retired_jerms

there is no doubt BigBadBri has some very good points regarding the goal distribution for the user team.
the amount of hat-tricks my players score is certainly over the top and then you may have an even game and then they couldn't hit a barn door especially with the bug caused by the 8.0.1 patch regarding shot ratio.

i still enjoy the game immensely though but some things definitely could be improved

retired_bpilla

I wrote an article over on GetSacked.Net about a common misconception that the AI is cheating or is biased somehow against the human user:

First and foremost, the AI doesn't cheat. Even if it may appear that you lose games in the dying minutes or concede three goals after going up two at halftime, no one's out to get you. In fact, the AI cannot cheat even if it "wanted" to. While you may personalize your game experience - playing whenever you'd like, as long as you wish, whatever way you see fit - the computer really has no choice in the matter. It has no feelings, no emotions an frankly doesn't give a damn if it wins or not!

The AI cannot differentiate between a human opponent or otherwise. Like any other computer program, it takes commands, toggles variables, inserts values and outputs results. Basically, it will do whatever it's told within the confines of the match engine. Obviously gamers have found that if the AI is down by a goal or two with 15-20 minutes to go, it will switch to a very attacking 4-2-4 formation. It's programmed to do that by the developers regardless if it's playing a user or an AI-controlled opponent.

It's your job as the user to input commands that counter that of the AI. The reason why most computers fail to beat humans at the highest level of various games is that the basis of their intelligence is finite. Likely being more complicated than I'll state - the game developers can only insert a small number of starting and tweaking instructions to be included within the "mind" of the computer.

A proper correlation could be made between a car and a train. The motor vehicle can maneuver through many different types of evironments, making adjustments for road conditions, finding faster routes, etc. The train, while being more powerful is limited to the tracks it rides on. Sure, there are some switching stations along the way, but it can't do anything drastically different other than stay on the rails. A tree falls down or snow builds up, the train is not "programmed" for any other function and is left immobile.

Within the confines of the match engine, it's a 100% fact that any tactic the AI employs can also be set by the user. The frustration factor sets in because without knowing the intricacies of each individual command, it's very difficult to reproduce AI decisions. Then you have to layer on the problem the user faces to counter these decisions when he or she is not even sure what they are to begin with. In face value, it almost appears that the computer is "smarter" than you - that's at least until the user understands the tactical approaches of the AI. Unfortunate, besides maybe the developers of the game, no one can be certain of the AI's exact operations.

THIS IS NOT CHEATING! There's no such command in the game that can be made so broad as if to tell the AI to "score a goal at the very end when you're tied!". There are way too many variables that go into that type of mentality. Sure, it can change it's match tactic to improve the probability of scoring. That's what it's programmed to do on that level. The argument made that the developers purposefully put these types of "cheating" mechanics in the game is surely laughable and proved virtually impossible by this logic. How can a programmer give any tactical advantage to the AI without having ANY clue what the human user will input as their strategy.

Of course, there can easily be certain counter-tactics that the developers have included in the game that are broadly based on what they expect human users to input, but that number is very finite. With so many variables that go into a tactic these days in FM2008, it's so finite that it probably wouldn't even be a bother to take up the task since it's implementation would be extremely rare. (that is to find a user that sets up a tactic EXACTLY to match with the pre-programmed counter strategies)

It all boils down to using your brain. No matter how difficult a task it may seem, when dealing with a computer program, there is ALWAYS a way to overcome it's intelligence. Although the solution may be hard to figure out and sometimes it may go against your entire previous knowledge of "real-life" strategy, understand that there is always something you can do to improve. Once you master that, you'll end up feeling like the one cheating.

retired_junvan

That is what I thought too. I fail to see the issue withe stats he posted. I would be happy with the results.

retired_w0lfpack1

Thanks for the reply, Bri.

My apologies, also; I didn't mean to get snarky about length-of-time-on-forum. You write well, which is why I've been replying in your threads. Please allow me to retract that.

.. okay .. but you still say
1. you're producing more shots than AI teams,
2. scoring at the same rate they are, and
3. susceptible to extended runs of poor form

(Putting multiple posts together for that).

