Jump to content
moore_94

Football Manager 2021

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, AjcW said:

My god this game is so monumentally ****ing stupid when it comes to Leicester sometimes

 

(A year after moving in lol)

 

1195426017_Screenshot2021-03-19at22_02_30.thumb.png.6204a58469d41b9db6a75fb767cfa195.png

Have had the same. Its a bit game breaking. I had it same as you with LCFC. 


I also had a constant battle against this with Cesena. Every year we got it to top level, every second year it was downgraded. 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, The People's Hero said:

Have had the same. Its a bit game breaking. I had it same as you with LCFC. 


I also had a constant battle against this with Cesena. Every year we got it to top level, every second year it was downgraded. 

I like to think it's not just because i'm biased, but I often question whether the leicester researcher actually watches any of our games or is a fan lol seems even crazier when @Riceyis there, should be giving him volleys over email lol 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, AjcW said:

I like to think it's not just because i'm biased, but I often question whether the leicester researcher actually watches any of our games or is a fan lol seems even crazier when @Riceyis there, should be giving him volleys over email lol 

I think Leicester are quite reasonably represented this year, with Barnes the obvious exception. Ndidi, Soyuncu, Fofana, Vardy, Maddison, Tielemans and Schmeichel are all top 6 players. I've seen complaints about Ricardo, but I still maintain he's a very balanced player and fullbacks tend to look the least spectacular stat-wise because they are arguably the position most reliant on high physical stats which are weighted higher.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

FC Annecy. 12 seasons it's taken to get them from predicted to do well to stay in the 3rd tier of France to winning Ligue 1. What a ride. We were top of the table for 4 minutes all season lol 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, AjcW said:

I like to think it's not just because i'm biased, but I often question whether the leicester researcher actually watches any of our games or is a fan lol seems even crazier when @Riceyis there, should be giving him volleys over email lol 

Don’t even know who it is to be honest. I sometimes correct the kit stuff but other than that I don’t get involved.

 

That training ground inbox item is a bit strange, but I suspect it actually hasn’t downgraded that much under the hood.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, AjcW said:

My god this game is so monumentally ****ing stupid when it comes to Leicester sometimes

 

(A year after moving in lol)

 

1195426017_Screenshot2021-03-19at22_02_30.thumb.png.6204a58469d41b9db6a75fb767cfa195.png

 

14 hours ago, The People's Hero said:

Have had the same. Its a bit game breaking. I had it same as you with LCFC. 


I also had a constant battle against this with Cesena. Every year we got it to top level, every second year it was downgraded. 

 

39 minutes ago, Ricey said:

Don’t even know who it is to be honest. I sometimes correct the kit stuff but other than that I don’t get involved.

 

That training ground inbox item is a bit strange, but I suspect it actually hasn’t downgraded that much under the hood.

 

 

It's just unfortunate timing. Every X years facilities get downgraded, as Ricey says, more than likely just by 1 (it's on a scale from 1 to 20.) As the event email states in game, it's just to represent the evolution of technology.

 

If you were playing any club with state of the art training facilities when that happened, you'd have gotten the email. It's not unique to Leicester. It's a bit unfortunate that the event has popped after you've just moved in to a new training facility but eyo.

 

It just happened to me in my Leicester save as well, tbf I asked Top to upgrade them and he immediately agreed without an argument.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tom,

Thank you for the work you've done. I honestly think your assessments are very decent in the main and the squad is able to finish to top 4 without much sweat first season. Also, kudos for sticking your neck out here :)

 

Re: Barnes, I think he's a bit of a miss though - no offense. Firstly, why is he natural AM and RW, or even accomplished in CM? I cannot recall him even playing the latter position or being particularly effective as AM or RW. My biggest gripe is his overall pace which is easily his strongest asset IRL, while also having good balance. His finishing and composure belies the fact he's only scored one goal less than Vardy this season. I mean 11/11 is like League Two/One level for a forward and he's pretty much been our star forward this season. In my Leicester save, he's not really improving either and just checking on my Legnago save 4 seasons in, he still looks pretty much the same.
Pretty odd for the arguably most improved player this season.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with Barnes is you over state his weak foot (besides a few long shots for West Brom, how often does he really do sensational stuff with his left?) and you've also given him too many strong positions (when was the last time he played AMC, RM, CM or LM) so you're already chewing in to his current ability. 

