GillsMan

I was thinking about this earlier on. I never have any of the reported problems with too many shots, but maybe that's because I actually read IRL match stats and know that there are plenty of games where there are a lot of shots and not many goals. To test my theory (and I would have posted whether I was right or wrong), I decided to look at the last 5 Gills games IRL and the last 5 Gills games in my FM08 game. I'm playing the patched version, by the way, and I'm managing Gillingham.

I'll take the last 5 Gills games, both IRL and in FM08. The numbers in the brackets are the total shots and the shots on target; the score is then displayed after:

IRL
<LI> Leyton [15/8] vs Gills [13/5] - 0-0
<LI> Gills [16/9] vs Nottm F [20/6] - 3-0
<LI> Gills [5/1] vs Southend [15/7] - 1-1
<LI> Bournemouth [20/2] vs Gills [19/1] - 1-0
<LI> Gills [14/4] vs Port Vale [13/2] - 1-2

FM08
<LI> Gills [16/10] vs Swindon [10/9] - 2-0
<LI> Leeds [18/10] vs Gills [17/12] - 1-3
<LI> Gills [10/6] vs Hartlepool [2/1] - 1-1
<LI> Wycombe [6/1] vs Gills [9/2] - 0-1
<LI> Gills [13/7] vs Walsall [3/1] - 1-0

I thought I'd also test this with a team I'm not managing on FM (and have no input in that league) - I've chosen West Ham, only because I've been to all their home games recently.

IRL
<LI> West Ham [16/7] vs Man City [8/4] - 0-0
<LI> Arsenal [21/13] vs West Ham [15/7] - 2-0
<LI> West Ham [11/5] vs Man United [7/3] - 2-1
<LI> West Ham [18/11] vs Reading [13/10] - 1-1
<LI> Middlesboro [7/2] vs West Ham [8/4] - 1-2


FM08
<LI> Blackburn [9/5] vs West Ham [8/5] - 3-1
<LI> West Ham [18/8] vs Newcastle [6/5] - 2-0
<LI> Tottenham [8/3] vs West Ham [5/4] - 1-1
<LI> West Ham [7/3] vs Man United [10/6] - 1-3
<LI> Chelsea [13/4] vs West Ham [9/7] - 1-1

By no means do I cite this as undeniable evidence of any kind, but given the results I wonder: is there really a problem with the number of shots in a game? I posted the stats the other day for the England vs Portugal quarter final in Euro 2004 - here they are - and I wonder if the real problem is that there are more shots in a game then we truely remember. Remember, all shots are counted IRL and in FM, including the ones where it's never in danger of going in the goal.

Just thought I'd chuck this into the air.

exacerbating

The conclusion I draw from this is that you haven't created a tactic that creates alot of clear cut chances. Sure, it creates enough for you to do well, but if you use a user-created tactic that creates alot of one-on-ones you will find it a problem.

Jimbokav1971

Gills. I am one of the other few people who have not experienced this, (although I must admit I don't doubt that it does exist).

I think the main reason that I don't see the oroduct of this in my game is that I play with a defensive 41410 formation, which obviously by it's very nature doesn't produce the great many chances that I have heard talk about by others.

Part of the reason may also be that my team isnb't very good and was a small fish in a small pond. After a couple of promotions I should be entering Europe, and this may be about to change as I become the dominant force in domestic football.

That aside, the problem with you comparing your in game Gills results with that of the real-life Gills results is that you are often on the back foot and until recently were leaking goals like a big sieve like thing with holes in.

Maybe what you might consider doing is comparing the results of a team like Arsenal in game, to real life, (a team who create loads of opportunities but have a reputation for not taking them all, and maybe also a team like Aston Villa who are building a reputation for eeking out results.

I do think there is a problem but I am just lucky enough to have stumbled on a short term solution at the moment.

GillsMan

To be fair, I haven't alterered the default 4-4-2 tactic too much. And the West Ham results are computer generated.

I think the telling thing is that there are more shots IRL than we really give credit for. Take the Bournemouth vs Gillingham game IRL. Bournemouth had 20 shots, Gillingham had 19, it finished 1-0 and there were only 3 shots on target during the entire game.

Lucky Wilbury

Very interesting stats, but there's no mention of how clear cut these chances are. There's a big difference between a 35 yard shot that rolls gently along the ground and a one-on-one chance that a "world class" striker puts stright into the keeper's arms.

I'm not taking sides on this issue, because I've not experienced this problem to the same extent other people have, and I'm doing well, so I'm not going to complain .

GillsMan

No, and I'm playing Devil's Advocate to a certain extent here, and you're right, no mention of how clear cut these chances are. But I can think of a number of occasions when, say, Torres had had shots on target from promising positions that have resulted in a comfortable save.

Also, taking IRL examples, I don't remember Marcus Hahnemman (sp) having a blinder against West Ham for Reading, despite having 11 shots to "save". Similar for Green or Almunia in the recent game against Arsenal.

Lucky Wilbury

That's kinda the point I was trying to make. Hahnemann didn't have a blinder but, according to the stats, he made a lot of saves. These could have been "easy" saves from shots that were basically speculative shots from the West Ham players.

Like I said, I've not been experiencing this problem as much as others have, so I've not been following the various threads about it too closely. But I was under the impression that strikers were missing "easy" chances that you would expect good players to score.

GillsMan

Hmmm, I suppose. And of course I've only looked at the stats, and not things like the types of chances being missed. But if you were to ask me if games in FM08 have too many shots, I'd say no.

ljdzsgffk

I think the real problem is not the number of shots (especially after the patch), but the amount of clear cut chances. What your evidence shows is that FM has the right number of shots, but they do not come from the right places. In real life, you hardly ever get a one-on-one chance but in FM its completely normal.

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!"