mdschneids

Yeah, a handful of screenshots of match stats are not the type of analysis you were claiming in your original post. Not even close.

Just admit it, you don't have hard data, because you have done no analysis. You've made rough estimates after the match as to how you perceived the match. You haven't gone back and thoroughly analysed every chance, every shot, player positioning etc.

And you seem happy to completely ignore the significance of tactics on all this, which casts doubt over your ability to make any kind of truly thorough study. </BLOCKQUOTE>

at the moment i only have one save game and i restarted the game, only made one season with this one. tactics in 1 vs 1 situation like striker vs keeper, shouldnt the players stats here be more important???? hard tackle,max close down, tight marking and my defenders still wont tackle despite having 17 tackling 18 marking, yah sure its a tactics problem here... i can send you the save game if you want to watch every game i made and watch that almost on every match they scored on a godly counter attack...

retired_kaletown

Oh how I love pointing to this game A few years back Liverpool played Southampton at Anfield. In the end, Liverpool had 23 shots to none and most of the possession as well. The result? 0-0.

And how often through the years have I watched Man Utd lay siege to the opposition goal and throw everything at it except the kitchen sink only to come away with a draw or even a defeat?

And it also comes down to the quality of the shots. Having nine shots is not the same as having nine shots. Scoring one from every four from 8 yards out is massively different from scoring one from every nine from 25-30 yards.

*waits for "supaahhkeepaahh and oppositionscoreseverytimefrom40yardsevenwithcechin goal* </BLOCKQUOTE>

I do agree with you. Never did I argue that my shots were of better quality. I merely pointed out that I required a lot more shots to score than the opposition. I am aware of RL games that have shown red-hot teams running into brickwalls, thank you. :thup:

Just pointing out a very big difference between 07 and 08.

mdschneids

lol i wont ever say that in fm2008 because i just dont see keepers making any difference in my games, i cant remember my GK mamking a 9 or AI making a 9. as for long shots , i make few and so does the AI.

what i dont like is that i need more shots on goal then AI to score but i also think that i score too much and same goes for AI

alidog

I don't understand that, but I'm guessing English might not be your first languags so I'm certainly not holding that against you.

To clarify my point, the 7.5 days at 24 hours is the total game time on the "Game status" screen in FM.

Hahahahaha - You're starting to make a fool of yourself now. Have you EVEN DONE THE MATHS for these hand-picked matches you've presented us with? Because I have:

Benfica:
Total shots - 91
Total shots on target - 54
Total goals - 20
Shots required to score a goal - 4.55
Shots on target required to score a goal - 2.7

Opposition:
Total shots - 39
Total shots on target - 15
[b]Shots required to score a goal - 7.88
Shots on target required to score a goal - 3[b]

That proves the exact opposite of what you're claiming. The AI needs more shots to score than you!

alidog

Bah, messed up the bold font a bit but it still makes sense.

My_Evo

IF it's a true one-on-one, then the attributes are more important, but that doesn't mean all other facets of the context of the chance are irrelevant.
Among football's greatest adages is the one about being most vulnerable right after you've scored. It applies equally well to spells of concerted pressure. Concentartion drops, so does the pressure on the opposition, while increasing on your own players.


Why the hell would I want to do that?
I really don't care how your game is going, I just care when you claim to have drawn conclusions from analysis that you never actually did. Sorry, I just don't like it when people lie, that's just me.


Let me ask you a couple of questions though.
What is the approximate average in real-life for total shots to shots on target?
And the ratio of shots to goals?
And the conversion rate for one-on-one chances?

(50%, 20% and 30% if you're curious)

retired_euluis

Oh how I love pointing to this game A few years back Liverpool played Southampton at Anfield. In the end, Liverpool had 23 shots to none and most of the possession as well. The result? 0-0.

And how often through the years have I watched Man Utd lay siege to the opposition goal and throw everything at it except the kitchen sink only to come away with a draw or even a defeat?

And it also comes down to the quality of the shots. Having nine shots is not the same as having nine shots. Scoring one from every four from 8 yards out is massively different from scoring one from every nine from 25-30 yards.

*waits for "supaahhkeepaahh and oppositionscoreseverytimefrom40yardsevenwithcechin goal* </BLOCKQUOTE>

I do agree with you. Never did I argue that my shots were of better quality. I merely pointed out that I required a lot more shots to score than the opposition. I am aware of RL games that have shown red-hot teams running into brickwalls, thank you. :thup:

Just pointing out a very big difference between 07 and 08. </BLOCKQUOTE>

Then what on earth is the problem? If you concede that your shots are not of the same quality then you forfeit your arguement. Of course you need more shots if your shots are worse, it goes without saying. Oh, and I was in the midst of the same calculations cliff made but he posted them before I finished, and with such an elaborate presentation

mdschneids

of course its makes, especially when the AI teams were all inferior teams. 2.7 to 3.0 yeah a big difference no doubt because i have better players and i think i'm nto dumb on tactics since i was abel to win champs with that team... i dont analize the total number of shots and goals, i analize game by game because the opposition is different from game to game... or do you expect to have better results against bigger teams and crappy results against lower teams???

My_Evo

DeathSpawn,

Cliff has just used the data you provided to show that, far from the "conclusions" your "analysis" reached, you actually have a far better goals:shots ratio than your opponents, considerably better.
And you're on-target shots:goals record is about the same, slightly in your favour in fact.

Your original arguments have been invalidated by your own data.

Seriously lad, just go quietly into the night, you're embarassing yourself.

retired_kaletown

Oh how I love pointing to this game A few years back Liverpool played Southampton at Anfield. In the end, Liverpool had 23 shots to none and most of the possession as well. The result? 0-0.

And how often through the years have I watched Man Utd lay siege to the opposition goal and throw everything at it except the kitchen sink only to come away with a draw or even a defeat?

And it also comes down to the quality of the shots. Having nine shots is not the same as having nine shots. Scoring one from every four from 8 yards out is massively different from scoring one from every nine from 25-30 yards.

*waits for "supaahhkeepaahh and oppositionscoreseverytimefrom40yardsevenwithcechin goal* </BLOCKQUOTE>

I do agree with you. Never did I argue that my shots were of better quality. I merely pointed out that I required a lot more shots to score than the opposition. I am aware of RL games that have shown red-hot teams running into brickwalls, thank you. :thup:

Just pointing out a very big difference between 07 and 08. </BLOCKQUOTE>

Then what on earth is the problem? If you concede that your shots are not of the same quality then you forfeit your arguement. Of course you need more shots if your shots are worse, it goes without saying. Oh, and I was in the midst of the same calculations cliff made but he posted them before I finished, and with such an elaborate presentation </BLOCKQUOTE>

No noooo. You see, whether in 07 or 08, I have come up with consistent tactics. I should expect the overall quality of shots to be stable over the 2 versions of games(even given that the match engine has changed).

Ceteris paribus, the ratio of goals/shots on target should be more consistent.

For your infomation, I wasn't in an arguement here! Maybe a less confrontational attitude would help. Like I said, I agree with you on one point- the quality of shots do matter. Neither was any issue of realism raised- a simple comparison with the precessor game, that's all.
Like TS, I have only began to scratch the surface in seeing a trend in our games and so hope to come back with some figures once the new season starts proper in my save.