 

It means you can't give him the pace and acceleration (both easily 16s) he should have along with the finishing and composure scores he warrants from recent form (easily 14/15) without bloating his CA up to elite levels. It just makes the whole thing a really uneconomical use of his CA. Especially when you compare him to some nomark like Marcus Edwards who, in real life, is quite clearly not anywhere near Barnes class. 

 

I think what makes it more frustrating for me personally though isn't so much how you've rated Barnes, it's actually how guys like Mason Greenwood and Curtis Jones are rated comparatively. That's not really your fault and you end up taking the blame for something that's actually just unrealistic pandering to the "big 6."

 

I do have to question why he has Tries First Time Shots and Shoots From Range though. Neither are currently accurate for how he plays and both make him really frustrating to have in the team, especially given he struggled to actually lose those PPMs. 

 

Barnes actually majorly refrains from long shots these days, a source of frustration for fans who had seen some of the goals he scored at West Brom and then saw him basically refuse to shoot here. 

 

He rarely ever shoots unless he's in a good position in front of goal and tends to get his head up well to pick a pass if someone has a better chance on. 

 

For what it's worth, though, I think the rest of the Leicester side are currently as well rated as they've been in ages. JJ, Thomas, Vards, Madders, Tielemans are all pretty much bang on. For years we've been drastically under rated but finally the senior editors seem to recognise we're worthy of some tidy CAs. 

 

You could probably argue that Madders, YT, Barnes and Co might have higher PAs but that's perhaps being greedy. Again, particularly when compared to Greenwood and Co. 

Edited by Finnegan
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of good stuff on Barnes from both of you, much of it is noted for the future.

 

I like to keep as much versatility as I can, even if a player hasn't played a position for a long time - Harvey obviously came through playing centrally, and has been used sparingly without much joy on the right. It is a difficult balancing act when deciding whether to prioritise whether a player is actually any good in a position, or whether he has played there at all - Perez on the right wing would be an obvious example of a player mostly played in a position where he probably isn't at his best. I will take a look for the summer though, and as you say quite rightly it would give more flexibility in allocating CA points. What I don't like is when I start a save with us and I know a player has been used in a position but can't play it whatsoever, it kills the realism, players are more versatile in real life than the game really lets us have them. Even looking at Vardy, he still has reasonable ratings to play on the wing where he hasn't played really since 14-15. But then you watch us against Sheffield United and there's an argument to say he almost played as a winger at times and he could certainly do that role again if you wanted to give it a go in the game.

 

He will obviously be in line for a significant CA hike for FM22 - I am more restricted with what I can do in any January update, and there was not enough to go on by September/October for me to suggest the levels we are talking about.

 

PPMs are an interesting one - he has scored a couple from 'range' this season if you count outside of the box as such (Palace, Man United spring to mind), and last season his point of main frustration was his lack of ability to take a touch so he would blaze shots over. He's improved on the latter a bit but in general we prefer to give a full season to see these things play out. What is slightly more important for me is that the AI is selecting him, on the left wing, and he's getting reasonable enough numbers in test saves. The gameplay behind the hood should be enough that, if you are a good enough manager and take control of Leicester, you can get plenty out of him. All of that combined often means the data can seem a bit out of date at times, but I and others have been stung before by runs of decent form that turn out to just be that (see Demarai Gray's fluctuating CA for the last couple of editions).

 

The big six argument is a fair one - for instance we have only just overtaken Arsenal in terms of 'average' CAs among the first team squad, so the 'bias' does exist. What I can say is that the way we calculate those average targets has changed from an arbitrary method to based on betting odds across the season, which makes things a lot less open to pure human judgement I suppose. It is unfortunately going to take consistency in finishing at the top end, and European performances to match, until we really see us at the elite levels. And I go back to the stuff about how the AI deals with squads in-game: Greenwood and Jones can't have low CAs and PAs that mean they wouldn't get near the first team, because both of them are playing regular games over people like Lingard, James, Milner, Wijnaldum - more established players with naturally high CAs. So it's difficult, and it will never be perfect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having players' positions as 'accomplished' or 'natural' whatever takes up CA but as far as I'm aware playing a player in a position they're not totally accustomed to only results in a minor hit to a player's decisions attribute iirc.