My post linked-to discusses a ton of other things - I personally hadn't come to the conclusion that '1 striker' was a problem, and all of my advice is linked to adjustments in slider/mentality/runs/passing.

I was trying to be more pragmatic, describing it "as it is" rather than getting into a "right or wrong" debate.

I used to be a keeper, myself, and it didn't really work like that. If I was kept busy, I got to feeling "on fire", with confidence that I was unbeatable. And if they did score after pounding shot after shot at me, its my defense's fault, not mine, so my personal confidence would remain high.

(If two or three got past me, of course, that would be a different story.)

I do agree with you that the effect has been exaggerated: Kasey Keller's performance against Brazil in 1997 sticks out in my mind because it was so unique, so yes, even though it can happen I think it should happen rarely; I think it happens too often in FM and should be tuned down.

But, since it isn't, it becomes important to build my tactic to the way the engine actually works, rather than building it to the way I think it should work.

retired_suziej

Consider that your strikers may be playing inconsistently when compared to the computer because you play a very consistent tactic, which will be good against some teams and worse against others. Where as the computer probably makes more adjustments game to game than you so it can equally compete against different tactics. Just watch the formations screen during a game to see the ridiculous amount of adjustments the computer makes.

retired_Miss Yummy

Is these an opinion or fact? If fact please provide proof of this. A forensic investigation of the source code by an independent 3rd party would suffice. Claims that the AI does cheat have the same burden of proof.

Is this true? I though certain AI systems were self-learning and thus infinitely extensible (limited by storage constraints only).

What the AI has is an almost unlimited patience and a unique ability to crunch numbers. In a game that requires inspection of many attributes in order to optimize the result the AI would beat anyone but the most diligent of players.

One other thing to bear in mind is Emergent Behavior. Complex systems can sometimes give rise to behavior not explicitly designed into them. The vicious cycle Amaroq describes where a striker has a shot saved, loses confidence, GK gains confidence, resulting in even more save shots might be an example of emergence.

I don't for one minute think that FM cheats. I have suspicions that it sometimes behaves in ways not expected, or perhaps even understood, by its developers and certainly not by its users. I also think that SI's engine testing strategy might need to focus more on AI-vs-Human than AI-vs-AI.

retired_tubamidget

Of course it does, all games cheat. Unless you think that SI Games managed to create an AI that can actually beat a human being in a game of football? As far as I know (and this can be looked up on the Internet), the most advanced AI in the world is somewhere on a level of a snail - so, when was the last time a snail won the Premiership?

Robots with advanced AI can't even find an exit from a room full of boxes, let alone play football.


The game's makers care about who wins and who loses. You see, the game mustn't be too easy or too difficult, because then it won't be fun. For instance, Sid Meier - the living legend of the gaming industry - openly admits that Civilization AI cheats exactly because of this. Here's what Civilization 3 AI programer says about AI cheating:

"We believe the game is most fun on the levels where the AI either doesn’t cheat or it cheats only a little bit. We took out some of the most visible cheats that the AI did in previous games because it is important that the user doesn’t feel that they are continually seeing the AI do things the user can’t do. There is an overall AI production bonus or penalty that the AI gets that allows it to build units or research faster or slower depending – it’s the third level where everything is even. Of course for some people what’s fun is what’s the hardest thing to beat. I wouldn’t find the highest level fun myself but it is hard. We would really encourage people to stick to the middle levels. I don’t think there is a right or wrong way to do this but we give people the option." (link)

I'm sorry, but that is a very naive stance on the subject of video-games AI.

All vide-game AIs in the world have unfair advantage over the human player. It's when these advantages become obvious that the game becomes annoying, to say the least. In Football Manager, it's all about statistics, so SI Games' main goal, I believe, is to make it as statistically accurete as possible. This maybe adds to the "realism", but takes away a lot of fun, because if you're too good for the AI, it resorts to the most extreme, but still "that's football - it's possible" scenarios to prevent you from winning. That, and it knows more than the player does.

Yes, it is.

Yes, there is, and it's called "a script".

Well, if the Civilization AI (and all other AIs) can do it, I'm pretty sure that Football Manager's AI can do it, too.

Sometimes, just sometimes, it's not the user's fault.