A subject to think about

[Tactician]

I just encounter this situation. But I used different formation. So I don't have relevant information for your reference.

I don't think match result must be the same in situation you mentioned. Conditions of 2 matches are hardly identical. You should ascertain conditions like player morale, conditions, in match tactic changes, etc. of your team as well as your opponents are identical.

Game will be boring if there is no randomness.

But it is non-appropriate if there is too much randomness involved (which is likely to be the case in Top Eleven). This is probably why there are so many complaints about strange results, non-acceptable results or 'troll' results in this game; such results (let's called them surprise results) have occurred more than they should. Like I have said, if two teams of equal quality are made to play against each other for say 10 times, where all the other factors that can be controlled by the manager are kept constant (tactics, condition, morale and so on), the team using the superior tactics must have the majority of the wins (not 50-50 or so like it seems to be in this game). Randomness can be used to try and simulate the outcomes like they might happen in real life, but when too much randomness is involved, the outcomes deviate from what is expected in real life, that is there are too many surprises or anomalies. So, briefly, the probable problem in this game is that randomness has been given too much significance for deciding match results.

[cookizzz]

But it is non-appropriate if there is too much randomness involved (which is likely to be the case in Top Eleven). This is probably why there are so many complaints about strange results, non-acceptable results or 'troll' results in this game; such results (let's called them surprise results) have occurred more than they should. Like I have said, if two teams of equal quality are made to play against each other for say 10 times, where all the other factors that can be controlled by the manager are kept constant (tactics, condition, morale and so on), the team using the superior tactics must have the majority of the wins (not 50-50 or so like it seems to be in this game). Randomness can be used to try and simulate the outcomes like they might happen in real life, but when too much randomness is involved, the outcomes deviate from what is expected in real life, that is there are too many surprises or anomalies. So, briefly, the probable problem in this game is that randomness has been given too much significance for deciding match results.

I don't rule out existence of troll or surprise results. Just want to remind some complaining managers that we may not access all factors which affect match results.

I have not studied the cases of recent troll results. Do some managers report surprise positive results? Do complaining managers encounter both positive and negative surprise results? Do some managers report that after a series of negative surprise results, they encounter some positive surprise results?

Edit:
One of my teams have roller coaster like up & down in last 2 seasons. These may not be those surprise results as you mentioned but these could be shared for your information.

In last season, this team opened the season with 6 losses in a row. I did not think my team badly played in this period and should have won some of these matches. The team still struggled in 1st half season and finished at bottom of table at half season point. In the 2nd half season, its performance improved without significant player or tactic changes. At one point it has good chance to reach 2nd place. But its performance suddenly worsened in last 2 or 3 days. It eventually finished at 6th (or 5th).

In this season, this team have no roster change except upgrading 2 attacking players 3 or 4 days ago. It unexpectedly well started the season with 8W 0D 1L. Most previous league matches were not so easy but my team could win. But these results are not fully surprising because average qualities in my league in this season were lower.

[Tactician]

Cookizzz, I replied for the 'concern' in general, that is not specifically to your post.

I think that football managerial skills should matter more than randomness when it comes to a football management game. Randomness should only be there for the element of surprise just like it is in real football, and also to mimic how the results happen in real life. But some users (probably not you cookizzz) will always try to argue, justify or say things against this because of the fact that they are not very good or even good at football management and tactics (some are not even decent). In other words, such users prefer to have the results based more on 'rolls of dices', where not much skill is required, as this is to their advantage.

Some users also prefer to have the results based on quality only, which is 'nonsense' in terms of football logic, but they want it like this because they want it 'simple' and want to win easily without requiring much tactical skills.

Some users prefer to have the results based mostly on quality and on 'rolls of dices', again probably because they are not good enough in football tactics.

All those three cases and other similar cases are understandable. It is natural for someone to have something that functions in such a way that he gets advantages. But, this does not mean that this particular way of functioning is appropriate.

I prefer a game based more on skills and hard work rather than 'luck'. Also, football is game based mostly on skills and hard work - the players skills, the managers skills and the other members of staff skills; generally, 'luck' plays only a minor part.

[Medo zalata]

The game depends on % as I believe.
You can set your perfect counter formation, have the better quality then you will have +90% of winning.
Even if you have 90%, you may fail.
This is based on the fact that most managers in real life stick to one formation that better suits their team (quality in the game) and don't change formation every game they have.
They change formation if necessary but they often change tactics.

However, nordeus should review their match calculation system because sometimes it depends too much on luck rather than logic. Also it depends too much on quality.

[Tactician]

The game depends on % as I believe.
You can set your perfect counter formation, have the better quality then you will have +90% of winning.
Even if you have 90%, you may fail.
This is based on the fact that most managers in real life stick to one formation that better suits their team (quality in the game) and don't change formation every game they have.
They change formation if necessary but they often change tactics.

However, nordeus should review their match calculation system because sometimes it depends too much on luck rather than logic. Also it depends too much on quality.

In real life, managers do make significant changes. It might be not evident to some people, especially those who only watch TV, read the newspaper, and/or use the internet and refer to the 'formations' shown. In many cases, the preparations and the tactics (this include the formations) to be used are different. The difference in tactics can be seen if you analyse each match, the positioning of the players, each of their roles and so on. You will likely see that there are differences (sometimes big differences) to the formations shown or the formations that was said to be used.

In a game like Top Eleven, options are very limited in terms of tactics. There is clear lack of orders, especially individual orders for each player. But, this is understandable because this game is meant to be more simple as compared to other games like Football Manager and so on.

There is a big difference between football (including football management) in real life and football in a game like Top Eleven. Some people, including some users on the forum here (I am not referring to you Medo, nor do I am referring to the users that commented in this thread only) don't even know what they are taking about, especially those that try to justify things occurring in this game with events that happen in the past or how things are currently are in real life football. But, given that this a football management simulation game, many things can be done so that despite being simple, it can simulate things properly, at least to an extent that the main things concerning football logic are respected.