 

Apologies Tom about the over the top comments, I appreciate your hands are tied and it's grating seeing young Liverpool and United players being overrated.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Finnegan said:

The problem with Barnes is you over state his weak foot (besides a few long shots for West Brom, how often does he really do sensational stuff with his left?) and you've also given him too many strong positions (when was the last time he played AMC, RM, CM or LM) so you're already chewing in to his current ability. 

To be fair he has actually done quite well using his left foot this season

 

Good finish at keepers near post vs Braga in the 3-3 draw

Smashed the ball into the top corner in the 2-1 loss to Fulham

Brilliant goal from 20 yards in 2-2 draw with Man Utd

18 yard goal into the corner in 1-1 draw with Palace

6 yard finish in 2-1 win vs Villa

 

4 of his 9 league goals are with his left, 5 of his 13 so far this season

 

15 left foot is probably a little high, but only by a couple of points really, 13 probably more realistic

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey. New to the discussion. I understand about CA/PA after using lockdown to edit a load of FM16 attributes so I can replay the 15/16 season in all its glory. City were dog rough at the start of that game.
 

What’s Barnes’ CA/PA? I’d guess about 150/-9 at the start of the season? Have his best attributes be Speed/Acceleration/Balance/Long Shots (15+) left foot is half decent aswell. I understand a 15. Anywhere between a 10 and 15 is good for me.


and then something like;

 

20 AML

15 ML, AMC, MC

10 AMR, MR, ST

 

All subjective of course.

Edited by Oswinner
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21/03/2021 at 11:37, tomfmlcfc said:

like to keep as much versatility as I can, even if a player hasn't played a position for a long time - Harvey obviously came through playing centrally, and has been used sparingly without much joy on the right. It is a difficult balancing act when deciding whether to prioritise whether a player is actually any good in a position,

 

In the current version, players learn new positions remarkably quickly. It's very easy to retrain a player positionally and even when played out of position, all they lose is a bit of decision making anyway. 

 

There's no need to make everyone extremely versatile and accomplished in stacks of positions. 

 

You've done it with Madders as well, which I find a bit frustrating given he looks far from comfortable when put on the wing in real life, he looks frankly abject. And I can't remember the last time he played as a striker? 

 

It all eats up your CA that you could be putting in to actual attributes, both visible and hidden. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Finnegan said:

 

In the current version, players learn new positions remarkably quickly. It's very easy to retrain a player positionally and even when played out of position, all they lose is a bit of decision making anyway. 

 

There's no need to make everyone extremely versatile and accomplished in stacks of positions. 

 

You've done it with Madders as well, which I find a bit frustrating given he looks far from comfortable when put on the wing in real life, he looks frankly abject. And I can't remember the last time he played as a striker? 

 

It all eats up your CA that you could be putting in to actual attributes, both visible and hidden. 

Whether the game allows you to retrain quickly or not has nothing to do with why we make players versatile where appropriate. If a player has played a position in the past it is important to reflect that in the game. We don't tend to completely bin off positional ability, even if a player hasn't played that role in years, in the same way we don't cut potential ability if a player gets to 24-25 and hasn't hit the heights people thought they were capable of.

 

Whether Maddison is any good out wide is a different debate, but he has played in that position a number of times. If he doesn't have a high rating of positional competence there, then the 'AI Rodgers' will not select him out wide, which is not at all realistic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, tomfmlcfc said:

Whether the game allows you to retrain quickly or not has nothing to do with why we make players versatile where appropriate

 

But I think it does, really, when you state yourself that your personal preference for having versatile players is a driving force behind your decision making.

 

Barnes had played a nominal number of games of Premier League football on the right but you've given him 19 at AMR. He's almost never played at AMC but you've given him 18, he's played once or twice as an auxiliary striker alongside Vards in an emergency and you've given him 15, he's played at CM once since youth football and that was in a Champions League away game in Porto (IIRC?) when he was played alongside the reserves so we could rest the first team - you've given him 13.

 

Maddison has scores of 18 and 16 respectively for the wings, positions he's never looked comfortable in and rarely plays, except for a few situations where Rodgers has tinkered with him out there because he doesn't like his other wide options in the squad. When he plays there, it's a great example in real life of what should be the football manager equivalent of you putting a player with no positional familiarity out there. He naturally finds himself drifting inside and gravitating back towards his AMC role habitually because it's not where he's used to playing.

