Season 113 - Are you ready?

[maloukees]

I don't have "any" key player. Ive full of neutral/bad players, thats the reason too, of why the team don't play fluid.

The simulator select few players to be "the main protagonists" in each match, and discard 4-5 that, if you watch the game like in the old version, (deactivating the live match and reading the comments) you can see how, the game never show the name* of the 11 players during one match.

Then, you can see too, how the "chosen players" are alternating each match (if they r not key players**) , so many times we have ratings like, 7-8-6-8-7 for, the "contributive players".
There are, contributive players (those who, assist, score, MCs helping in defense, those passing well or "doing some action"),
the "non contributive players" , (those who don't show/or show** the name during the match, but have a weight in the simulation in some way, that's why I call them "neutral players") that can have, positive impact, or negative in the players arround, and key players. These key players can win all alone, 1 of them, the 70% of a title, and they tend to appear every match doing something positive -scoring, assisting, etc-

My team dont have key players. The contributive ones, are, the GK, who scores from FK/corners time to time... the DL, that seems to score time to time too and do a effort in attack, and then, I used 3 AMCs +1 as MC that seems to be "assistants" only, but, score in very few ocassions. Then mostly of times, mostly of players appear as neutral ones that don't do anyting some matches and don't appear despite that, they can have near 9*'s.

To "solve my problem" I need a key player at least, one of these who have, ratings like 9-10-10-8-9 and well, of course I need to notice that the game goes more fluid, and in my favour. Right now, I only have a 134% team, with "visual quality" but no more, because I have too much players bad programmed.


edit: lol later I edit this cuz I mixed terms and thesis writing fast, but there's an idea****

Resume:

A player can be, during the match, Visible or Invisible in the comments game mode.
Then can be, Visible + contributive, in a positive, or negative way.
Or Invisible+ do a contribution in negative/positive way too.


Visible/Invisible=appear, do not.

Visible + positive= scores, help indefense etc
Visible + negative= loses the ball possession, misses 1,2,3 attempts etc

Invisible, what I call neutral players-
Invisible+positive: Don't appear his name, but, the game goes fluid in your favour, so theres no negative impact in the players he have arround.
Invisible+negative (don't show the name and impacts badly in the players arround when is set in the 11).


Then:
Key players, appear almost always, doing positive contributions, helping to win, having 9's-10 as rating.
"Positive Contributive players" (visible always) - these help like, one match yes, one no and so, scoring when they r chosen to appear, showing their name and helping. Ratings go like, 6-7-6-8-6 or 7-7-7-8-7
"Negative Contributive Playrs" -
That potato striker that with 8* scores 3 goals in 40 matches. Appearing constantly because he likes the camera man but missing all. That player who misses 3-4 attemps in a row.
Too the player who loses the ball so allows a counter against you.
Aggressive players.
...

Thanks that makes sense.

So to say it simple, you have to observe the players more than the stars (quality they have).

If low quality if they perform as key players better to keep them always.

[Nebu]

I don't have "any" key player. Ive full of neutral/bad players, thats the reason too, of why the team don't play fluid.

The simulator select few players to be "the main protagonists" in each match, and discard 4-5 that, if you watch the game like in the old version, (deactivating the live match and reading the comments) you can see how, the game never show the name* of the 11 players during one match.

Then, you can see too, how the "chosen players" are alternating each match (if they r not key players**) , so many times we have ratings like, 7-8-6-8-7 for, the "contributive players".
There are, contributive players (those who, assist, score, MCs helping in defense, those passing well or "doing some action"),
the "non contributive players" , (those who don't show/or show** the name during the match, but have a weight in the simulation in some way, that's why I call them "neutral players") that can have, positive impact, or negative in the players arround, and key players. These key players can win all alone, 1 of them, the 70% of a title, and they tend to appear every match doing something positive -scoring, assisting, etc-

My team dont have key players. The contributive ones, are, the GK, who scores from FK/corners time to time... the DL, that seems to score time to time too and do a effort in attack, and then, I used 3 AMCs +1 as MC that seems to be "assistants" only, but, score in very few ocassions. Then mostly of times, mostly of players appear as neutral ones that don't do anyting some matches and don't appear despite that, they can have near 9*'s.

