retired_cricket

The game isnt a cheat.

But the fact of the matter is that the English developers of the game made the EPL and the FA CUP/League CUP's extremely hard.

Why with relatively the same team in EPL can i barely win the EPL when in La Liga i won everything in five years there at barcelona.

It seems that every competition outside of england is easy to win. And i for one cant believe for a second that its all down to tactics.

It just seems the game is biased. Oh and i hope to god they do something with the team talk engine. In Spain, i used to do all the teamtalks and won rather well, but in england, i have to leave my ass man do the teamtalks regardless of how i feel.

Can anyone compare this? to them?

retired_trinitycook

No! Of course the game doesn't cheat,but sometimes the underdogs win the most unbelieveble matches for example when a 3.divisjon team beats one of the best 1.divisjon teams 6 to nothing in the cup final. That is NOT cheating, its weird, **** HAPPENS FOLKS!!!

retired_elina

Yes, it cheats, BUT:

The question is biased. The important aspect is not wether the game cheats, but rather the huge frequency of those "team x should have won this easily" games. So while I don't believe that this scenarios happen mostly in favor of the AI, regarding anything else discussed in this thread I have to agree to Arteta and Hammer (and other "moaners").

To put it shortly: I can not have fun playing a game where a team misses an unrealistic amount of one-on-ones and other huge chances, while the other teams plays crap both in defense and in attack yet manages to score (sometimes even 3 or 4 goals per game) in bizzare fashion.

I'm really bothered by the "hear no evil, see no evil" attitude of SI and most testers and "fanboys" on these forums. There have been so many screenshots as evidence for the scenario mentioned above and SI have never even remotely accepted it as a problem.

My answer is however based on another issue: the AI "tactical cracking" module (or reranking or whatever you want to name it). SI have admitted that the game learnes about tactics of human players over time and reacts to them. Now this is cheating unless it does the same thing againt every virtual manager in game. E.g. the virtual Mourinho and everyone else should also have his tactics monitored by the AI.

retired_mugir

Yes, it cheats... (or it's flawed)

How many times in a game when you completely dominate a game … 5, 6, 7, 8 … shots and finally score a goal, and rite after scoring the other team with one single shot scores the equalizer in a complete absurd way. I’m not saying it dos not happen I real life, but it happens in the game way to often (if it’s not a cheat… it’s a flaw). How often in the game thus this happen in reverse… when you are completely dominated and score a equalizer rite after the other team scores. Hardly ever. After scoring a goal, 50% of the times I suffer a goal in the next shot the other team has.

retired_janellewood86

And yet, if you're a small team it virtually never happens, even when you start doing well. It appears only to happen to teams that build up a rep.

Which leads us to the question - is it really that the AI cheats, or is it just that when you have a better team you need a different approach.

It could well be that the game artificially (through one way or another) makes it far too difficult for bigger rep teams to succeed. I've had a number of "cheat games" over the past few days with United and Arsenal. On the flip side, I had hardly any with Vauxhall Motors or Foligno, and in fact on more than a few occassions got a few cheat games out myself.

I think the game punishes attacking tactics (since I never have this problem when I play defensively) which are obviously the staple diet of larger clubs. Either I have to a) accept this and create such a good team that it doesn't happen or b) find an attacking tactic which avoids giving away stupid goals.

When the two teams are of equal rep and talent (roughly), it's rare to get "shafted" by the AI. At least in my experience.

So yet again, we must ask the question. Is the phenomenon an example of the AI cheating, or is it an example of where using the wrong type of tactic will fail?

And yet again, we must say that the AI converting more shots than the human is not proof of the AI cheating. It may be a manifestation of its cheating, but is not in itself proof.

retired_balls

No it doesn't cheat but the AI setup definately has some flaws which make this game unplayable / unrealisitc at times.

The game looks to me to be setup to give a definate advantage weighted towards the AI/Computer team.

Re-ranking exists and can destroy a very good tactic, this doesn't happen to the AI teams. I have seen myself challenge one season (into top 4 with newcastle) and relegated the next with far superior players to 75% of the other teams in the league. I never changed my formation sets yet my team falls apart but the AI team stays the same (formations etc) and continues to prosper. I know this can happen in football but it only happens to human teams in this game. In all my time of playing this game I have never seen an AI team finish in the top 6 and get relegated the next year. Just wouldn't happen but it can happen so easily with the human when you haven't changed anything.