 

Ricardo (whose template I'm guessing you largely adopted from Nice's editor?) who was a striker in his youth career at Porto, has 7 at ST. He played more at left back than at right back in his first of two years at Nice and yet he's a 13 at left back now, presumably because he's barely played there in the last three years. These seem like far more balanced interpretations of players who've previously dabbled in other positions.

 

It just feels like the positional footprint of these guys is exaggerated, you could tone almost all of those alternative positions down by 5-6ish if not more. I'm not sure how much CA that even frees up to be fair but probably enough to give a guy with 9 Premier League goals this season more than 12 finishing. 

 

Edited by Finnegan
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

But I think it does, really, when you state yourself that your personal preference for having versatile players is a driving force behind your decision making.

 

Barnes had played a nominal number of games of Premier League football on the right but you've given him 19 at AMR. He's almost never played at AMC but you've given him 18, he's played once or twice as an auxiliary striker alongside Vards in an emergency and you've given him 15, he's played at CM once since youth football and that was in a Champions League away game in Porto (IIRC?) when he was played alongside the reserves so we could rest the first team - you've given him 13.

 

Maddison has scores of 18 and 16 respectively for the wings, positions he's never looked comfortable in and rarely plays, except for a few situations where Rodgers has tinkered with him out there because he doesn't like his other wide options in the squad. When he plays there, it's a great example in real life of what should be the football manager equivalent of you putting a player with no positional familiarity out there. He naturally finds himself drifting inside and gravitating back towards his AMC role habitually because it's not where he's used to playing.

 

Ricardo (whose template I'm guessing you largely adopted from Nice's editor?) who was a striker in his youth career at Porto, has 7 at ST. He played more at left back than at right back in his first of two years at Nice and yet he's a 13 at left back now, presumably because he's barely played there in the last three years. These seem like far more balanced interpretations of players who've previously dabbled in other positions.

 

It just feels like the positional footprint of these guys is exaggerated, you could tone almost all of those alternative positions down by 5-6ish if not more. I'm not sure how much CA that even frees up to be fair but probably enough to give a guy with 9 Premier League goals this season more than 12 finishing. 

 

Perhaps I should clarify it's more than a personal preference - it's advised that in general that versatility is a good thing to have. It is not a big burden on CA at all, if it was then we would perform poorly in test saves and indeed in saves where you are our manager.

 

When you play the game as another manager, when you come to play Leicester there should be a decent enough chance that Maddison plays wide, because he has played there before for us. If I reduce his ability to play on the left wing, other players would be selected ahead of him who in real life would not. If you run a save in the Premier League and the AI is playing Maddison on the left and Barnes in the middle, then that is a different debate to be had. But from the testing I've done that is not the case.

 

I'm not sure what your issue with 12 finishing is, when he couldn't finish to save his life at times last season. If you come to me and say 'he's not scoring enough goals in my saves', then that is something I can take a look at. But plucking numbers out and saying 'this is too low/too high' is not much use to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sly said:

In fairness, Barnes has kicked in loss this season. 
 

I’d guess the stats are based on 19/20 @tomfmlcfc? Therefore he isn’t that far out realistically. 
 

 

Yes, pretty much. The 21.0 update (i.e. the data for the release of the game in November) was virtually all done back in July when the season finished - we do the updates straight away at the end of the season so that our knowledge and opinions are fresh and not swayed by internationals or meaningless pre-season games.

 

There is some scope for change after the first few games of the season - for example I pushed for a late upgrade for Fofana, but that's more because the game was listing him for loan rather than because I was 100% confident he would continue to be as good as he has been.

 

The January updates (21.3) are a bit less open to big CA changes. Barnes had a slight boost this winter but nothing major. I don't like to make sweeping changes based off limited numbers of games.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
On 18/04/2021 at 23:37, moore_94 said:

How are SI gonna work this into next years game then? :ph34r:

To be honest this is the only place it sounds like a good idea, but I’d rather just do it myself on the editor 😂

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, lildave3 said:

To be honest this is the only place it sounds like a good idea, but I’d rather just do it myself on the editor 😂

To be honest I imagine it has already been done by a Youtuber lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...