Jump to content

New Game Engine & Player Positions


Recommended Posts

In November 2015, SM released a new match engine along with their new interface and relaunch to celebrate 10 years of SM! Happy Birthday SM!

 

Steven (SM) very kindly elaborated on this new engine in a separate post:

 

"...Also, player position compatibility for certain formations is now more realistic, making match days more strategic. For example only DM(L/R) and M(L/R) can only play the wingback role perfectly within formations such as 3-5-2 and D(L/R) will not play as well in a 3 man defence..."

 

This new engine has caused some controversy among SM managers. It is implied that players with AM(RCL) attributes are no longer guaranteed to perform successfully in M(RCL) positions. Essentially, they will be playing 'out of position' (like fielding an AM at F). This was not the case with the previous match engine.

 

It has also been noted that a number of players (for example, TURAN, DI MARIA etc.) currently do NOT possess any flat M(RCL) positional abilities and that Soccerwiki (the source of SM statistics) has been fairly conservative in issuing M(RCL) positional abilities (primary or secondary) to AM players.

 

The purpose of this thread is to thrash the issue out, but as I have started it, I will give my two cents!

 

...I see the changes as primarily driven by the widespread abuse of AMs and wingers. The flat midfield (M) in a 4-4-2, 3-5-2 etc. is NOT the same at the AM positions in a 4-2-3-1. For this reason, AMs with NO M(RCL) abilities should NOT be able to play this deep. In the past, many managers have mindlessly hoarded all the highest rated advanced AMs and successfully forced them into a flat midfield. The previous game engine permitted this and this was wrong. I applaud any attempt to penalize managers that adopt (and have adopted this tactic). SM is clearly working WITH Soccerwiki's attributes with the intention of preventing managers from fielding too many attack minded players in an 11 man squad and therefore there is absolutely no need for Soccerwiki to alter player positions. Instead, SM managers must and should change their tactics and behavior.

 

Secondly, many of the AM(RCL) players that SM managers have argued should have their positional attributes revised, do NOT play in a flat M(RCL) regularly or consistently in real life. Indeed, very few top teams deploy a flat midfield regularly in real life and the purist, traditional M(RCL)s like David Beckham are much rarer nowadays. In short, I strongly suspect that SM managers are motivated by a desire to return the old days, where they could get away with fielding HAZARD, TURAN, DIMARIA and RONALDO all at M(RCL). This was and always will be an unrealistic and undesirable situation and I pray that SM developers never return to this state of affairs.

 

This thread is open to posters of all views and persuasions and I look forward to thrashing the issue out with a frank and lively debate! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think we can all agree that soccerwiki is terrible.
 
Jamie3184 sums it up nicely:
 

Soccerwiki is flawed and has been from the moment it was implemented. It would be better to abandon it and go back to the old ratings/player updates system.

 

To be able to contribute to Soccerwiki you need a reputation level of 80, to achieve that level you need to have players successfully added onto the database by the "community" voting them on. It is in fact the admins that have the final decision on which players get added.

 

I have tried to add many legitimate players that have played over the old minimum minutes required rule yet they have been rejected, usually in favour of a player with a slight name that has no first team minutes and in some cases no reserve minutes.

 

Also is there any scope for a Soccerwiki revamp or going back to how the ratings/player positions were once handled?

 

what this has led to, since the (much needed and absolutely correct) tactical changes to the likes of 442/352/343 is several players unable to play positions they play in real life.

 

for instance: you now need to have F(RL) to play in the wide spots of a flat front three. that's fine, but it means players like James Rodriguez, Andrés Iniesta and Isco cannot play in a position they absolutely would play in real life.

 

you also need M(RL) to play wide of a flat midfield 4 or 5. again, this change is fine, but there are several players who need to have M(RL) but don't, such as Angel Di Maria, Arda Turan, Willian, Arjen Robben, even Juan Mata under LvG plays M®.

