OSM Engine 'stole' me
-
It's clear that OSM rewards amateur coaches even if they deserve to be defeated
The difference in strength in my favor was 95, and the 83 opponent who scored the goal was 69 Although my goalkeeper strength is 95.
All we take from that should improve the offensive line
@ahmḛɗ-khalḛɗ10 Dude, I think this was more so due to tactics. Your opponent was using 4-2-3-1 against your 4-3-3 A.
4-2-3-1 is quite good for defense, as it forms 3 triangles on the pitch. With a wide midfield, it would be difficult for your 3 forwards to break through it to score. Also, if your midfielders push forward and your opponent counter-attacks, that would create more good chances to score. Your goalkeeper might've been really good- but that doesn't mean that it will always stop the goals from weaker forwards. One more thing, if the goal was scored in the second leg, then it might also be due to your tired players, cause it's known that playing against 4-2-3-1 is tiring and that's why clubs like PSG and Barcelona adopt this formation. -
@ahmḛɗ-khalḛɗ10 Dude, I think this was more so due to tactics. Your opponent was using 4-2-3-1 against your 4-3-3 A.
4-2-3-1 is quite good for defense, as it forms 3 triangles on the pitch. With a wide midfield, it would be difficult for your 3 forwards to break through it to score. Also, if your midfielders push forward and your opponent counter-attacks, that would create more good chances to score. Your goalkeeper might've been really good- but that doesn't mean that it will always stop the goals from weaker forwards. One more thing, if the goal was scored in the second leg, then it might also be due to your tired players, cause it's known that playing against 4-2-3-1 is tiring and that's why clubs like PSG and Barcelona adopt this formation.@astroblade said in OSM Engine 'stole' me:
4-2-3-1 is quite good for defense, as it forms 3 triangles on the pitch. With a wide midfield, it would be difficult for your 3 forwards to break through it to score. Also, if your midfielders push forward and your opponent counter-attacks, that would create more good chances to score. Your goalkeeper might've been really good- but that doesn't mean that it will always stop the goals from weaker forwards. One more thing, if the goal was scored in the second leg, then it might also be due to your tired players, cause it's known that playing against 4-2-3-1 is tiring and that's why clubs like PSG and Barcelona adopt this formation.
I know this my friend, and usually I don't play offensive line against 4231, but the difference in strength was so great that the opponent put the line-up 10 hours before the match and doesn't care if he wins or loses
-
@astroblade said in OSM Engine 'stole' me:
4-2-3-1 is quite good for defense, as it forms 3 triangles on the pitch. With a wide midfield, it would be difficult for your 3 forwards to break through it to score. Also, if your midfielders push forward and your opponent counter-attacks, that would create more good chances to score. Your goalkeeper might've been really good- but that doesn't mean that it will always stop the goals from weaker forwards. One more thing, if the goal was scored in the second leg, then it might also be due to your tired players, cause it's known that playing against 4-2-3-1 is tiring and that's why clubs like PSG and Barcelona adopt this formation.
I know this my friend, and usually I don't play offensive line against 4231, but the difference in strength was so great that the opponent put the line-up 10 hours before the match and doesn't care if he wins or loses
@ahmḛɗ-khalḛɗ10 I also noticed that your opponent had tackling set to normal/aggressive while you had it to careful. That also affected the result. I think your opponent had pressing a little high, so the tackling might be normal.
-
Good evening.
You guys must do something about the game simulator.
Ridiculous situations keep happening over and over again and it simply kills or drive and motivation to play.When the opponent invests time in the game, build a strong squad and is better tactically than you, all you have to do is keep trying to be better.
But when something like what I'm about to show you happen... it just shows how random this game is and illogical.
Yesterday:
Easy win having a slight better team.
Today:
My team improved from 84 to 94,or so, and my opponent almost didn't use the transfer madness.
The opponents team has an overall of 81.
He only had 10 players on the pitch.
A striker played as midfielder.
He only has 4 defenders, one of them awith an overall of 63.
I use the same tactic that has beaten stronger 451s in the past at home and away.The result:
I'm a very experienced player, a leader of a Top 20 crew, I invest time playing other games in the offer wall, I invest money when I don't have enough BC's to be competitive on hard leagues where I am representing my crew and I am really finding it difficult to accept this kind of situations.
You must start to protect the players that invest their time.
You keep on protecting the players that forget to line up and get a draw and sometimes a win having 50 or 60 overall players.
STOP doing that! Just STOP, please!
I don't know what you guys are doing in order to improve the game, but it's not enough.
I'm really disappointed with you guys and it makes me think whether I should or shouldn't continue my time with OSM.It's just sad.
Best regards
Rui
Elite Legends Gold Crewboss
Crew Cup World Staff Member
Associação Portuguesa Grupos Staff Member
-
Good evening.
