Many shots, few or no goals advice/answer

Death Ball

Member
May 17, 2009
2,340
0
0
I realized that in the past, many of those complaining threads on not winning games having a lot of shots or having only one or two goals after thirty or more shots, more than fifteen on target, there's a point that always pops up and I've never addressed if answering, so I thought I'd do it now and have this visible for anyone who will come with that.

That point is "to avoid unrealistically inflated scorelines, when a team has a huge lot of shots, the engine will make scoring from them too difficult". I know it doesn't sound unreasonable and I won't say it's false or true. That's not the point. The point is that if you think that happens, then you shouldn't register that idea just for the sake of reinforcing your complaining here; you should work with it in the game. Do you find your team time and again shooting thirty times and scoring one or two goals tops, with too many scoreless goals? Do you think that is the explanation? Then think on it and use it. If having more than thirty shots will make scoring too hard for your team, change the tactic so your team will make less shots, just below that line from which the excessive reduction of goal likelihood triggers so each chance will be more likely to go in and in the balance you get better chances to score.

If chances for a shot being goal is 5% up to 19 shots and 1% from 20 shots, make a tactic that will make just under 20 shots and you'll have far better chances to win and get higher scores. If you're right, then that should start making your team banging in the goals and the wins. If it doesn't, then that is false.
 

WJ

Member
Apr 3, 2014
4,478
8
38
The thing is, taking many shots means that there isn't too much emphasis put on quality of the shots. It's just shots from anywhere.

Proper tactics generate fewer shots because players wait and get better chances, rather than just having to shoot because there's nothing else on.

It's not an artificial limiter. If you can create good chances/quality shots and take 40 shots, fine, but generally speaking, it doesn't happen.
 

SteVieBizzLe

Member
Apr 2, 2010
173
0
16
30
I realized that in the past, many of those complaining threads on not winning games having a lot of shots or having only one or two goals after thirty or more shots, more than fifteen on target, there's a point that always pops up and I've never addressed if answering, so I thought I'd do it now and have this visible for anyone who will come with that.

That point is "to avoid unrealistically inflated scorelines, when a team has a huge lot of shots, the engine will make scoring from them too difficult". I know it doesn't sound unreasonable and I won't say it's false or true. That's not the point. The point is that if you think that happens, then you shouldn't register that idea just for the sake of reinforcing your complaining here; you should work with it in the game. Do you find your team time and again shooting thirty times and scoring one or two goals tops, with too many scoreless goals? Do you think that is the explanation? Then think on it and use it. If having more than thirty shots will make scoring too hard for your team, change the tactic so your team will make less shots, just below that line from which the excessive reduction of goal likelihood triggers so each chance will be more likely to go in and in the balance you get better chances to score.

If chances for a shot being goal is 5% up to 19 shots and 1% from 20 shots, make a tactic that will make just under 20 shots and you'll have far better chances to win and get higher scores. If you're right, then that should start making your team banging in the goals and the wins. If it doesn't, then that is false.
The problem with your theory is how do you build a tactic to generate a particular number of shots?

Some games you will just steamroll the opponent if their defence has an off day or maybe your team talk inspires your forwards to super human performances.

Agree with WJ on this though, which is surprising as we haven't in the past, generic 'overload' tactics force the team to shoot at any given opportunity, whereas a more thoughtful tactic will focus on slower build up for better chances.

Although it doesn't make looking at those match stats post game any less infuriating when you have like 40+ shots but lose 1-0 to their solitary shot on goal.
 

WJ

Member
Apr 3, 2014
4,478
8
38
The problem with your theory is how do you build a tactic to generate a particular number of shots?

Some games you will just steamroll the opponent if their defence has an off day or maybe your team talk inspires your forwards to super human performances.

Agree with WJ on this though, which is surprising as we haven't in the past, generic 'overload' tactics force the team to shoot at any given opportunity, whereas a more thoughtful tactic will focus on slower build up for better chances.

Although it doesn't make looking at those match stats post game any less infuriating when you have like 40+ shots but lose 1-0 to their solitary shot on goal.
The 40+ shot issue was as much a user issue as it was an AI issue to just be way too defensive and, tbh, **** at setting up tactically.

The AI should be more competent this time around, which would see us dominate less.
 

SteVieBizzLe

Member
Apr 2, 2010
173
0
16
30
The 40+ shot issue was as much a user issue as it was an AI issue to just be way too defensive and, tbh, **** at setting up tactically.

