News FMM23 First Look and Headline Features

[Ashez]

1 hour ago, Marc Vaughan said:

In a perfect world the idea is that people will understand the roles from their real-life watching of the sport and that the game will cause the players on the pitch to behave in the manner people expect from their roles, I'll happily accept that there are areas where this can be improved and I'm always striving to do so with each iteration.

Random question and I understand if you can't go into too much detail or any at all but how much does a player's stats influence the role? For example if you have say Trent Vs Wan-Bissaka at WB? Obviously one is better than the other in attacking/defending situations but in general play in the same role would Trent be better or more adventurous when attacking or would he just have better end product? Would Trent go further forward? Or naturally cross from different positions as he has the stats to? (No idea how their stats compare in game, just picked a known attacking WB Vs a more defensive one etc). 

Tbf I think alot of my frustration in recent years in trying to minic real life and the rigid role system is how football has moved on. Trent isn't really any WB/DMR role as he's all of them while being a winger and a playmaker.

Ooh can we have a DMR/L playmaker role 👀. Daft suggestion but if I could that's the sort of stuff I'd be looking to create if we could open up roles. Not every player fits a role and I can just imagine the fun of creating roles and sharing them with the community. Yes some would be broken and silly but some like creating the Trent role would make it worth while as it's not used enough to be SI created yet it's potentially an era defining innovation. 

Edited October 27, 2022 by Ashez

[Woody]

Subtle updates to tactics surely can be done. I'd be happy with sliders 🤣

[Woody]

3 minutes ago, Ashez said:

Random question and I understand if you can't go into too much detail or any at all but how much does a player's stats influence the role? For example if you have say Trent Vs Wan-Bissaka at WB? Obviously one is better than the other in attacking/defending situations but in general play in the same role would Trent be better or more adventurous when attacking or would he just have better end product? Would Trent go further forward? Or naturally cross from different positions as he has the stats to? (No idea how their stats compare in game, just picked a none attacking WB Vs a more defensive one etc). 

Tbf I think alot of my frustration in recent years in trying to minic real life and the rigid role system is how football has moved on. Trent isn't really any WB/DMR role as he's all of them while being a winger and a playmaker.

Ooh can we have a DMR/L playmaker role 👀. Daft suggestion but if I could that's the sort of stuff I'd be looking to create if we could open up roles. Not every player fits a role and I can just imagine the fun of creating roles and sharing them with the community. Yes some would be broken and silly but some like creating the Trent role would make it worth while as it's not used enough to be SI created yet it's potentially an era defining innovation. 

Which version allowed us to play a BBM in the DM range?

[FuddledFox]

3 minutes ago, Woody said:

Which version allowed us to play a BBM in the DM range?

Seem to remember that BBM could play in DM on FMM17 which was the first version I played and then on FMM18 was when it was removed.

[Woody]

1 minute ago, FuddledFox said:

Seem to remember that BBM could play in DM on FMM17 which was the first version I played and then on FMM18 was when it was removed.

I thought it was 17. Cheers FF 👍

[Ashez]

13 minutes ago, Woody said:

Which version allowed us to play a BBM in the DM range?

 

9 minutes ago, FuddledFox said:

Seem to remember that BBM could play in DM on FMM17 which was the first version I played and then on FMM18 was when it was removed.

The Kante role. 

[hhooo]

56 minutes ago, Ashez said:

 

The Kante role. 

We need the Cancelo role next. Inverted Box to Box Wingmaker

 

And in seriousness, I have managed to get IWBs to be my primary playmakers in one of the challenges in the Vibe World Cup last year. 

[MikeF]

5 hours ago, Marc Vaughan said:

There is an English description for each role - this is my preferred way of explaining things because the underlyiing code and what it 'sets' might not really make sense to people.

To give you an idea of the complexity - for inside forwards there are specific 'instructions' which are set depending on the formation you setup, for instance if you have a crowded area then they'll behave slightly differently to if you're playing with a solo striker - simply put if you've three forwards in the box.

The areas they run into are similarly affected by the instructions and setup of the rest of your tactic - ie. if they make a run into the box they'll try and avoid running into areas where other players are likely to be positioned.