 

right now the majority of players capable of playing wide in a flat midfield 4 or 5 are fullbacks, and that is just utterly laughable. even more laughable is the now negligible difference between 523 and 343, and other such problems created by the lack of attacking players with M(RL).

 

the player database needs a massive overhaul to fall in line with the new improved match engine. and soccerwiki is wholly incapable of providing that.

 

what does SM plan to do about it?

 

anyone have any ideas?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you need a flat midfield?

 

Why cant you just adjust your tactics and formations?

 

I think there should by an imaginary line 2/3 up the pitch. A player can either play one side or the other...he cannot be played at both. When I say 'cannot', I mean managers 'cannot get away with'...i.e the match engine should lower the player's performance rating and form if fielded incorrectly.

 

All I hear is people wanting to field PRIMARILY attacking players as deep as they can. Hell...why not put them in defense or in goal! That way you can fit all 11 of the worlds best attacking players into your formation! You hear how ridiculous this sounds?...yet so many SM managers used to get away with fielding players like AGUERO at CM...even though he barely gets anywhere near this position in real life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to ask what changes have been made to the SMFA and cheat/report functions to combat the issues that were so wide spread?


 


There wasn't a lot of information on what has been updated in regards to this with the relaunch.


 


Also is there any scope for a Soccerwiki revamp or going back to how the ratings/player positions were once handled?


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I can see it's only the formations with 3 at the back that require the wide midfielders to have one of DM(RL) or  M(RL), an AM(RL) can still be picked there in the formations with 4 at the back.

 

This change makes perfect sense to me and along with D(RL) not being able to play in a back 3 it's something that should have been brought in a long time ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There wasn't a lot of information on what has been updated in regards to this with the relaunch.

 

Also is there any scope for a Soccerwiki revamp or going back to how the ratings/player positions were once handled?

 

They are no D(R/L) only at CB (for example, in a 3-5-2) and no AM(RCL)/wingers only at M(RCL).

...I think you can still physically field them there, but they may not perform as well. It will be like fielding an AM(RCL) only at F.

 

Why do you want players revamped? I mean specifically with your squad. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are no D(R/L) only at CB (for example, in a 3-5-2) and no AM(RCL)/wingers only at M(RCL).

...I think you can still physically field them there, but they may not perform as well. It will be like fielding an AM(RCL) only at F.

 

Why do you want players revamped? I mean specifically with your squad. 

 

I don't want players revamped.

 

I want Soccerwiki revamped or another way of ratings/player position changes and players being added onto the database. Before Soccerwiki it was much better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why?

 

It is inadequate, messy and not fit for purpose. 

 

It started off as a great idea in theory however it has failed to live up to many of the ideals it was initially designed for, Not all the fault lies with SM for it's failings, a lot lies with the users that abused the system when it was first introduced, enforcing restrictions that changed it from something the whole community could freely use to something only a chosen few can use.

 

The inconsistency that Soccerwiki generates is far greater than the previous way the player database was handled, yes mistakes were still made but not at such a high level.

 

One of the reasons Soccerwiki was introduced was to try and cope with the large growth of the game and player database so the old way may no longer be effective, however that still doesn't mean Soccerwiki can't be looked into or replaced with a more effective system.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What inconsistency? What are the high level mistakes?

 

Players added that have 0 minutes of first time football yet players with many minutes of first team football getting rejected. 

 

I went to add a player with 5000 minutes and 3 years of first team football however it was rejected, after having a quick check they are still not on the database.

 

Players not getting a deserved ratings increase after 1000's of minutes of first team action. When a player is still at 75-80 after playing in the first team week in week out yet a player that is deemed a "top prospect" plays a few games and gets a rise it is inconsistent. 

 

Players added with incorrect ages, I have seen users buying players thinking they were 15/16 when they were actually 26/27. Whilst the game player should really negate this by looking into the player in the first place it is still a very obvious mistake that should not be happening.

 

Players added with wrong names and countries.