The AI should be more competent this time around, which would see us dominate less.
Agree completely.

And yes, the AI seems much more switched on this time. Can still architect tactics to exploit space but the AI reactions and movements are much more realistic and less predictable. The people wanting auto-always-win tactics will hate it.
 

WJ

Member
Apr 3, 2014
4,478
8
38
The counter-attack is still a bit under-powered, but less so than last year and the AI is a bit more adept at setting up their tactics. It's better this year.
 

SteVieBizzLe

Member
Apr 2, 2010
173
0
16
30
Yeah, setting Counter Attack largely does nothing (in my experience), I've found Control gives a better result in producing a counter attacking style tactic.
 

WJ

Member
Apr 3, 2014
4,478
8
38
Yeah, setting Counter Attack largely does nothing (in my experience), I've found Control gives a better result in producing a counter attacking style tactic.
Control doesn't have counter attack enabled. Player decision-making is still not where it should be in a counter attack though, but it's a difficult thing to get spot on.
 

SteVieBizzLe

Member
Apr 2, 2010
173
0
16
30
Not saying that Control has counter attack enabled but it produces those results better than the counter attack strategy does.
 

Death Ball

Member
May 17, 2009
2,340
0
0
The problem with your theory is how do you build a tactic to generate a particular number of shots?

Some games you will just steamroll the opponent if their defence has an off day or maybe your team talk inspires your forwards to super human performances.

Agree with WJ on this though, which is surprising as we haven't in the past, generic 'overload' tactics force the team to shoot at any given opportunity, whereas a more thoughtful tactic will focus on slower build up for better chances.

Although it doesn't make looking at those match stats post game any less infuriating when you have like 40+ shots but lose 1-0 to their solitary shot on goal.
Two things to this:

A) Yes, he's right but that's not the point.

B) You've answered your own question.

I've never said you could control number of shots, that was just an example with crazily precise numbers I made up. Point is, "you get lots of shots and few goals and thing having lots of goals makes something in the game to make scoring too hard? Then do what is in your hand with your tactics to steer the team to make few goals so that anti inflated scorelines mechanism doesn't activate rather than use it for the sake of your argument without trying to work with it in the game". I must also note: I'm not saying that if you get fed up you can't mention it when you come to the frustration thread, of course you can, i say try to include that when you think your tactics before getting to that final frustration stage.
 

zJordan

Member
Jul 25, 2013
632
0
0
30
What I've found is winning is actually easier. I beat R. Madrid 5-1 as Barcelona despite having 5 shots to their 20+... I didn't even play Messi due to injury.
 

peterbolam78

Member
Jan 8, 2011
194
2
18
Shots to goals

to begin are shots on target the same as clear cut chances?. I am genuinely confused


Now I realise this is not a game I dominated possession wise but if they score half their on shot targets how do I not, also I understand the quality versus quantity theory, but these were viewed in full match with work ball into box and a control mentality.

is there anyway to to up my conversion rate or is it just a matter of quality strikers?

These are my tactics and team instructions

if this is the wrong thread I apologise and am happy to see it moved
 

WJ

Member
Apr 3, 2014
4,478
8
38
to begin are shots on target the same as clear cut chances?. I am genuinely confused


Now I realise this is not a game I dominated possession wise but if they score half their on shot targets how do I not, also I understand the quality versus quantity theory, but these were viewed in full match with work ball into box and a control mentality.

is there anyway to to up my conversion rate or is it just a matter of quality strikers?

These are my tactics and team instructions

if this is the wrong thread I apologise and am happy to see it moved
It should really be in the tactics forum. But no, shots on target is simply a shot on target. There's no indication that they were good or bad chances.

In your case, who's going to score? The only player around the box is the striker and even he has been given a withdrawn role. The 2 others you would have expected to make runs, the AML and AMR have been asked to reduce their forward runs from sometimes to rarely and also been instructed to hold up the ball, so they're not much of a goal threat, unless they have PPMs that will bail you out.

Then there are the wingback who are told to bomb forward, but at the same time you're reducing crosses. If and when they do cross, they're pinging inaccurate crosses at pace into the box where 1 player is waiting.

As I said, PPMs can alter the setup and help you out, but it looks like all your goal scoring hopes are on 1 player and 1 method of creating chances.
 
Top