In real-terms using the CM3 arrow analogy this changes the positioning of the arrow slightly to try and optimize things to be more effective for the user (and keep things sane ) ... the idea is to help users while simplifying the interface.

In a perfect world the idea is that people will understand the roles from their real-life watching of the sport and that the game will cause the players on the pitch to behave in the manner people expect from their roles, I'll happily accept that there are areas where this can be improved and I'm always striving to do so with each iteration.

All makes sense. Thanks for taking the time to come and discuss things here. I’m looking forward to the new version. 
 

Any news on Touch features?

[topline]

6 hours ago, Marc Vaughan said:

There is an English description for each role - this is my preferred way of explaining things because the underlyiing code and what it 'sets' might not really make sense to people.

To give you an idea of the complexity - for inside forwards there are specific 'instructions' which are set depending on the formation you setup, for instance if you have a crowded area then they'll behave slightly differently to if you're playing with a solo striker - simply put if you've three forwards in the box.

The areas they run into are similarly affected by the instructions and setup of the rest of your tactic - ie. if they make a run into the box they'll try and avoid running into areas where other players are likely to be positioned.

In real-terms using the CM3 arrow analogy this changes the positioning of the arrow slightly to try and optimize things to be more effective for the user (and keep things sane ) ... the idea is to help users while simplifying the interface.

In a perfect world the idea is that people will understand the roles from their real-life watching of the sport and that the game will cause the players on the pitch to behave in the manner people expect from their roles, I'll happily accept that there are areas where this can be improved and I'm always striving to do so with each iteration.

personally, one of my most desired things is simply the Regista role. None of the other roles available at DM really capture this type of role.
We have the Trequartista available, but not the regista which seems odd to me. It is available in touch/full, is there a reason (under the hood) as to why its never been brought into mobile?

[DanEnglish]

15 hours ago, Marc Vaughan said:

for inside forwards …

… The areas they run into are similarly affected by the instructions and setup of the rest of your tactic - ie. if they make a run into the box they'll try and avoid running into areas where other players are likely to be positioned.

Is it ok to be quietly excited about these changes to an IF’s (Inside Forward) movement? 😄

In FMM22, it annoyed me that my IF / Rashford would often (but not always) stand right next to my sole striker (AF / Martial) - see the yellow box with both attackers) - similar to stacking in ultimate frisbee or an England corner at the Euros.

Seemed odd, but created nice opportunities / gaps between the opposition DCs and FBs - see the shaded red area - especially for my B2B to run into!

Am strangely excited to see how the IF moves in this year’s FMM match engine 😄

Edited October 28, 2022 by DanEnglish

[DanEnglish]

19 hours ago, Marc Vaughan said:

A couple of iterations ago man-marking was added - perhaps if 'long-shots' was added in a similar manner that might interest people? - so you could turn it on for specific players?

Would be nice to have. Do you remember back in CM0102, you had individual tactical player instructions - far too many for FMM though.

To build further on this - would be nice to have 2 or 3 extra individual player instructions  - including man marking, long shots, closing down (so my DCs don’t close down and create space behind them) … and passing style (e.g. short, long, direct, mixed) … so that I can have a short passing game for most of the team, but when my DR gets the ball he launches a long ball forward over the opposition defense - similar to Newcastle sometimes this season … !

Images from the Athletic

Thoughts? 🙂 

Edit - you’d want to be really careful with this ⚠️ if you did it, then only have it only for a very limited number of individual player instructions. Otherwise you’re complicating things and taking the series back +2 decades! 😮

Edited October 28, 2022 by DanEnglish

[Marc Vaughan]

2 hours ago, DanEnglish said:

Edit - you’d want to be really careful with this ⚠️ if you did it, then only have it only for a very limited number of individual player instructions. Otherwise you’re complicating things and taking the series back +2 decades! 😮

Yeah - one of the most complicated parts of making FMM is evolving it forward and improving it while not actually slowing it down and/or making it too complicated for the users its aimed at .... you'd be amazed at the amount of time I take prototyping things and trying to ensure that the games flow remains fast enough, while also improving how the series feels in terms of realism/fun ...