To "solve my problem" I need a key player at least, one of these who have, ratings like 9-10-10-8-9 and well, of course I need to notice that the game goes more fluid, and in my favour. Right now, I only have a 134% team, with "visual quality" but no more, because I have too much players bad programmed.


edit: lol later I edit this cuz I mixed terms and thesis writing fast, but there's an idea****

Resume:

A player can be, during the match, Visible or Invisible in the comments game mode.
Then can be, Visible + contributive, in a positive, or negative way.
Or Invisible+ do a contribution in negative/positive way too.


Visible/Invisible=appear, do not.

Visible + positive= scores, help indefense etc
Visible + negative= loses the ball possession, misses 1,2,3 attempts etc

Invisible, what I call neutral players-
Invisible+positive: Don't appear his name, but, the game goes fluid in your favour, so theres no negative impact in the players he have arround.
Invisible+negative (don't show the name and impacts badly in the players arround when is set in the 11).


Then:
Key players, appear almost always, doing positive contributions, helping to win, having 9's-10 as rating.
"Positive Contributive players" (visible always) - these help like, one match yes, one no and so, scoring when they r chosen to appear, showing their name and helping. Ratings go like, 6-7-6-8-6 or 7-7-7-8-7
"Negative Contributive Playrs" -
That potato striker that with 8* scores 3 goals in 40 matches. Appearing constantly because he likes the camera man but missing all. That player who misses 3-4 attemps in a row.
Too the player who loses the ball so allows a counter against you.
Aggressive players.
...

Khris, this is the exact way that I know who to sell or train or keep. My favourite player Javan was scoring so many goals even as a 4* player, even more that 6/7* players in my team. I kept him untill I had enough greens and tokens to train him, he will be 26yrs next season and I am still planning to train him.

Javan is responsible for all the titles I have won, even events. But such players are deliberately scarce in T11, but I have also tried out those recommendations by Assistant. I think they mirror the old player's programming that they want you to replace. So I hope my assistant will suggest Javan's replacement when the time comes.

Perhaps you could have replaced yours when the suggestion was made. Expensive as it might be.

[pele]

Javan is responsible for all the titles I have won, even events. But such players are deliberately scarce in T11, but I have also tried out those recommendations by Assistant. I think they mirror the old player's programming that they want you to replace. So I hope my assistant will suggest Javan's replacement when the time comes.

Perhaps you could have replaced yours when the suggestion was made. Expensive as it might be.

This is a very interesting thought. I've never purchased recommended players owing to the exorbitant cost. I wonder if it would make sense to buy one just to see if Khris' and your theory is right.

[nikolgiorgos]

The main problem of the main 11, no 9's or 10's as rating show the issue

of course
- if you are not using wingers (AML-AMR),
- using your ST as MC
- using your GK for f-k/c-k
lol

[khris]

of course
- if you are not using wingers (AML-AMR),
- using your ST as MC
- using your GK for f-k/c-k
lol

xDDDDD
I had since many seasons ago a AMC as MC lol I try to have just one player out position in yellow.
Then I wont go for a amr, just wait for a team renovation, but I really would like to play without wingers again, as years ago.

[po_zdrach]

The main problem of the main 11, no 9's or 10's as rating show the issue

But your -40% opponent who kill you on the pitch is full of well training, good internally programmed players and this is reason for his win. I understand that. Can you explain now, how my team (15 games winning streak) can lost against
-50% abandoned team (only losses in last 5 games) and I can't change game no matter what I do? And this is not only one case.

[khris]

Thanks that makes sense.

So to say it simple, you have to observe the players more than the stars (quality they have).

If low quality if they perform as key players better to keep them always.

Exact. And sack that ST of 8*s that only misses if needed.

But your -40% opponent who kill you on the pitch is full of well training, good internally programmed players and this is reason for his win. I understand that. Can you explain now, how my team (15 games winning streak) can lost against
-50% abandoned team (only losses in last 5 games) and I can't change game no matter what I do? And this is not only one case.

