've created myself and other people's that i've tested).
 
I find that a tactic that solely focuses on attacking tends to be a lot less consistent than a more balanced tactic, lots of big wins, but loses against lower league teams who hit on the counter or against big sides who overcome with quality (Found this with tactics i've created myself and other people's that i've tested).

Im not having that problem but each to their own i suppose.
 
Speaking of problems anyone else having players miss penalties since the update? I've gotten 6 but only been able to score one and that was a rebound after the goalie saved it.
 
Well since my pc crashed on me the other week I had to start a new save and I'm really struggling to motivate myself to play. Since this new patch nothing seems to go my way and it's really starting to feel like pulling teeth.
 
I can prove this, because were the computer to play another computer it would act differently.

Two computers playing FM2013 without any human interaction would result in a 0-0 draw, as a computer cannot out-think another computer. Both are made in more or less the same way.

The human brain can out-think a computer (Gary Kasparov, anybody?) and therefore the player is going to act differently in a game - therefore, the computer must know it is playing a human.

Let's run a test then - two computers playing each other, and I will give £50 to Help A Capital Child if proven right (I'll still give £30 if I'm proven wrong - I'm willing to copy my receipt from them as proof of payment) if:

a) the score is not a draw
b) the in-game play is random (i.e. one team gets all the bookings/red cards/goals disallowed etc.)

Now I would not call anybody a liar, but maybe somebody is either oblivious to the problems documented or is being economic with the truth.

By the way, my cousin is a gamer and has written games in the past and his opinion is that the game is unbalanced - he's 36 and has MCSE, CCNA, CCEA, VCP,Oracle, Linux, Oracle, SQL, Shell, Cobol, BA Hons Visual Effects and BA (Hons) Digital Animation qualifications, so he's hardly another numptie moaner.
 
I can prove this, because were the computer to play another computer it would act differently.

Two computers playing FM2013 without any human interaction would result in a 0-0 draw, as a computer cannot out-think another computer. Both are made in more or less the same way.

The human brain can out-think a computer (Gary Kasparov, anybody?) and therefore the player is going to act differently in a game - therefore, the computer must know it is playing a human.

Let's run a test then - two computers playing each other, and I will give £50 to Help A Capital Child if proven right (I'll still give £30 if I'm proven wrong - I'm willing to copy my receipt from them as proof of payment) if:

a) the score is not a draw
b) the in-game play is random (i.e. one team gets all the bookings/red cards/goals disallowed etc.)

Now I would not call anybody a liar, but maybe somebody is either oblivious to the problems documented or is being economic with the truth.

By the way, my cousin is a gamer and has written games in the past and his opinion is that the game is unbalanced - he's 36 and has MCSE, CCNA, CCEA, VCP,Oracle, Linux, Oracle, SQL, Shell, Cobol, BA Hons Visual Effects and BA (Hons) Digital Animation qualifications, so he's hardly another numptie moaner.

You listed a load of qualifications, and he is still wrong. For example its already proven that human players generally are more capable of getting better finishing ratios that the AI. 50 users over 2 weeks, debunked the theory that the AI is a "super finisher" and thus actually proved that the Match engine was universal. It's been proven time and again, by every player who brings through a lower side, or every player who smashes the league by 20 points, or goes unbeaten. If anything I'd argue the AI needs to be made even tougher, given more logical processes to make.

The thread for that is on SI forums, go have a search. Also you really think he is the only qualified person playing the game, who has written games before? It's not about moaning or anything, he'd still be wrong. He can have his opinion, he'd still be wrong, belief in the face of a fact is still wrong. (By the way, if you want to know just how highly regarded they are in the games industry, both have MBEs for their services)

The human brain can out-think a computer (Gary Kasparov, anybody?) and therefore the player is going to act differently in a game - therefore, the computer must know it is playing a human.

The fact that a human will out think a computer (because it has the capacity to learn that computer doesnt) , does not mean a computer will realise its playing a human. That requires a) an ability to see through your screen, and b) a cognitive ability to learn/recognise. Neither of which exist in.

You have made a huge leap, and a totally incorrect one too, acting differently does not suddenly mean it must be a human, it cannot recognise a human. Deep Blue didnt recognise Kasparov, it was merely acting/responding to his moves using a series of pre programmed logic, and the engineers had to reprogram it between games.

The AI cannot tell anything about user and AI, it only react to a series of inputs with a set of choices of its own, the choices it can make are many, but far more limited that anything we can do, because it simply hasn't got the level of human logic. It can only use the TC and the shouts, it cannot manipulate sliders like we do, it cannot create custom shouts like we do, the coding for it is not yet strong enough to fully understand all the links between philosophies like we do. You cant prove it because you don't even understand how the Match Engine AI in football manager works, all it sees are inputs.

You've already been proven wrong because the AI already plays it self! How do you think the other games are generated? They are not random, they are played out AI vs AI in the match engine.

There isn't a person on the planet who understands the coding of Football Manager better than Paul Collyer, since he built the code himself, he built every point, he knows exactly how and why it does something. So certainly not oblivious. You just said they are being economical with the truth so in fact you are calling the person who built it a liar. Which is ridiculous.

Its not about opinion its about facts. Paul Collyer designed the Match Engine as universal, in order to try and replicate real life football, it cannot have rubber band AI, which it doesn't.

By all means, join the SI forums send him a PM and ask him yourself. He will give you a straight answer that you are wrong.

You keep arguing that the game is unbalanced against you, it isn't, otherwise people would not have the success they do.

Long story short: No the AI doesn't work the way you think, you are wrong. I cannot be any blunter than that. Its nothing to do with moaning about winning or losing. It simply doesn't work that way.

The man who created the game will tell you that, since he has said it many times before. If you are not going to believe him, then frankly we are done on this discussion.
 
Last edited:
Top