The ideas and feedback that everyone gives me are a huge help though and help me us on course generally speaking, I'm very thankful for it (and your patience when we've gone astray)

[Scratch]

46 minutes ago, Marc Vaughan said:

Yeah - one of the most complicated parts of making FMM is evolving it forward and improving it while not actually slowing it down and/or making it too complicated for the users its aimed at .... you'd be amazed at the amount of time I take prototyping things and trying to ensure that the games flow remains fast enough, while also improving how the series feels in terms of realism/fun ...

The ideas and feedback that everyone gives me are a huge help though and help me us on course generally speaking, I'm very thankful for it (and your patience when we've gone astray)

I totally understand the need to not mess up the match engine balance by having too many possible instructions for players, but I'm also on team 'More Individual Instructions'.

I don't think it has to be too complicated for the majority of users though, more like the interface is just as it is now, but if you press on a player you get an extra popup with some individual instructions. They'd be set to default behavior for the player based on role and the tactic's instructions and if users didn't want to mess with it they wouldn't even need to open it. But if I want to override it, I can! Then I can tell my right back to play Direct passes instead of following the team's Short passing style. And I can tell my AP to shoot less and try more through balls more. etc.

Of course it's probably much harder to do than I realise, but I feel like that'd be the way to do it - follow the philosophy of just exposing a little bit more of how it already works and then giving power users the ability to tweak those a little bit. And it not being something the players will always follow, just do more often.

Maybe Keiran Trippier will ignore the Short Passing instruction anyway (some of the time), but being able to tell him to go long more often would be really great.

Edited October 28, 2022 by Scratch

[Woody]

2 hours ago, Marc Vaughan said:

Yeah - one of the most complicated parts of making FMM is evolving it forward and improving it while not actually slowing it down and/or making it too complicated for the users its aimed at .... you'd be amazed at the amount of time I take prototyping things and trying to ensure that the games flow remains fast enough, while also improving how the series feels in terms of realism/fun ...

The ideas and feedback that everyone gives me are a huge help though and help me us on course generally speaking, I'm very thankful for it (and your patience when we've gone astray)

Maybe something along the lines of when the EME came in. Have another version along with the OME but with extra added features.

[hhooo]

1 hour ago, Scratch said:

I totally understand the need to not mess up the match engine balance by having too many possible instructions for players, but I'm also on team 'More Individual Instructions'.

I don't think it has to be too complicated for the majority of users though, more like the interface is just as it is now, but if you press on a player you get an extra popup with some individual instructions. They'd be set to default behavior for the player based on role and the tactic's instructions and if users didn't want to mess with it they wouldn't even need to open it. But if I want to override it, I can! Then I can tell my right back to play Direct passes instead of following the team's Short passing style. And I can tell my AP to shoot less and try more through balls more. etc.

Of course it's probably much harder to do than I realise, but I feel like that'd be the way to do it - follow the philosophy of just exposing a little bit more of how it already works and then giving power users the ability to tweak those a little bit. And it not being something the players will always follow, just do more often.

Maybe Keiran Trippier will ignore the Short Passing instruction anyway (some of the time), but being able to tell him to go long more often would be really great.

This is where I stand as well. In the same space where the zonal/man marking toggle lives, there could be a toggle for creative freedom, passing, pressing, shooting, etc (obviously not all of them). 

 

Something else that would be very useful, and would benefit both the more casual pick up and play users and the dorks here would be tooltips for the player attributes - at least for Aggression! 

[Marc Vaughan]

1 hour ago, hhooo said:

This is where I stand as well. In the same space where the zonal/man marking toggle lives, there could be a toggle for creative freedom, passing, pressing, shooting, etc (obviously not all of them). 

Something else that would be very useful, and would benefit both the more casual pick up and play users and the dorks here would be tooltips for the player attributes - at least for Aggression! 

tooltips for player attributes - good call, have made a note to look at this in the future.

