If you register for free, you will be able to post threads, vote on polls and lots more. If you have problems with the registration or logging in, please contact the administrator.
We often refer to playing against the AI but of course that should be a wrong reference. The way i understand it is that if it’s Sunderland v Man Utd then it’s me pity my wits against Ferguson, be it the AI version of Ferguson. But if the program is written correctly then it should reflect Alex Fergusons decisions. Just the same as playing against any other team, their decisions should reflect their manager. Now i think it does when it’s AI v AI but is it really the same when it’s Human v AI?
Does say Reading, QPR, Aldershot or whoever makes tactical decisions based on their managers attributes?
I ask this because of the opponent’s ability to successfully make changes during the game. Although it may well be possible to counter the opponents counter the point is, if these tactical decisions are based from the manager’s attributes, why do they keep getting it right?
It should be possible for even top managers to make wrong tactical decisions, and lesser managers some tactical blunders. For example when 0-2 down changing to 4-2-4 does not mean they should comeback to draw 2-2. In my experience of real life is that to do that is out of desperation and only rarely should it reap any rewards.
Sometimes i feel as though I’m up against Alex Ferguson every week rather than twice a season. When you’re playing against certain teams it just feels that you struggle to score, they make a late tactical change and score almost immediately. If Lawrie Sanchez had the ability to do that then he wouldn’t have got the sack!
It appears that the AI managers are set to use their inside knowledge of the game rather than their own managerial abilities.
It is the same with player abilities. If, as it should, come down to the players actual attributes then if a player has a clear shot at the goal it should mainly come down to his finishing and composure. IE – 1+2=3 (goal) 1+3=3 (miss)
But how many times have you wondered how your opponents scored with only one shot on target and when you looked at his scoring attributes they added up to less than your own?
I’m not saying though that if you buy the best players (attributes) that you should automatically win everything. But Managers (tactical decisions) and Players (Attributes) should be the main contributes to any outcome.
The best players will win nothing without the right guidance, but equally poor players with good guidance should not always bring success. Look at Keane at Sunderland. Possibly one of the best young managers in the game but he’s working with crap. I just feel that the AI v AI is fine but Human v AI carries an advantage that their actual manager doesn’t.
The program should have been written so that in the Human v AI situation the Oppenents Managers Attributes take over is it really like that?
12-23-2007, 04:51 PM
Who plays the role of the opposition manager? Post #2
We often refer to playing against the AI but of course that should be a wrong reference. The way i understand it is that if it’s Sunderland v Man Utd then it’s me pity my wits against Ferguson, be it the AI version of Ferguson. But if the program is written correctly then it should reflect Alex Fergusons decisions. Just the same as playing against any other team, their decisions should reflect their manager. Now i think it does when it’s AI v AI but is it really the same when it’s Human v AI?
Does say Reading, QPR, Aldershot or whoever makes tactical decisions based on their managers attributes?
It doesn't happen like that in real football either. Managers change things due to what happens during a game and events they see unfold.
Quote:
I ask this because of the opponent’s ability to successfully make changes during the game. Although it may well be possible to counter the opponents counter the point is, if these tactical decisions are based from the manager’s attributes, why do they keep getting it right?
They don't get it right if you alter your style to combat the new way they play. You don't always have to react but sometimes you may need to play a bit wider/narrower depending on what they have just changed. This is the reason so many people think the AI gets it right all the time. Its because they just think sod it and carry on playing exact same with no small alterations.
In real life do you think Fergie etc sit and don't react when someone changed formation against them or brings a new player on? No they make small changes and adapt.
12-23-2007, 05:08 PM
Who plays the role of the opposition manager? Post #3
It should be possible for even top managers to make wrong tactical decisions, and lesser managers some tactical blunders. For example when 0-2 down changing to 4-2-4 does not mean they should comeback to draw 2-2. In my experience of real life is that to do that is out of desperation and only rarely should it reap any rewards.
You should react and play through the middle or something and they would be punished for changing. It only reasps rewards for the AI if you make no changes.
Quote:
It appears that the AI managers are set to use their inside knowledge of the game rather than their own managerial abilities.
It is the same with player abilities. If, as it should, come down to the players actual attributes then if a player has a clear shot at the goal it should mainly come down to his finishing and composure. IE – 1+2=3 (goal) 1+3=3 (miss)
But how many times have you wondered how your opponents scored with only one shot on target and when you looked at his scoring attributes they added up to less than your own?
Its not that simple there are many other factors, the oppositions stats vs yours etc. I can't speak for everyone but in my games i can have 7 shots score all 7, or have 1 shots and score that too.
Quote:
Look at Keane at Sunderland. Possibly one of the best young managers in the game but he’s working with crap. I just feel that the AI v AI is fine but Human v AI carries an advantage that their actual manager doesn’t.
The program should have been written so that in the Human v AI situation the Oppenents Managers Attributes take over is it really like that?
At the end of the day it all boils down to how well you understand the game. If you understand the engine then the rest comes easy.
12-23-2007, 05:58 PM
Who plays the role of the opposition manager? Post #4
At the end of the day it all boils down to how well you understand the game. If you understand the engine then the rest comes easy.
That is where i fail, everytime i think i uderstand the engine it comes back to haunt me. It's like Sudoko in the newspapers - there is medium and difficult one. I start with the medium and with some logic and occasional trial and error i complete it. Then i use the same theory on the difficult on and end up in a mess
FM has become like that for me.
Who plays the role of the opposition manager? 
Linear Mode
