Does anybody really think we can influence the game?

[hectorblg]

As far as the last 2 seasons, I realize I'm not playing a simulation, I'm playing a random, luck game. I'm sure they make us believe we can influence the game, but we don't. Every time we play, the game is already doomed since the beginning, no matter if you attend, make changes in the game, train, put you morale at the best, oh no, nothing matters. Now it seems there exists a "luck" algorithm that says: YOU'RE GOING TO LOOSE THE NEXT GAME, even if your opponent is a 2 star abandoned team, 50 points below you. When you start the game it's so obvious. Your players attack as hell, pass easily through the pitch, miss every shot. You know then it's obvious that your opponent will have soon the first shot and it will be a "wonder" goal from the midfield. It doesn't matter that you put your tactic in normal, and you put 4 defense + a mid defense to avoid surprises like these. Then you know that it doesn't matter how hard you try, if you change tactics, make offensive changes, no it won't affect nothing, your players will still miss all their chances, like if their morale was the worst, and the opponent's defense will always outrun you like if their have the best condition, and the morale at TOP.

What's most hilarious and pathetic about this game, is that the next match you'll face a stronger team with exactly the same formation, you won't change tactics, you won't care, you will just leave your players with low morale, and you're going to win 5-0.

And don't come and say "they want to make it as real life game, where luck happens". The "luck" that makes a weaker team beat a stronger one, has to be provoked with smart tactics, the ones that never happen here....

Is this a football simulation or a roulette game?

[Mitja fc]

Check my thread named "this tho " is newly opend so it wont be hard to find...tjere will be your answer...but in short yes we do influence a game alot...like 95% alot...

[Nezivor]

As far as the last 2 seasons, I realize I'm not playing a simulation, I'm playing a random, luck game. I'm sure they make us believe we can influence the game, but we don't. Every time we play, the game is already doomed since the beginning, no matter if you attend, make changes in the game, train, put you morale at the best, oh no, nothing matters. Now it seems there exists a "luck" algorithm that says: YOU'RE GOING TO LOOSE THE NEXT GAME, even if your opponent is a 2 star abandoned team, 50 points below you. When you start the game it's so obvious. Your players attack as hell, pass easily through the pitch, miss every shot. You know then it's obvious that your opponent will have soon the first shot and it will be a "wonder" goal from the midfield. It doesn't matter that you put your tactic in normal, and you put 4 defense + a mid defense to avoid surprises like these. Then you know that it doesn't matter how hard you try, if you change tactics, make offensive changes, no it won't affect nothing, your players will still miss all their chances, like if their morale was the worst, and the opponent's defense will always outrun you like if their have the best condition, and the morale at TOP.

What's most hilarious and pathetic about this game, is that the next match you'll face a stronger team with exactly the same formation, you won't change tactics, you won't care, you will just leave your players with low morale, and you're going to win 5-0.

And don't come and say "they want to make it as real life game, where luck happens". The "luck" that makes a weaker team beat a stronger one, has to be provoked with smart tactics, the ones that never happen here....

Is this a football simulation or a roulette game?

+++++

[pyssell]

I agree with u completly. I think it´s like this. Those 2 min before the game starts when u can’t change anything more then the match engine calculate all things like moral ability condition and everything else. Then for example it will come up with that home win 75% draw 15% away win 10% and then a lottery that decide the winner.

Then it doesnt matter what u do during the game its already decided how it will end. Its just who will score that is real. We tried in a friendly and put a weak team from start at 75% against a opponent at 105% and we were 0-2 down in half time. Then we made 9 substitutions and went up to 150%. We didn’t even have a single shot at goal or not even an good attempt to score. The only the that changed was a little better possession. And we were 45% better.

But the result were already made up before the game started...

[hectorblg]

Check my thread named "this tho " is newly opend so it wont be hard to find...tjere will be your answer...but in short yes we do influence a game alot...like 95% alot...