 

Players with wrong or outdated positions.

 

Soccerwiki was meant to bring the community together, allowing users to interact with each other and have a live impact on the database. Unfortunately it hasn't been the case, when the main leagues were reviewed twice yearly it produced much more interaction within the community. The forum was the place to go for debates on who would rise in the up coming reviews, advice from experienced users on who to buy or if a player would need to be sold because they may drop.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think we can all agree that soccerwiki is terrible.
 
Jamie3184 sums it up nicely:
 
 

 

 

what this has led to, since the (much needed and absolutely correct) tactical changes to the likes of 442/352/343 is several players unable to play positions they play in real life.

 

for instance: you now need to have F(RL) to play in the wide spots of a flat front three. that's fine, but it means players like James Rodriguez, Andrés Iniesta and Isco cannot play in a position they absolutely would play in real life.

 

you also need M(RL) to play wide of a flat midfield 4 or 5. again, this change is fine, but there are several players who need to have M(RL) but don't, such as Angel Di Maria, Arda Turan, Willian, Arjen Robben, even Juan Mata under LvG plays M®.

 

right now the majority of players capable of playing wide in a flat midfield 4 or 5 are fullbacks, and that is just utterly laughable. even more laughable is the now negligible difference between 523 and 343, and other such problems created by the lack of attacking players with M(RL).

 

the player database needs a massive overhaul to fall in line with the new improved match engine. and soccerwiki is wholly incapable of providing that.

 

what does SM plan to do about it?

 

anyone have any ideas?

 

 

Since when did Rodriguez, Iniesta, or Isco play LM?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since when did Rodriguez, Iniesta, or Isco play LM?

 

this just proves you

1. don't follow football

2. don't even read my posts properly

 

I mentioned those three players with regards to play on the sides of a flat FRONT three in a 433 or a 3133. I wasn't talking about M(RL) with regards to any of them, but F(RL). a different issue arising from the same problem. that was pretty obvious.

 

but since you asked:

 

-James played LM for all of Colombia's 2014 World Cup qualifiers, and a bunch of 2018 ones too.

 

-Isco played M,AM(LC) for Madrid pretty much all of last season. and the season before too. and before that for Malaga as well. and for Spain at times too. even when lined up in a central zone he always drifts into M(L) areas to start attacks.

 

-Iniesta doesn't "technically" play LM but if you've ever watched him you know functionally he occupies LM zones and responsibilities, both offensive and defensive.

 

all three should have M(L). you could give Isco M(RL) tbh, but he doesn't often play on the right side even though he is capable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so does anyone have any ideas?

 

soccerwiki needs revamping. for me? hire a couple researchers to do the work. add, amend, delete, etc.

 

keep the idea that users can submit and suggest changes - including reasons why - but ultimately the choice should come down to the researchers. and things should be more interactive. quicker to react to real world changes.

 

e.g. Sergi Roberto showed propensity to play all up an down the right-flank, maybe edit his profile to show that? or Borja Baston, maybe give him the rise his goal tally deserves even if maybe you missed him during the regular changes...

 

stuff like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's really odd that in a lot of formations, e.g. 4-3-3, the likes of David Silva, Ozil, Nasri can not be used as CAM while players like Rooney, De Bruyne, James, et al. can be used as DM.

 

anyone who has M© should be able to play DM© and AM©. you just have to be more selective with who you give M© too.

 

Rooney played most of last season in central midfield, so I understand him having it, but I never understood why James and De Bruyne had M© in their positional profile. they've rarely if ever played at the base of midfield.

 

James should be M(L),AM(RLC),F(RL)

 

and De Bruyne M(RL),AM(RLC),F(RL)

 

Silva, Ozil and Nasri should be AM(RLC),F(RL)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank god for the old UI back!

 

Now i can see what happens with the positions of players. I'm ok although i will need to revisit al lmy squads.