(and am also listening to the suggestions for the match side of things - do bear in mind that any future changes will take time to implement, so most like next years version although some things I might 'sneak' into an update depending on how much kerfuffle there are with issues post-release ... at present I'm obviously in full flow trying to get the game out the door)

Edited October 28, 2022 by Marc Vaughan

[Ashez]

I think the key phrase is optional depth, which we've seen in other areas of the game. Training, traits, set pieces, media/talks, squad numbers and various other things are optional depth and immersion. Bringing that to the role system in ways @Scratchand myself have said should keep everyone happy. 

The hardcore can ignore stuff like the instruction presets and squad numbers while the casuals can rely on them and ignore the tactical depth options like tweaking role specifics. 

[macmole]

It’s a shame there no new  leagues added, would have liked the full Scottish pyramid added. Maybe  either Norway or Sweden.
Apart from that I am happy with the direction it’s heading in. If it’s made too complex it would put off a lot of casual users. Maybe more people need to start moving from mobile to touch for what they want from the game 

[Woody]

1 hour ago, macmole said:

It’s a shame there no new  leagues added, would have liked the full Scottish pyramid added. Maybe  either Norway or Sweden.
Apart from that I am happy with the direction it’s heading in. If it’s made too complex it would put off a lot of casual users. Maybe more people need to start moving from mobile to touch for what they want from the game 

Its the little touches mate. I do think a 3rd version of the game would go a long way to appease those(me included) to complement the OME and EME.

[Shaanmann]

4 hours ago, macmole said:

It’s a shame there no new  leagues added, would have liked the full Scottish pyramid added. Maybe  either Norway or Sweden.
Apart from that I am happy with the direction it’s heading in. If it’s made too complex it would put off a lot of casual users. Maybe more people need to start moving from mobile to touch for what they want from the game 

I would like to play the touch version on Android if it was made available. Hopefully in future Android users have options for both Mobile and Touch version to choose from.

[MikeF]

8 hours ago, Woody said:

Its the little touches mate. I do think a 3rd version of the game would go a long way to appease those(me included) to complement the OME and EME.

I guess the third version is touch. OME isn’t a  more basic version of the game for any reason other than it suits older mobiles no? 

[Ashez]

1 hour ago, MikeF said:

I guess the third version is touch. OME isn’t a  more basic version of the game for any reason other than it suits older mobiles no? 

The engines are completely different. In extremely simple terms from what I vaguely remember the OME is all about coin tosses while the EME is all about calculations. 

[Migraz]

As this is a positive and gentle discussion, I wanna give one more pov about the game. 

Well, I don't know what kind of user profile suites more for me... I have played the series since 1998/99. I don't like the cheating/extreme ways of play, but I love realism as much as possible. Therefore I like investigate new tactics solutions and having plenty of option for roles and instruction. 

Even considering FMM... Who is defined as a casual user? 

If it is the first time you give a chance to the game maybe ok you ask for a simple approach, but the longevity is not in here... Are the casual users really completing any 10 (don't say 30) seasons career? I don't think so, but it is fair not excluding anyone. 

Realism is a priority for me (graphic stuff is part of it) and the essentials I would like are the same. Some are at a good point, others are a step back.

To summarize I think you should not won the UCL with Pisa in nowadays football (or only after 30 years at least) and on contrary the success (little or big wrt the club) you make as a manager should bring you more offers from other clubs. 

Finally Thanks to Mark Vaughan for all his work. 

[Marc Vaughan]

2 hours ago, Ashez said:

The engines are completely different. In extremely simple terms from what I vaguely remember the OME is all about coin tosses while the EME is all about calculations. 

lol - that's a tad of a simplifacation.

The OME is one of our earlier match engines taken from back in 2002 when the games were text only. I generally don't like giving away the underlying workings of the game because it prevents people from thinking about the game as 'real' - but I will say that engine is more akin to a 'board game' if you think of it as splitting the pitch up into squares and players moving between them. The actual stats, tactical awareness of the engine is still fairly solid though in my somewhat biased opinion.

The EME is a full physics simulation of a football match, which is why the 2d etc. is better on that engine (on the OME the 2d is an 'interpretation' of what happens overlaid onto the engines data).

[Marc Vaughan]

2 hours ago, Migraz said:

Even considering FMM... Who is defined as a casual user? 

