Need answers from Nordeus...

[drazen vtc]

that is exactly what i say, manager skills are not of much use, if manager skill is only to hope and pray for oponent players dot have too much boost than better move live match and put casino wheel, that way will know what to expect
Isnt it normal that preparing for match meen look for oponent team weak spot and push on it to break defense? Why waste time on strategy to say "hmm he is dense in midle side are weaker spots will attack there" than game decide, o no, those players need to be balanced to prevent break from sides-that is nor fair and nice at all
By uderstanding game you think it is this- ok, i will put weaker players on his strongest players so game will balance it and i can get him by surprise on orher part of pit-? I know it is blunt explanation but with all those %%, balancing, game engine etc etc i see it that way
Strangely, i never won match against 30+% oponent in champion league finals, so i should feel better now, bcs i am not bad manager just need to learn how to exploit those game interventions in teams
P.S.when i complain why i ended for 6-7 consecutive seasons vs same teams that are way over me, answer was that no many teams of my lvl in server, but checking cup first stage teams i found 21 team that was my lvl and 10% up or down of me
That i mention bcs in those seasons there was teams who has 2 or 3 players 160, 180 or 200+ % power whos normaly fill my net with 7+ goals every match, so where is there those balancing/engine stuff when 180% attackers face defenders of 115 and 120 goalie? Tried all, dif formation, zonal, man to man, etc, outcome was the same

[khris]

that is exactly what i say, manager skills are not of much use, if manager skill is only to hope and pray for oponent players dot have too much boost than better move live match and put casino wheel, that way will know what to expect
Isnt it normal that preparing for match meen look for oponent team weak spot and push on it to break defense? Why waste time on strategy to say "hmm he is dense in midle side are weaker spots will attack there" than game decide, o no, those players need to be balanced to prevent break from sides-that is nor fair and nice at all
By uderstanding game you think it is this- ok, i will put weaker players on his strongest players so game will balance it and i can get him by surprise on orher part of pit-? I know it is blunt explanation but with all those %%, balancing, game engine etc etc i see it that way
Strangely, i never won match against 30+% oponent in champion league finals, so i should feel better now, bcs i am not bad manager just need to learn how to exploit those game interventions in teams
P.S.when i complain why i ended for 6-7 consecutive seasons vs same teams that are way over me, answer was that no many teams of my lvl in server, but checking cup first stage teams i found 21 team that was my lvl and 10% up or down of me
That i mention bcs in those seasons there was teams who has 2 or 3 players 160, 180 or 200+ % power whos normaly fill my net with 7+ goals every match, so where is there those balancing/engine stuff when 180% attackers face defenders of 115 and 120 goalie? Tried all, dif formation, zonal, man to man, etc, outcome was the same

Lower the team quality, at the end of the season if you aren't in the top server, so if you are lower than 100% you will prevent +1 level teams in your competitions in many cases.
Then, the key is to understand the internal roles dusplay in your team, and develop the right players and, of course discard players if needed, to invest resources with efficency. Always remember that to know your players potential you have to text them vs a 1* opponent, so then you can oversize the internal programming and see the roles assigned intenannyl by the engine. Too remember that the engine does a simulation checking the 1vs1 team quality distance to set the margin and the scenario parameter, the beatability margin is arround a 30% but sometimes it can reach a 50% of distance where a team surprisingly is able to earn a tie.

You see the teams as formations, but the engine see the teams as lists that have to fill and then each player available have some animations linked and a dominance power that determines how many of the 25 match animations can cover overall, so, don't look at the "weaker spots" looking at the field, but thinking how the engine simulates the match. There is no weak point as I explain you, the engine select few players to be determinant and this is based on variables, mainly the ratings that have variations, so, for example, there are players that have like 8-6-8-6-8 so here you can predict a drop and probably or, the player will not participate in any animation, or will fail earning a 6 very likely. The Key players tend to keep streaks of 2-3 max ratings after the drop and each player have a own behaviour.

Look at the game like what it is, a engine reading numbers and checking lists, and having a process, this has nothing to do with the reality and you have to understand this in first place to improve the way to manage. The animations are just to make the data look like realistic but it is so wrong to try to read and understand why we have some scores from the animations viewpoint without understanding in first place the process used by the engine.

[Steppenwolf]

Lower the team quality, at the end of the season if you aren't in the top server, so if you are lower than 100% you will prevent +1 level teams in your competitions in many cases.
Then, the key is to understand the internal roles dusplay in your team, and develop the right players and, of course discard players if needed, to invest resources with efficency. Always remember that to know your players potential you have to text them vs a 1* opponent, so then you can oversize the internal programming and see the roles assigned intenannyl by the engine. Too remember that the engine does a simulation checking the 1vs1 team quality distance to set the margin and the scenario parameter, the beatability margin is arround a 30% but sometimes it can reach a 50% of distance where a team surprisingly is able to earn a tie.