This brings me onto my next point. Players attributes. I think they are worthless. The AI changes the way it plays against you with the same players from season to season but how can this work. Surely for a team such as Watford to be able to change the way they play against you the following season after you drubbed them home and away the first season their players should all have very high mental attributes in order to be able to adapt themselves and implement very different instructions. When you check this is never the case.

Same can be said for the AI players ability to finish chances. How many times have people won 3-1 or 3-2 or whatever when the only shots the AI has had are the two that have went in when you have have had well into double figures. I had a game recently playing against 8 men, I was 1-0 up then they had 3 players sent off before half time. I battered them for 45 mins only for them to equalise with their first attempt in the 88th minute. How can someone with 10/12 finishing always bury their one and only chance against a keeper with very good stats when the human teams centre forwards with 17/18 finishing and composure can't beat an average keeper with 15 attempts.

The above scenario of drawing with 8 men would only ever happen to the computer team, never to the human and never in real life. Against 10 men absolutely, this has happened so many times IRL that it is now accepted in football to play against 10 is often harder but against 8 for nearly 55mins impossible. Fitness would kill off the opposition but not for the AI teams, they had players chasing shadows that finished the game with better condition than my team.

I personally have never beaten or drawn in FM 2007 when I have been down to 10 men. Maybe its the way I approach it but the computer can do this with ease against me, often by not doing anything. I have been 3-1 up, lost a defender so I sacrifice a forward or try and tighten it up only to be beaten 4-3. I can say with almost 100% guarantee if I was 3-1 down to 10 men I would never win 4-3.

It has been said that signing too many players can upset the balance of a team, this never seems to affect the AI teams when I have ever played the game.

The fact that the AI can counter your tactics suggests the game is weighted in favour of the computer. All we get to see of the computer is the formation and a poxy report off your scout/assitant manager from that teams previous game. In some instances he hasn't been able to watch them..........what?

In my experience also I have seen the AI play some of the most obscure formations in an attempt to counter your tactics, if the human tried some of them you wouldn't stand a chance.

The above are just some of my observations from the game. I have increased my knowledge of tactics using these forums so have changed my opinion somewhat but I will always maintain that in this incarnation of FM2007 there are some glaring faults and unfortunately they are on the most critical aspect of the game, the match engine and the results it generates.

retired_wolfpac9mm

Nope. that's a cheat. cheat's also when somebody makes you believe that the game is good and it's all up to you to win or to lose, when is not. However you can easily find out that the CPU GK always gets more than 7/8 but moving on there are lot of issues like that one.

Cam'on this is a football game! nobody cares about the face of the players! we need a good engine! We're not playing at "the sims"

In my opinion, not enough.

retired_Cat1123

Now we're getting somewhere!.

retired_hope

What do you mean we are getting somewhere?

It seems to me like most people believe the game doesn't cheat.

I think most people accept that the match engine has limitations and will be improved.

Also people's definition for cheating is somewhat different to to the opening post of this thread.

That the game has and uses an ability to give the AI an unfair advantage over the human player by influencing events such that they are out of the human player's control.

So what is the problem? Does the game cheat or is the game too random?

Also how many games in a season does this occur, because the way some people are going on the impression is that it is like every other game they play.

JeffRogers

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. </BLOCKQUOTE>

hi leroy! thanks for the reply!

i agree that you must amximise your own chances of winning through what you've said, but there is no accounting for a 5 goal swing in 45 mins of a game! it makes a mockery of tactics to me when this can happen! a tactic that had only conceded 1 goal in its first 12 league games also leads me to believe the tac is sound. so how do i know what % chance i had before the match when this happens?

like someone else said above, the game is too much like a crapshoot! the random factor is way too high and the fact it happens to everyone, not just once but regularly tells us this is true! we're all using different tactics in all probability. i myself have used quite a few differing tacs but i still get the same results when i come up against the match engine!

the tempo arguement is a good example. apparently a high tempo increases the likelyhood of creating a lot of missed chances, yet i have used tactics with my tempo set to 1 and still had 20+ shot all saved or gone wide whilst the direct playing ai has scored 2 goals with 2 shots on target!!

(p.s. frugal means thrifty, careful...etc!)