retired_hope

I suggest we let moggydave post the running totals, because a you are just trying to rub people up the wrong way and also you can't count.

Yes = 4
No = 11
Maybe = 1

Hardly the popularis vs the optimates is it

Luketi

Why there are so many people that belive this game cheats? The most common answers are: they are moanners, they are newbies, they are lazy people who don`t take the time to analyse the match engine, they (...).

But how do people get to the point that the game cheats? This is the most important thing. Most of the threads of the cheat argument are based on the unfamous "match stats". The thing is that this game gives ONLY this feature to the human player to "understand" or figure out what happened.

Now, if these stats show regularly and often during a season that the human player lost a high number of matches that he deserved to win, and add the fact that in many cases this dominance is huge, then is very predictable that the players will wonder: "what the hell is wrong? I have more possession, more shots on target, more crosses completed, etc. and still loose so many matches, even against crap oposition!!" Do you see my point?

Now, imagine that there are some "kind" of feedback or post match comment from a game feature that tells the player something like "Even when we totally dominated xxx, there was severe errors in defense, which costed us the match. We should make adjustments in xxx to avoid this in future matches." Or a half-time report "We have made a lot of shots on target, but most of them were long range attempts. This is a problem as the xxx keeper seems to has no problem with them" or "Our off-side trap is working very poor, as xxx`s strikers had few but very dangerous chances". Add more detailed stats: A map of the pitch with little marks from where our team and the oposition has made the shots. More stats: NUMBER!! of crosses (team and individual), turnovers, a more accurate rating system (there are times when I am 0-3 at half-time and my players has all 6s and 7s .

These are just stupid ideas of how the darkness could be removed from this game. The lack of the mentioned features lead to frustration, missunderstanding and (maybe) wrong conclussions (the game cheats).

retired_rayrhi

This was a recent reply to Millie in another post after he claimed that I would prefer to blame the game rather than myself. I think this is relevant to Luketi's recent post:

I don't think that there is any need to blame myself for anything since I have already succeeded at this game and won everything there is to win.

Clearly, the computer enjoys a higher percentage of goals from its shots on target than the human (you admitted it yourself). This is the proof I am talking about it. I haven't created this phenomenon, it is real. Too many people have pointed it out; unless of course it is mass hysteria. Now, you would prefer to justify this phenomenon by blaming it on your own tactical adequacies, which is a good theory in itself, but you can not prove that this is why it happens. Me, I just look at the stats and see that this happens all too often, thus I conclude that it is an anomaly. My theory is that it happens, and clearly it does. You admitted it. There is no reason for me to try and prove or disprove it, because it happens. The stats tell me it does. Additionally, it is impossible to disprove it with tactical inadequacy theories since there is NO feedback in the game. It is never, EVER clear in this game that x is a direct result of y. Once again, this comes back to the lack of feedback. The bottom line is that you can theorise until you are blue, red, or bluer in the face, as to why this statistical anomaly occurs, but it is IMPOSSIBLE to discover why. What you can't hide from is that it DOES happen. And all this time, that is what Hammer and I have tried to tell you all.

Luketi

100% agree with that. No way to have a clear idea of how (when the stats are totally in my favour) the result says something different. This is the most weak aspect of the game, and leads to think that the game takes an unfair advantage over the human player.

Luketi

It`s out of topic but take a look at this .pkm, watch the goal of Getafe and the final stats. The defender that makes such unbelivable stupidity has 18 marking, 14 anticipation and concentration and 18 positioning. WHY??
The pkm is named "Unbelivable" and is Getafe vs Betis.

Link

retired_rayrhi

100% agree with that. No way to have a clear idea of how (when the stats are totally in my favour) the result says something different. This is the most weak aspect of the game, and leads to think that the game takes an unfair advantage over the human player. </BLOCKQUOTE>

Glad you agree, mate. I would like to go back to something you mentioned, Luketi, regarding the only feedback we have. I think it's important and a good point. You are correct in saying that the only feedback we have to go by currently are the match stats. I can already hear in the background 'the match stats only tell half the story.' To a certain extent this could be true. But for how long can we avoid the fact that in football, the team that dominates usually bloody wins?

Okay, for argument's sake, let's scrap the match stats. Gone. Now, beyond THEM, where do I go from here? What is the next tool that I have at my disposal? What can I now utilise to break down and analyse my previous match? Exactly. Nothing. So, if the stats are the only real post-mortem of a game, and they shouldn't be 'looked into too much', then what else is one to do? If you are constantly dominating games, yet losing to silly goals with only one shot against you, something is awry. Yet, when people come on here trying to show how easy it is for the AI to score with minimum effort, always the reply is that there is something tactically wrong, when in reality, it is IMPOSSIBLE to diagnose that the tactics are the direct cause. What one can not hide from are the stats. And that's the problem. People are still hiding from them.

JeffRogers

i'd just like to clarify that i cant say the game cheats! neither can i say it doesnt cheat as i dont have all the evidence before me!

i'm still waiting for someone to explain the scenario that happened to me, if possible and how such things could happen in an airtight tactics system??

its my understanding that when you go to match, the game calculates the results within the parameters it has and such results are played out before you, until you change those parameters!

so i'll ask again, how can a 2-0 halftime lead turn into a 3-0 halftime deficit? if ALL parameters are the same for both games??

trust me i play this game by the numbers and never change my strategy and i'll stress again! every parameter was equal when going to match. just incase anyone wants to tell me i'm wrong and something must have been different. i'm 100% sure it wasnt!

this is what makes people feel cheated!

only a lack of evidence prevents me from saying it!

i wont hold my breath for an answer!

retired_hope

Hi bob, I don't know how the match engine works (e.g the code), but I do have some knowledge in the field of computing.

I agree that all the inputs to the match engine will be the same if you replay a save game.

What isn't the same are the results of the calculations determining what happens in the match. Okay the tactics stay the same, but headers may be won in one game that are lost in other etc, a shot my go in that the keeper might normally save etc. This then has a knock on effect, the AI will change tactic to try and come back into the match or hold onto its lead in an even game, morale will rise/drop etc, condition will fall at different rates due to diffent pitch conditions (which are determined after you go to match).

Arteta has done a similiar experiment in another thread and he replayed his game over 20 times and couldn't get a win, then he won one game comfortably.

I don't think replaying games are useful other than to try out new tactics or perform testing, but my main point is as you say it is a numbers game, more importantly a probability game, you need to maximse the chance of you winning though tactics, appropiate player selection and teamtalks.

Keeping to the same tactical instructions, whilst the AI changes theirs is not one of them.

retired_smckruit

Yes.
This game is cheat.

retired_rags

I don't think the game 'cheats' (makes it impossible for the human player to win etc) but I do think that all but the worst AI managers have very good tactical knowledge so if they play against the human user for 2-3 years and the human uses the same or similair tactics then the computer can work out a very good tactic to counter those of the player, meaning they have to change tactic aswell.