 

One thing that is wrong though is there should be two 4-1-3-2 formations. One with 3 AMCs and one with AML/AMC/AMR. I thought that was the case, but is says that the AMRL cannot play well on this formation, which is very obviously wrong. If there will not be 2 of this formation, trhen the accurate should be the latter, not the first that it is now!

Link to post
Share on other sites

this just proves you

1. don't follow football

2. don't even read my posts properly

 

I mentioned those three players with regards to play on the sides of a flat FRONT three in a 433 or a 3133. I wasn't talking about M(RL) with regards to any of them, but F(RL). a different issue arising from the same problem. that was pretty obvious.

 

but since you asked:

 

-James played LM for all of Colombia's 2014 World Cup qualifiers, and a bunch of 2018 ones too.

 

-Isco played M,AM(LC) for Madrid pretty much all of last season. and the season before too. and before that for Malaga as well. and for Spain at times too. even when lined up in a central zone he always drifts into M(L) areas to start attacks.

 

-Iniesta doesn't "technically" play LM but if you've ever watched him you know functionally he occupies LM zones and responsibilities, both offensive and defensive.

 

all three should have M(L). you could give Isco M(RL) tbh, but he doesn't often play on the right side even though he is capable.

 

Since you appear adamant on grasping for unrealism, let me break down your post:

 

 

"I mentioned those three players with regards to play on the sides of a flat FRONT three in a 433 or a 3133. I wasn't talking about M(RL) with regards to any of them, but F(RL). a different issue arising from the same problem. that was pretty obvious."

 

Neither Isco, Roriguez or Iniesta are traditional forwards that can play in a front three, unless they want to perform badley. You may be thinking of 433 wingers, in that case, those guys you mentioned can play as the winger. Iniesta as a forward? No, it wouldn't work.

 

"-James played LM for all of Colombia's 2014 World Cup qualifiers, and a bunch of 2018 ones too."

 

He played as a winger, not a traditional LM.

 

"-Isco played M,AM(LC) for Madrid pretty much all of last season. and the season before too. and before that for Malaga as well. and for Spain at times too. even when lined up in a central zone he always drifts into M(L) areas to start attacks."

 

Isco played as a central midfielder and attacking midfielder, again not a traditional LM. He's an ATTACKING MIDFIELDER.

 

"-Iniesta doesn't "technically" play LM but if you've ever watched him you know functionally he occupies LM zones and responsibilities, both offensive and defensive."

 

Iniesta plays as a left CENTRAL MIDFIELDER or LEFT WINGER/ATTACKING MIDFIELDER, he hasn't played a traditional LEFT MIDFIELDER role in quite some time. It's been years. The movements you see do not indicate he is playing LM, he's just tracking on the left side.

 

"all three should have M(L). you could give Isco M(RL) tbh, but he doesn't often play on the right side even though he is capable."

 

No, they should not. LM or RM indicate signiifcant defensive responbilities, and neither of the players you mentioned play LM or are capable of doing that without penalties as SM accurately represents.

 

In formations such as the 5-3-2, 3-5-2, etc....where the left and right sides are dependent on defensive roles, any of these players are incapable of playing in that role!

 

Jesus...

Link to post
Share on other sites

anyone who has M© should be able to play DM© and AM©. you just have to be more selective with who you give M© too.

 

Rooney played most of last season in central midfield, so I understand him having it, but I never understood why James and De Bruyne had M© in their positional profile. they've rarely if ever played at the base of midfield.

 

James should be M(L),AM(RLC),F(RL)

 

and De Bruyne M(RL),AM(RLC),F(RL)

 

Silva, Ozil and Nasri should be AM(RLC),F(RL)

 

Nope...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since you appear adamant on grasping for unrealism, let me break down your post:

 

 

"I mentioned those three players with regards to play on the sides of a flat FRONT three in a 433 or a 3133. I wasn't talking about M(RL) with regards to any of them, but F(RL). a different issue arising from the same problem. that was pretty obvious."

