Season 33 Week 17 processing...

Even more dissapointed now that I know City were down to 9 men and i still didn't equalise. also another penalty miss for me and City.

is there a stat on how many penalties are scored in game Paul? i always seem to  miss and advantage would mostly be in the penalty takers favour

Chelsea estimated fans have dropped to 300,000 when it was over a million last turn , that seems to be only issue i can see

gary@chelsea wrote:

Even more dissapointed now that I know City were down to 9 men and i still didn't equalise. also another penalty miss for me and City.

is there a stat on how many penalties are scored in game Paul? i always seem to  miss and advantage would mostly be in the penalty takers favour

Chelsea estimated fans have dropped to 300,000 when it was over a million last turn , that seems to be only issue i can see

actually, yes, my fans have reduced from 925k to 300k...

Rob@Barcelona wrote:

Tom@Charlton wrote:

Same problem at Wolfsburg! To make matters worse, I was against 10 men for 2/3 of the game as well! Missed opportunity for sure.

I think complacency probably plays a part and/or tired players if they played mid week games. Maybe even exacerbated if playing away from home. Had this at Barcelona where we dominated Sociedad but couldn’t score.

i did a complacency and hideaway this week, just in case - stamina was fine also....

I'll check the penalty situation to make sure its still working as intended.

I'll also review what happens in the AI game manager when a team goes down to ten men.

Thanks for all the feedback.

I have tweaked Penalty takers slightly in some cases

Penalty miss = remains the same
Penalty skill > penalty saving skill = remains the same
Penalty skill = penalty saving skill = +15% increase in the chance to score
Penalty skill < penalty saving skill = +15% increase in the chance to score

We'll see how that goes. 

I have also removed the GK bonus received when the same player takes more than one penalty, this affects in game pens and shootout pens.

Ive had a look at what happens when a team gets a man sentoff and that seems to be working as intended but I have increased stamina drain by an extra 15% and by 30% if two players are sent off, but that will only make the 10 men less likely to attack it wont affect them defensively and wont affect the 11 mens chances of scoring unless the 11 men can get a player free into the space vacated by the player who was sentoff.

So what we seem to need is a method which gives the 11 men the chance to make the most of the situation tactically. I'm thinking maybe a new game condition which will allow you to change your tactics. 

More details when I come up with a viable plan, feedback welcome as usual...

Paul Hemmings wrote:

Ive had a look at what happens when a team gets a man sentoff and that seems to be working as intended but I have increased stamina drain by an extra 15% and by 30% if two players are sent off, but that will only make the 10 men less likely to attack it wont affect them defensively and wont affect the 11 mens chances of scoring unless the 11 men can get a player free into the space vacated by the player who was sentoff.

So what we seem to need is a method which gives the 11 men the chance to make the most of the situation tactically. I'm thinking maybe a new game condition which will allow you to change your tactics. 

More details when I come up with a viable plan, feedback welcome as usual...

Personally think the above works well as in real life most teams end up parking the bus with 10 men and making it really challenging for a team to score...

I do think perhaps something worthwhile is the team with 11 men being told to attack the vacated space a bit more - whether this works in programming practice not sure?

Yeah, the problem with it depends on what position was sent off for the opposition.  That information would be needed before deciding what tactics to change to?  

For example, if a full back got sent off you'd want to exploit the width, however if it were an AM then you'd need to have more in the middle of the park?

I'm guessing this would be too hard to implement?  Would become very confusing?

Tom@Charlton wrote:

Yeah, the problem with it depends on what position was sent off for the opposition.  That information would be needed before deciding what tactics to change to?  

For example, if a full back got sent off you'd want to exploit the width, however if it were an AM then you'd need to have more in the middle of the park?

I'm guessing this would be too hard to implement?  Would become very confusing?

I was kind of thinking that something would happen automatically with the main creative player who would look for the gap more often?

It is a tricky one for sure, I know what you are saying but would I want Thiago firing balls into the empty full back slot if I didn't play wingers?  Or what if you don't have a creative type?

Hmmm, what normally happens (IRL), is the 10 men go more defensive and the 11 commit more men to the attack, as there is less danger of attack.
I suppose this also depends on the current score. If the 10 men are losing, they might shore up the defence and stick someone up front to nick a goal (probably via long ball), or if drawing/winning fully park the bus.
Whereas, if the 11 men are winning, they might park the bus? Drawing or losing and they'll attack...

Perhaps a new condition would work, but I don't think it'll be able to include things like 'exploit down the left' and such?

IRL, the team down to 10 may well want to make a sub to plug a gap, and the team with 11 may want to put a sub on to exploit a gap.

Toughy!