To explain what I'm trying to do with FMM - I'm trying to make a fun, realistic sports simulation which doesn't require a huge amount of time to play through a season (the aim is to allow someone to play a season comfortably in an evenings play of 3-4 hours if they're playing quickly).

The game is intended to be realistic, but also to include sensible defaults so that someone can play through and do 'reasonably' well simply by selecting a team and tactics that are sensible, if you take the time and have the knowledge to tweak things then obviously that will give you an advantage above this level.

This emphasis on 'speed' is one of the reasons I try and build in most features in a manner that makes them optional depth rather than compulsory - for instance the 'squad dynamics' within the game are fairly complex and advanced (while hopefully being presented to users in a simple and easy to understand way), but users can easily ignore them if they want to just 'get on with things.'

This year the teamtalks are designed in much the same 'vibe' - they're wholly optional (and can be turned off in preferences even if you hate the concept), by default they simply present things that were happening previously (ie. before each match you were told about it and your players mood concerning the match) - the teamtalks present those moods to you as a starting point and if you give a 'balanced' talk then the game proceeds as it did last version ... the only difference being you can now see the effect of your players mood on the match if you click on the summary mood (for example if a player 'lacks confidence' then his morale and creativity will be slightly decreased when the match begins). If you decide to undertake a teamtalk then pre-match you can choose the mood as either 'relaxed' (ie. just go out there and enjoy yourselves), or 'demanding' (ie. I expect a win) and this will change the players mood depending on their personalities. The half-time talk is slightly different in that you still select the overall mood, but can also single out players for praise and criticism, ie. I'm really disappointed that we're 3-0 and we should be doing better, the rest of you look to Migraz for inspiration - he's doing what I want.

How well I hit this aim can vary from year to year and I rely on feedback from everyone to stay on target in this regard, although I do play the game at truckton myself and consider myself to be one of the 'users' myself (I'vecurrently just completed playing through a season as Brighton on this years version, finished 9th and had Caicedo poached from us for 50m by Man City, which makes a nice change from it being Chelsea poaching Trossard that happens most games I play as Brighton  ... as well as various one season tests like this I've also completed a bottom to top challenge as Eastbourne in this years game as part of my 'standard' game feeling test I do each year while tuning things ...). 

PS - The way people play varies hugely, across all versions of FM (including Touch and the full-fat PC game) the majority of users only play 3-5 seasons, tending to drop off as the real-world players retire. That however ignores that a decent proportion do play beyond this period and once you get beyond that point the commitment/drop-off percentage lowers with each subsequent season I'd have to double check the figures but a surprising number users complete the full maximum season length in FMM at some point. 

When designing the game I try not to alienate any user, but obviously do take into account the most popular styles of play ... 

Edited October 29, 2022 by Marc Vaughan

[Marc Vaughan]

2 hours ago, Migraz said:

Well, I don't know what kind of user profile suites more for me... I have played the series since 1998/99. I don't like the cheating/extreme ways of play, but I love realism as much as possible. Therefore I like investigate new tactics solutions and having plenty of option for roles and instruction. 

PS - We've pretty much grown up together then, CM97-98 was the first game I worked upon and 98-99 was very much my baby and the first one I had a huge part in designing - I introduced the personalities and media into the games as they moved forward and remember those early versions very fondly.

I use the 'style' of gameplay in terms of speed and ease of play from the later CM3 series as a rough 'guide' for FMM generally (for those of you who can remember those games).

[hhooo]

3 hours ago, Marc Vaughan said:

PS - We've pretty much grown up together then, CM97-98 was the first game I worked upon and 98-99 was very much my baby and the first one I had a huge part in designing - I introduced the personalities and media into the games as they moved forward and remember those early versions very fondly.

I use the 'style' of gameplay in terms of speed and ease of play from the later CM3 series as a rough 'guide' for FMM generally (for those of you who can remember those games).

I'll also be on the lookout for an update for Bentancur's stats. Been incredible this season, carrying, passing, defending, and even scoring. If he has 9 movement while Maguire is world class again.... 🧐

[Uncleseekx]

4 hours ago, Marc Vaughan said:

To explain what I'm trying to do with FMM - I'm trying to make a fun, realistic sports simulation which doesn't require a huge amount of time to play through a season (the aim is to allow someone to play a season comfortably in an evenings play of 3-4 hours if they're playing quickly).