 

Neither Isco, Roriguez or Iniesta are traditional forwards that can play in a front three, unless they want to perform badley. You may be thinking of 433 wingers, in that case, those guys you mentioned can play as the winger. Iniesta as a forward? No, it wouldn't work.

 

"-James played LM for all of Colombia's 2014 World Cup qualifiers, and a bunch of 2018 ones too."

 

He played as a winger, not a traditional LM.

 

"-Isco played M,AM(LC) for Madrid pretty much all of last season. and the season before too. and before that for Malaga as well. and for Spain at times too. even when lined up in a central zone he always drifts into M(L) areas to start attacks."

 

Isco played as a central midfielder and attacking midfielder, again not a traditional LM. He's an ATTACKING MIDFIELDER.

 

"-Iniesta doesn't "technically" play LM but if you've ever watched him you know functionally he occupies LM zones and responsibilities, both offensive and defensive."

 

Iniesta plays as a left CENTRAL MIDFIELDER or LEFT WINGER/ATTACKING MIDFIELDER, he hasn't played a traditional LEFT MIDFIELDER role in quite some time. It's been years. The movements you see do not indicate he is playing LM, he's just tracking on the left side.

 

"all three should have M(L). you could give Isco M(RL) tbh, but he doesn't often play on the right side even though he is capable."

 

No, they should not. LM or RM indicate signiifcant defensive responbilities, and neither of the players you mentioned play LM or are capable of doing that without penalties as SM accurately represents.

 

In formations such as the 5-3-2, 3-5-2, etc....where the left and right sides are dependent on defensive roles, any of these players are incapable of playing in that role!

 

Jesus...

 

^_^ Spot on. It is like I have said... 

 

...SM is clearly working WITH Soccerwiki's attributes with the intention of preventing managers from fielding too many attack minded players in an 11 man squad and therefore there is absolutely no need for Soccerwiki to alter player positions. Instead, SM managers must and should change their tactics and behavior.

 

...many of the AM(RCL) players that SM managers have argued should have their positional attributes revised, do NOT play in a flat M(RCL) regularly or consistently in real life. Indeed, very few top teams deploy a flat midfield regularly in real life and the purist, traditional M(RCL)s like David Beckham are much rarer nowadays. In short, I strongly suspect that SM managers are motivated by a desire to return the old days, where they could get away with fielding HAZARD, TURAN, DIMARIA and RONALDO all at M(RCL). This was and always will be an unrealistic and undesirable situation... 

Why do you need a flat midfield?

 

Why cant you just adjust your tactics and formations?

 

...All I hear is people wanting to field PRIMARILY attacking players as deep as they can. Hell...why not put them in defense or in goal! That way you can fit all 11 of the worlds best attacking players into your formation! You hear how ridiculous this sounds?...yet so many SM managers used to get away with fielding players like AGUERO at CM...even though he barely gets anywhere near this position in real life.

 

I have read your posts Metaphysical...how about you address these points directly. Namely:

 

Why do you need a flat midfield?

 

Why cant you just adjust your tactics and formations?

 

You say that you use 3-4-1-2...who on earth would field PRIMARILY AMs/wingers in the flat four in this kind of formation...in real life? Yet you want AM/wingers redefined so that they can fit there.

 

You could then potentially have four (PRIMARILY) AMs/wingers at M(RCL)....and an AM...and two F!!!!

 

This kind of set up is ridiculously top heavy...and absolutely no manager would deploy this combination of players in this formation in real life. If they did, it would not be successful and many players would perform badly.

 

Stop claiming that RONALDO and BECKHAM are essentially the same player, that RONALDO is fine to track back and defend as a flat M(RCL)...that essentially both players do the same thing...because this is just wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, player position compatibility for certain formations is now more realistic, making match days more strategic. For example only DM(L/R) and M(L/R) can only play the wingback role perfectly within formations such as 3-5-2 and D(L/R) will not play as well in a 3 man defence.


