Quote:
Originally posted by Amaroq:
GillsMan, your analysis is going to have been very similar to what SI's testing team did - if I were SI, I'd have an automated test bed that runs each build through thousands of simulated matches to check statistics in each key competition.
I think that the "goals to shots ratio problem" amounts to "Certain extreme tactics create more one-on-on chances than is realistic," and that SI's solution is going to be:
a.) Reduce the accuracy of certain passes
b.) Improve defenders' AI, increasing their ability to deal with one-on-one's as RL defenders do.
c.) Improve computer managers' AI, giving them a tactical adjustment to make when seeing too many one-on-one chances due to extreme tactics.
d.) Increase the chances of offsides trap breaking up a one-on-one feed.
What I think the problem is, is users assuming that "good chances" equal "successful tactic".
I would love to see - long-term - an Assistant Manager complex and efficient enough to recognize the problem and give them feedback about what is going wrong, so that the user might realize "its within my control" instead of immediately jumping to "its a bug!"
|
Im going to take issue with a couple of your comments here:
1) Its nothing to do with extreme tactics, albeit it will happen under certain conditions- Ive encountered this issue playing a variety of formations at differing widths, tempos etc. The common denominator for me is that the one on ones are created with my quicker strikers regardless of my tactics as defenders just cannot cope with fast players either running onto through balls or running with the ball.
Anyway we are back to blaming our tactics created within a framework that SI give us- yeah great blame the player because SI nerfed the finishing instead of fixing the worful defending.
2) Im sorry but what on earth do you mean by saying "What I think the problem is, is users assuming that "good chances" equal "successful tactic"?!!!?
Of course it means your tactic is a successful one (at least in the offensive sense), assuming your not leaking goals that is- how on earth can good chances equal anything but a successful tactic? What would you prefer poor chances- does creating fewer clearcut chances equal a better tactic?
Its thinking like this that I hope SI do not subscribe to, as it is just making excuses for quite obvious flaws in the match engine and if it is accepted as gospel would mean we would forever have to play our way around such flaws.
You normally post a lot of sense but your post here shows no understanding of the issues that are plaguing many because of the 8.01 patch, not because of extreme tactics or us assuming incorrectly that good chances incorrectly equal a successful tactic.
Linear Mode