You see the teams as formations, but the engine see the teams as lists that have to fill and then each player available have some animations linked and a dominance power that determines how many of the 25 match animations can cover overall, so, don't look at the "weaker spots" looking at the field, but thinking how the engine simulates the match. There is no weak point as I explain you, the engine select few players to be determinant and this is based on variables, mainly the ratings that have variations, so, for example, there are players that have like 8-6-8-6-8 so here you can predict a drop and probably or, the player will not participate in any animation, or will fail earning a 6 very likely. The Key players tend to keep streaks of 2-3 max ratings after the drop and each player have a own behaviour.

Look at the game like what it is, a engine reading numbers and checking lists, and having a process, this has nothing to do with the reality and you have to understand this in first place to improve the way to manage. The animations are just to make the data look like realistic but it is so wrong to try to read and understand why we have some scores from the animations viewpoint without understanding in first place the process used by the engine.

What kind of test vs 1* teams you are talking about? I played 2 friendlies against the same 1* team, the second game with less condition. In the first game all my players had ratings over 7.5 and the score was 2 - 0. In the second game only few players had ratings over 7.0 and the score was 10 - 0. My best player of all times wasn't in those few with ratings over 7.0...

[khris]

What kind of test vs 1* teams you are talking about? I played 2 friendlies against the same 1* team, the second game with less condition. In the first game all my players had ratings over 7.5 and the score was 2 - 0. In the second game only few players had ratings over 7.0 and the score was 10 - 0. My best player of all times wasn't in those few with ratings over 7.0...

The test vs a 1* team allow you to oversize the internal programming. Since the beatability margin is set arround a 60% of distance, by testing your team vs a 1* your players will perform at the max. posible quality distance. You can know by doing this, if a player is a key player, because by the force a excellent programmed player (with dominance power (so able to take a good amount of amination slots) and contributive power (so able to be efficent) will score very likely 3+ goals per match.

You can too test the team composition, because every season have differences in how the power is spread. Time to time there is a season where 1 player scores the 70% of attempts because mostly of dominance power, is assigned to him, in other seasons, 2-3 players are alternating.

A real key player, a "well programmed one" will not have a 7 as rating vs a 1*. so in that case if you bought a player like this, you have to discard him because will be a waste to invest boosters on him, since the visual skills affect very slightly the player behaviour. It only affect the beatability margin and in this case the dominance.

You know, for example, that you can not create a "good player" intentionally. If a player is set internally to be a scorer, and have linked to him the goal animations, you can not convert him, in a assistant, by training the passing. And viceversa, an assistant will not be a scorer even with 340% shooting because of the internal roles, and we already tested this and you know perfectly about this since the V.1 Steppen, try to follow my points, please.

[Steppenwolf]

You know, for example, that you can not create a "good player" intentionally.

Every key player I had in my teams was created intentionally... These are the last four from Celtic 1888...

[khris]

Every key player I had in my teams was created intentionally... These are the last four from Celtic 1888...

Your first post is the reply to yourself-

"If the strongest player on the pitch (8-star, on fire) is under-performing 2 games in row, tell me:

1. Why I should waste money and resources to bring players to 8-star?
2. Why I should waste morale boosters to bring morale at max?"

Here there are different points to cover, the first is, that a player have to be predetermined by default to be successful.
Despite all, you can win by margin, of course. But you can differentiate a player well programmed by default from a bad programmed for the fluency that your team have when is playing.
Another point is, the beatability margin of your oppos, of course, if you push a player, he'll gain distance in the simulation, but this has nuances.
How many times we've seen upsellers with 340%s in skills complaining because their "investment" doesnt work as expected? like, finishing 340% and barely the player scores?
Too we have to consider that, by definition, as the engine only simulates the attacking playstyle, this will always link players to fill the lists and bring animations, with the corresponding variables, and these variables will create alternation when determining which player solves a match.
You can perfectly notice when you have a squad that plays fluidly or, when it seems stuck.
It is a deep science in realitym and IMO these overall rating you shared are nice, but, to understand the team situation more in detail, and the reason why the players may underperform at certain games, or why some times the score can seems stuck to 0 etc.. this is a very general analysis and will not help you. At least it didn't...

[khris]

What kind of test vs 1* teams you are talking about? I played 2 friendlies against the same 1* team, the second game with less condition. In the first game all my players had ratings over 7.5 and the score was 2 - 0. In the second game only few players had ratings over 7.0 and the score was 10 - 0. My best player of all times wasn't in those few with ratings over 7.0...

Pleasse if you have time, share here the capture of the match events, and the final team ratings.**