 


Player’s with concerns will see a substantial decrease in their value, the higher the level of concern the greater the decrease in value. This should help smaller clubs pick up better players for cheaper than their maximum value and the club they are leaving will receive a substantially lower fee when they hand in a transfer request.


 


Steven,The 2 paragraph's above are from one of your posts.


I am finding a contradiction in your attempts to improve the game regarding players not being able to play in so many different positions and to stop clubs having big squads.


If a club wishes to use two different tactics during a season, possibly one tactic for home games and another for away games, they now might need to change 4 or 5 players because they can no longer have a LB in a 3 man defence for example. The change in tactic might be slight but  it could mean only 6/7 players get to play more than 50% of league games but another 8-10 play no more than 50% and therefore start to get concerns.


Then you need to allow for having a bigger first team squad in case of injuries and suspensions, yet the aim of the changes seem to be to deter clubs from having big squads.


I like your intention and don't have an answer but i hope you can see that the new positional restrictions need to be altered slightly.


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm convinced BBB doesn't actually watch football. his ceaseless straw-man arguments are really growing tiresome.

 

Since you appear adamant on grasping for unrealism, let me break down your post:

 

Neither Isco, Roriguez or Iniesta are traditional forwards that can play in a front three, unless they want to perform badley. You may be thinking of 433 wingers, in that case, those guys you mentioned can play as the winger. Iniesta as a forward? No, it wouldn't work.

 

if SM wants to make more formations available with wing positions I'll happily drop this point. but right now, in a 3133 for example, I can't play any of those three players in the wide spots of a front three. and all three of them can play in the wide spots of a front three and have done recently.

 

make 3133B, for instance, with the front three split with wingers and a #9. otherwise, you have to give these players F(RL) just like Mata.

 

 

He played as a winger, not a traditional LM.

 

absolutely incorrect. he occupied LM in a 442 and had full defensive responsibilities associated with that position.

 
 
Isco played as a central midfielder and attacking midfielder, again not a traditional LM. He's an ATTACKING MIDFIELDER.
 
if you watch him play, which you clearly don't, you'll see him occupy the LM zones during buildup and defensive phases of the game. when he plays in a 433, he plays M(LC) when he plays in a front three, he also tracks into M(L) zones when in defensive transition (even beginning attacks from there). his positional data should basically be the same as Iniesta's except he can also play on the right too, albeit he does this rarely so if it was eliminated I'd have no argument.
 
 
Iniesta plays as a left CENTRAL MIDFIELDER or LEFT WINGER/ATTACKING MIDFIELDER, he hasn't played a traditional LEFT MIDFIELDER role in quite some time. It's been years. The movements you see do not indicate he is playing LM, he's just tracking on the left side.
 
he occupies those zones and has defensive responsibilities associated with a LM. he routinely plays close to the touchline and works up and down it in offensive and defensive phases of the game. that's why he has M(L) in his positional profile and that's why it should stay there.
 
 
No, they should not. LM or RM indicate signiifcant defensive responbilities, and neither of the players you mentioned play LM or are capable of doing that without penalties as SM accurately represents.

 

yes. M(RL) does indicate defensive responsibilities. and every player I listed does play with significant defensive responsibilities. well, James not so much anymore, but that's only because Falcao fell off a cliff form-wise. just because they're attacking players, or known as attacking players, doesn't mean they can't defend. your view of football is so reductive.

 

 

In formations such as the 5-3-2, 3-5-2, etc....where the left and right sides are dependent on defensive roles, any of these players are incapable of playing in that role!

 
there is a BIG difference between 532 and 352. the fact you don't seem to think so tells me everything I need to know about your understanding of football.
 
352 is an attacking formation. there are certain players attacking players who have the profile and skill-set to play wide of midfield in that formation. not every attacker can do this, but the ones I have suggested are fully capable. the only reach is James Rodriguez, as he no longer plays there for Colombia and given it's unlikely Falcao will re-find his form, he probably won't play there again.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...