Not exactly but this answers both questions. The -40's were not managed, just out of top 8 if I remember well many times, and nothing spectacular checking out players attributes, like some skills +240 or so...

But this occurs for the "variable of scenario", so, the more far away you are from the last loss, the more probable it is (even if it's in a low %).
So the game can chose a scenario, chosing X, Y Z orders as dominant ones to control the game (remember that the orders work individually, not faced VS the oppos settings, or these work, or do not) so, maybe you can have the right orders to control more or less the match but, your shooting success chances are set in "0" goals for you.
For more attendance, for more that you switch orders and you have the control, even doing subs', the balance can be directly closed for you. And you know pretty well that this happens to all managers time to time. Like "there's no way".

Still I believe that the game calibrates these stuffs with time of anticipation, setting some oppos as harder to beat, and I believe too that "if there's a reason for that weakness" one "can do something" to avoid that troll score, the problem is that you will never know if a player from your reseves would have been played better inside your main 11 having a effect of "ok, in this case the 11 main players, (st's mc's etc) are set to miss all chances, but, with the MC+ ST as reserves, your team value change and you'll win.

All is based in what we don't see.

[maloukees]

Exact. And sack that ST of 8*s that only misses if needed.



Not exactly but this answers both questions. The -40's were not managed, just out of top 8 if I remember well many times, and nothing spectacular checking out players attributes, like some skills +240 or so...

But this occurs for the "variable of scenario", so, the more far away you are from the last loss, the more probable it is (even if it's in a low %).
So the game can chose a scenario, chosing X, Y Z orders as dominant ones to control the game (remember that the orders work individually, not faced VS the oppos settings, or these work, or do not) so, maybe you can have the right orders to control more or less the match but, your shooting success chances are set in "0" goals for you.
For more attendance, for more that you switch orders and you have the control, even doing subs', the balance can be directly closed for you. And you know pretty well that this happens to all managers time to time. Like "there's no way".

Still I believe that the game calibrates these stuffs with time of anticipation, setting some oppos as harder to beat, and I believe too that "if there's a reason for that weakness" one "can do something" to avoid that troll score, the problem is that you will never know if a player from your reseves would have been played better inside your main 11 having a effect of "ok, in this case the 11 main players, (st's mc's etc) are set to miss all chances, but, with the MC+ ST as reserves, your team value change and you'll win.

All is based in what we don't see.

Thinking back a little thats makes really sense, sometimes a 6-7 * players plays with a rating of 5.6 en swap it for a 3* player suddenly that player has a grade of 8

[khris]

Thinking back a little thats makes really sense, sometimes a 6-7 * players plays with a rating of 5.6 en swap it for a 3* player suddenly that player has a grade of 8

The game is made of "variables". All is dynamic, using a "hidden base" of internal numbers that each player have. Basically, so a 5-8* can perfectly be unabled for X match and overcomed for a 3* as Ive said, the 1vs1 isn't what ppl think, is something in our mind but the truth is that, orders aren't faced with oppo's ones. Then, Dynamic conditions + these hidden AvQ numbers in each player makes the game as in the reality, cause been Dynamc don't exist the term "proportional win", unless, you oversize the skills creating mutants, that's how you can fix a match and one of the historic reasons of ma complains xD

It had sense time ago when we had limits and we could see a "bad player" despite it's visual avq, now there was a period without limits what means that the simulator has been broken allowing the players to overcome the own simulator limits... and well... here we are some of us, asking for skill limits again.

[po_zdrach]

Khris, I think that you give quality and complexity of the game engine that it doesn't have.

Before many years I played CM 01-02. Great football manager game and players in this game had internally programmed quality and they had diferent contributions in every match, but in T11 the case is not like this. I played this two games for many years and can see the diferents. 2-3 mounts ago there has some logic in the game and one smart manager could have success based on his possibility to adapt in differed situations. Now the game engine is TOTALLY BROKEN. The random factor is too high and I don't feel that manager have any chance to change game scenario. This make game roulette. No internally programmed, no players contributions, no reserves impact, just roulette...