retired_janellewood86

I had this idea a while ago, but now I think there might actually be a need for it. Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your pkms!

A .pkm file is what you get when you save the highlights of a match. So, why do I want them?

I have heard a lot of complaints recently about "superkeepers", strikers who can't score for toffee, tactics which get "cracked" after four games, cheating AI wonder goals, sitters missed by the human and a whole host of other things. But, crucially, I've never seen the proof.

Plenty of people show screenshots of match stats which quite clearly show a game of domination only to lose 1-0, or give examples of where things have gone wrong. But the most solid example you can provide is a pkm.

I'm not saying anyone's lying. Far from it, the reams of threads about these problems obviously means that there is something amiss. However, from watching some of these pkms, I might be able to see what exactly you are defining as a superkeeper etc.

I don't get these things. That's not a boast about how great I am, it's just I don't see these things happening in my game. I don't know why. But if you're experiencing them, maybe I could take a look at your pkms, your examples and see if I can offer some constructive criticism OR find out just what a crap striker really is.

So, upload some pkms of the most shocking examples of AI cheating to somewhere like FMDownloads, nad let me see just exactly how much that AI screws you over on a regular basis.

retired_ladylimdiddy

I'll just send you my whole saved game Millie

retired_dego72

Personally I just think the match engine is designed to statistically be accurate in terms of scorelines, corners etc- so forced the issue as such.

Using the def 20-mid 10-att 1 attacking bias Im starting to get the kind of results the AI gets, where I fail to dominate games but walk away with a 1 or 2 nil win because the engine has deemed that my players have created the better chances.

Thing is by watching the game I would say the AI (as I used to) created the better chances as they missed some real sitters- either blasting over from close range or just missing a number of one on one chances.

IMO the AI isnt cheating- the match engine is the issue as so far in FM07 Ive failed to get any reward or success by creating lots of what are in my opinion superior chances to score.

Now the shoe is on the other foot thanks to this bizarre tactic I am still not happy, as all it does is further reinforce how poor the match engine can be and how illogical many of the effects of the tactics are- who would have thought putting your defenders on an attacking vent and your strikers on defensive would result in cleansheets and goals.

I know why the things dont happen in your game btw- if youve got a pretty good tactic that works then players stop making mistakes or being unlucky (well apart from the stupid way players concede corners to keep the stats right)- as I found when I got a run together.

I suppose you could say your making your own luck- but the match engine compounds and frustrates players having a bad time further by lumping bizarre goals, penalties, shocking mistakes etc on the player when really it should be enough that teams will beat you on their own merits.

As a longtime fan of the CM/FM match engine its sad to see it going downhill like this as it once used to be the No1 strength of the game- now its just a mess that doesnt feel natural or realistic at all.


As for Superkeepers- yeah the effect exists, but we all benefit from this untransparent statistical mechanism to keep scores realistic and the whole model of the game statistically accurate. But really its not in the form of a Superkeeper as such, as if anything the effect of this mechanism is just as strong in the amount of good opportunities that fail to hit the target at all, let alone give the keeper a chance to make a save.

retired_janellewood86

Please do!

dotseurat

whs

retired_Myoplex

w h smiths?

retired_ladylimdiddy

retired_Myoplex

its a joke its a shop

retired_rolando.perez

Millie, very nice idea for a thread, although rather than simply providing 'proof' of a superkeeper or otherwise, it would be helpful to use the thread as a sort of tactics-doctor - tell people the problem with their tactic from the .pkm so they can work on it.

George Graham
I disagree with your opinion of a flawed match engine - sure, the visual side may be slightly inaccurate since it is 2D and much of football is 3D. However, the engine itself is not flawed - it is up to the player to, as you say, 'make his own luck'. Poorly designed tactics are the real reason people find themselves with problems. They, in a sense, create the oppositions superkeepers for them, by producing a tactic that doesn't fashion decent chances and therefore allows the opposition keeper to shine. I know myself, because I used to do it, that many people create tactics by looking at each slider, choosing a number, and moving on to the next slider. I'm not saying each individual setting is wrong, rather that they don't link properly. In tactic designing, one must take into account the 'domino-effect'; one slider will indefinitely affect another and you must make amendments to allow for this. For example, a person creating an attacking tactic might put high FWR on his fullbacks, because it seems like the right thing to do. Then, he wonders why his CBs are under constant pressure, and he looks at the CBs' settings to amend the issue. Needless to say, he doesn't fix the issue, so boots up the tactics forum to have a rant about the poor tactical structure of the game.

The overiding message is that tactics should be designed with the whole system in mind, rather than one segment of it. Actually think about the effect high mentality will have on the defence, and make allowances in the Defensive Line and/or in defenders' individual settings. Ignorance is the key falldown of tactical design, and no doubt the reason so many rants are born here bemoaning the poor engine. The game simply could not be released to the public, or at least be as successful as it is, if the engine was a poor as so many say. It is just a matter of thinking when you design a tactic.

As for the game forcing results, this isn't strictly correct. This is in fact the result of playing personnel - decent players playing with a poor tactic still won't necessarily lose every game of the season, they will just underachieve. Only truly dismal tactics will force decent players into a relegation battle for example. In a sense there are 3 things a tactic can do to the team; they can make it overachieve, underachieve or maintain it's current level. Tactics can't single handedly cause failure or success (unless they are VERY extreme) - they simply work with the players to achieve one of the above levels.

Anyway, enough ranting. Great idea Millie, could be very helpful to a lot of people on the boards. Cheers!

retired_janellewood86

I sort of meant it to develop that way, neon, but my main issue was to find out what some people see as "superkeepers" and the like. By seeing how people are interpreting what they are seeing, we (by that I mean anyone willing to help) may be able to see things that others are missing - offer different takes on things and hopefully find some solutions.

My thoughts turn to it, basically, because I regularly get games with stats similar to what people call "cheat" games, yet I know damn well I deserved to lose based on my tactical ineptitude. I'd like to see other people's games to see whether it is indeed a programming issue or a problem with us as managers.

But yes, if it can develop into a tactical clinic, then great.