Game engine

[Saransh Vatsa]

The bookies get richer and richer from people putting the top four clubs to win in their accas.

How many times in a season do all the big four/five clubs win in the EPL? Bookies nightmare if it ever happens.

Their are no easy games in football, and for anyone to say the best team on paper will or should always win, has a lot to learn about the beautiful game.

I don't think that anyone says that the best team should ALWAYS win..... What everyone here is saying that the no of unrealistic losses should be decreased.

To Rayco, out of all the matches u listed, did any of the losing team have 70% possession????? Did anyone of them have 11 shots at goal and their opponent keeper had no saves??? Yes the weaker teams do and should lose. But not so many times as it happens in this game.

[TypTex]

I don't think that anyone says that the best team should ALWAYS win..... What everyone here is saying that the no of unrealistic losses should be decreased.

But are the losses that unrealistic?

As the EPL has been talked about in this thread, I'll continue this example.

Man Utd and Man City have the two most expensive squads in the EPL (around about 400m).

City played 16 - won 10 drawn 2 lost 4
Utd played 16 - won 7 drawn 4 lost 5

If City or Utd (400m) were a team in this game . they would be 6/7 star teams, whilst the likes of Hull and Cardiff (squads worth 30-40 million) would be 2/3 star teams. Yet the smaller teams still can win and win well in real life, so why not here in the game?

Losing to weaker teams is not unrealistic, it's annoying, but not unrealistic.

[Saransh Vatsa]

But are the losses that unrealistic?

As the EPL has been talked about in this thread, I'll continue this example.

Man Utd and Man City have the two most expensive squads in the EPL (around about 400m).

City played 16 - won 10 drawn 2 lost 4
Utd played 16 - won 7 drawn 4 lost 5

If City or Utd (400m) were a team in this game . they would be 6/7 star teams, whilst the likes of Hull and Cardiff (squads worth 30-40 million) would be 2/3 star teams. Yet the smaller teams still can win and win well in real life, so why not here in the game?

Losing to weaker teams is not unrealistic, it's annoying, but not unrealistic.

I get u but what I am trying to say is in real life, games r decided by many factors. Playing conditions and all and even sometimes the X factor a luck is involved. Now since it is a simulation, I feel that that X Factor has been overdone. Because if a stronger team loses when the weaker team had centered its formation, played correct ordered, made correct subs, etc it was believable. But there r strong teams losing to lol teams when they have countered formation and what not!!! That is impractical. And in the matches IRL, the weaker team wins when its players play their heart out, with every bit of their energy. But in the game, taking all that into account is impossible and it just can not be decided in which match a player will suddenly get a super energy boost and will start running up and down the whole pitch, chasing everyone who has the ball and then taking it and running all the way to score. If that can't happen, then all the NGE does is picks some random match with some random victim and activated the Troll Protocol LOLs
Well, what I just said. I hope u get what I am saying. I am feeling sleepy and so can't explain properly right now.

[TypTex]

Well, what I just said. I hope u get what I am saying. I am feeling sleepy and so can't explain properly right now.

Thanks for taking the time to explain and yes .. your points do make sense.

[Belgji]

I get u but what I am trying to say is in real life, games r decided by many factors. Playing conditions and all and even sometimes the X factor a luck is involved. Now since it is a simulation, I feel that that X Factor has been overdone. Because if a stronger team loses when the weaker team had centered its formation, played correct ordered, made correct subs, etc it was believable. But there r strong teams losing to lol teams when they have countered formation and what not!!! That is impractical. And in the matches IRL, the weaker team wins when its players play their heart out, with every bit of their energy. But in the game, taking all that into account is impossible and it just can not be decided in which match a player will suddenly get a super energy boost and will start running up and down the whole pitch, chasing everyone who has the ball and then taking it and running all the way to score. If that can't happen, then all the NGE does is picks some random match with some random victim and activated the Troll Protocol LOLs

Yes.. I agree!!!
As this is a game, the factor should be these:
1. How much of time the player/manager uses for his team
2. How much he prepared for that match
3. Differences of the players' conditions & morales
4. Formations & tactics, including in match tactical changes & subs
and so on....
Oh... Don't get me wrong!!! Of course, the stronger teams should WIN... but well-prepared weakers should win sometimes(sometimes).
And, the abandon teams should be dominated all the time & there should be no bot!!! I hate BOTTTTSSS!

" MAY NORDEUS CARES THE ACTIVE GAMERS "

[Raykco]

I don't think that anyone says that the best team should ALWAYS win..... What everyone here is saying that the no of unrealistic losses should be decreased.

To Rayco, out of all the matches u listed, did any of the losing team have 70% possession????? Did anyone of them have 11 shots at goal and their opponent keeper had no saves??? Yes the weaker teams do and should lose. But not so many times as it happens in this game.

Maybe not 70% possession but still lose, but what about this from 4 weeks ago. Tottenham had 56% possession against Man City's 44, and still lost by 0-6.