The game is intended to be realistic, but also to include sensible defaults so that someone can play through and do 'reasonably' well simply by selecting a team and tactics that are sensible, if you take the time and have the knowledge to tweak things then obviously that will give you an advantage above this level.

This emphasis on 'speed' is one of the reasons I try and build in most features in a manner that makes them optional depth rather than compulsory - for instance the 'squad dynamics' within the game are fairly complex and advanced (while hopefully being presented to users in a simple and easy to understand way), but users can easily ignore them if they want to just 'get on with things.'

This year the teamtalks are designed in much the same 'vibe' - they're wholly optional (and can be turned off in preferences even if you hate the concept), by default they simply present things that were happening previously (ie. before each match you were told about it and your players mood concerning the match) - the teamtalks present those moods to you as a starting point and if you give a 'balanced' talk then the game proceeds as it did last version ... the only difference being you can now see the effect of your players mood on the match if you click on the summary mood (for example if a player 'lacks confidence' then his morale and creativity will be slightly decreased when the match begins). If you decide to undertake a teamtalk then pre-match you can choose the mood as either 'relaxed' (ie. just go out there and enjoy yourselves), or 'demanding' (ie. I expect a win) and this will change the players mood depending on their personalities. The half-time talk is slightly different in that you still select the overall mood, but can also single out players for praise and criticism, ie. I'm really disappointed that we're 3-0 and we should be doing better, the rest of you look to Migraz for inspiration - he's doing what I want.

How well I hit this aim can vary from year to year and I rely on feedback from everyone to stay on target in this regard, although I do play the game at truckton myself and consider myself to be one of the 'users' myself (I'vecurrently just completed playing through a season as Brighton on this years version, finished 9th and had Caicedo poached from us for 50m by Man City, which makes a nice change from it being Chelsea poaching Trossard that happens most games I play as Brighton  ... as well as various one season tests like this I've also completed a bottom to top challenge as Eastbourne in this years game as part of my 'standard' game feeling test I do each year while tuning things ...). 

PS - The way people play varies hugely, across all versions of FM (including Touch and the full-fat PC game) the majority of users only play 3-5 seasons, tending to drop off as the real-world players retire. That however ignores that a decent proportion do play beyond this period and once you get beyond that point the commitment/drop-off percentage lowers with each subsequent season I'd have to double check the figures but a surprising number users complete the full maximum season length in FMM at some point. 

When designing the game I try not to alienate any user, but obviously do take into account the most popular styles of play ... 

We have half-time team talks also now, good. About to aggressively curse my players out. Also will be individual talks also like it is on PC? 

[Uncleseekx]

18 minutes ago, hhooo said:

I'll also be on the lookout for an update for Bentancur's stats. Been incredible this season, carrying, passing, defending, and even scoring. If he has 9 movement while Maguire is world class again.... 🧐

Maguire was nerfed badly in the Jan update, he would be bad on 23

[Marc Vaughan]

20 minutes ago, Uncleseekx said:

We have half-time team talks also now, good. About to aggressively curse my players out. Also will be individual talks also like it is on PC? 

You can single out a player for praise/criticism but only one of each - this is intentional as I don't want teamtalks to be something that people spend ages doing and/or get too confused about (and I always find it a bit 'odd' on the full-fat game that you can give individual talks to so many players in 15 minutes, I think in the main (from watching documentaries etc.) that teamtalks are done to the team as a whole with people picked out for specific comments as exceptions in the main)

(I'll be listening to peoples feedback about the feature and expect it to evolve/get fined in future updates/versions based on that)

added 0 minutes later

39 minutes ago, hhooo said:

I'll also be on the lookout for an update for Bentancur's stats. Been incredible this season, carrying, passing, defending, and even scoring. If he has 9 movement while Maguire is world class again.... 🧐

I'm afraid I'm not allowed to meddle with the database, something to do with me being a Brighton supporter and therefore obviously having a lack of judgement