Hey, I read your thread and you're speaking of one single game. I'm sure it was all a coincidence, the result was already decided. I've also had games like this, where it seems I'm the great smart manager that made things change. But for every game like that, I have 20 where it's the opposite. It's a LOT more probable, that it was a coincidence that goals came when you make your subs, and you were already going to win that game, even you make or not make the subs.

[Tactician]

But the result were already made up before the game started...

This is something that I have been saying many times for older versions of Top Eleven when I was around many months ago. This thing started to become evident in associations more than a year ago, and I made tests myself and verified this, but they were friendlies and there was still a possibility of the it being different for competitive matches but later I have noticed, it is more or less the same. In those tests matches, where I was the manager of both sides, I could know and modify the formation and orders of both sides, see the assistant manager advice for both sides, and there was no sense at all.

[Mitja fc]

Well I usually start game with low pressure easy tacklings and if result isnt going the way I want it I change to hard pressure/normal tacklings and result does change...could be just a coincidence but I dont think so...we do influence a game...maybe not on great scale but we do...

Also the way I see it if opp is using high pressure on me from start he is hard pressuring fresh team full of energy with fresh team but when I change to hard pressuring i put pressure on tired team with fresh team while he is still hard pressuring fresh team but with tired team...I am sure i get a little edge by doing that...did hard pressure from the go in this match tho...

EDITED:Also when you try to influence a game you can also bring a negative outcome...
For example you are losing 2:0 and you rage-change mentality to hard attacking and sub one MC for another striker cuz this will deffinitely bring goals in our rage-mode thinking logic...
Try to play bunch of friendlies with this settup from beggining and you will see the outcome compared to normal tactics...I am sure it will be worse...
Thats why I dont do marginal changes in game...i just change pressure and maybe move dmc to mc position with a sub...like I did in last game...

[pcmacdaniel]

Changing the orders does have an influence on the match. Watch what happens to the ratings, after they are changed. If you change the correct thing, many players on your team will have their ratings improved at once. Wrong change, and it's a sea of red.

As for formation changes, I'm not sure. Maybe it helps, I can't say it doesn't. However I tend to lean towards the position of the moderator (Khris) that formation isn't that important in this game.

[Aku Papua]

Yes u can influence the game... U dont believe me?
Try this, once u are leading 3 goals, on 2nd half put everyone at wrong position... Gk as striker, striker as GK and so the rest...
U surely will lose...
Which prove u can influence the game...

[khris]

Yes u can influence the game... U dont believe me?
Try this, once u are leading 3 goals, on 2nd half put everyone at wrong position... Gk as striker, striker as GK and so the rest...
U surely will lose...
Which prove u can influence the game...

You can influence the match when the scenario is "revealed or known" and this need a manager attending.... realy there are 3+3=6 options of scenario if you count all options of, non attend or attend, + attand and do something "to solve the scenario" or son't do anything "cause attend is enough without touch anything"....

resume-
non attending 3 scenarios inside 2 groups
1no attend vs no att
2-no vs yes attend and don't modify
2-no vs yes and switch things (ye, sometimes is worst touch the starting orders and players vs a inactive, we know enough true?)

attending 6 scenarios inside 2 groups
3-yes (just attend) vs nope
3-yes (attend + modify) vs nope
4-yes no touch (touch=modify something) vs yes no touch
4-yes touch vs yes no touch
4-yes no touch vs yes and touch
4-yes touch vs yes and no touch

still I numbered the scenarios because are part of the same "group", or 4 groups of scenarios that allow different options in each case of the 4 mentioned ( I mean,in these 4 big scenarios the options you have doing/ dont doing are fixed/determined, thats why are part of the same despite be divided in sub-groups)

-no attend vs no attend
-no attend - vs yes
-attend vs nope
-attend vs attend

the options are 2x2. really, and "sub' consequences of the decisions" are part of these 4 scenarios, because attend and don't control the match vs a inactive includes the options, that the game gives you to resolve the matches "doing something" in that case of "attend vs non attending" ..of course the options can be "0" for you trying anything you try.