You guys must do something about the game simulator.
Ridiculous situations keep happening over and over again and it simply kills or drive and motivation to play.When the opponent invests time in the game, build a strong squad and is better tactically than you, all you have to do is keep trying to be better.
But when something like what I'm about to show you happen... it just shows how random this game is and illogical.
Yesterday:
Easy win having a slight better team.
Today:
My team improved from 84 to 94,or so, and my opponent almost didn't use the transfer madness.
The opponents team has an overall of 81.
He only had 10 players on the pitch.
A striker played as midfielder.
He only has 4 defenders, one of them awith an overall of 63.
I use the same tactic that has beaten stronger 451s in the past at home and away.The result:
I'm a very experienced player, a leader of a Top 20 crew, I invest time playing other games in the offer wall, I invest money when I don't have enough BC's to be competitive on hard leagues where I am representing my crew and I am really finding it difficult to accept this kind of situations.
You must start to protect the players that invest their time.
You keep on protecting the players that forget to line up and get a draw and sometimes a win having 50 or 60 overall players.
STOP doing that! Just STOP, please!
I don't know what you guys are doing in order to improve the game, but it's not enough.
I'm really disappointed with you guys and it makes me think whether I should or shouldn't continue my time with OSM.It's just sad.
Best regards
Rui
@ruipsc5 I totally agree with you.
This has been the situation with me for 3 months now.
I can't "honestly" beat anyone away, no matter how stronger or weaker I am than my opponents. It happens that I win when the opponent gets a red card, or when the engine "takes pity" -
@ruipsc5 I totally agree with you.
This has been the situation with me for 3 months now.
I can't "honestly" beat anyone away, no matter how stronger or weaker I am than my opponents. It happens that I win when the opponent gets a red card, or when the engine "takes pity"@ado-hackovic Thanks, Ado!
It's like.. Imagine you are the manager and you select a team.
And then one of the player says: "Gaffer, there is a player missing..."
"No problem! Hey, you - appoints to a random player - today you play as midfielder!"
And the player replies: "But... but... I'm a goalkeeper!"
And the manager continues: "No problem! Trust yourself!".
And other player says: "But the Central Defender is a kid from the youth who is 12 years old and we don't have any subs...""No problem! We will be ok!".
And then this team wins.
This is OSM nowadays...
-
Hey Rui
This is why I was ready to quit and this is why Andy quit
so you are experiencing this too now -
@ahmḛɗ-khalḛɗ10 Dude, I think this was more so due to tactics. Your opponent was using 4-2-3-1 against your 4-3-3 A.
4-2-3-1 is quite good for defense, as it forms 3 triangles on the pitch. With a wide midfield, it would be difficult for your 3 forwards to break through it to score. Also, if your midfielders push forward and your opponent counter-attacks, that would create more good chances to score. Your goalkeeper might've been really good- but that doesn't mean that it will always stop the goals from weaker forwards. One more thing, if the goal was scored in the second leg, then it might also be due to your tired players, cause it's known that playing against 4-2-3-1 is tiring and that's why clubs like PSG and Barcelona adopt this formation.@astroblade I don't agree with you!
I normally win against 4231 when I'm better, using a balanced 433A or B WP.
If you play really offensive you can lose. But if you play in a balance way, normally you win. You can have a draw, max, but you don't lose.My issue with OSM atm is just the way the engine protects the inactive or irresponsible players. It's completly stupid.
When you are way better, but the opponent prepares a defensive tactic and prepares the game properly, being online, with all the 11 players on the pitch and so on... you can lose.
But when your opponent plays with 10 players, having no subs, plays with 50 or 60 overall players and that player with 50 or 60 overall scores the winning goal... It's just ridiculous, stupid and a total lack of respect for the manager who loses.It's time for the game to be better. This simply cannot continue!
Elite Legends Gold Crewboss
Crew Cup World Staff Member
Associação Portuguesa Grupos Staff Member
-
@astroblade I don't agree with you!
I normally win against 4231 when I'm better, using a balanced 433A or B WP.
If you play really offensive you can lose. But if you play in a balance way, normally you win. You can have a draw, max, but you don't lose.My issue with OSM atm is just the way the engine protects the inactive or irresponsible players. It's completly stupid.
When you are way better, but the opponent prepares a defensive tactic and prepares the game properly, being online, with all the 11 players on the pitch and so on... you can lose.
But when your opponent plays with 10 players, having no subs, plays with 50 or 60 overall players and that player with 50 or 60 overall scores the winning goal... It's just ridiculous, stupid and a total lack of respect for the manager who loses.It's time for the game to be better. This simply cannot continue!
@ruipsc5
I agree with you. Your explanation was good. This happens to me a lot as I said, the game rewards a coach who shows some stupidity in tactics and formations and It's not fair at all -
And the list goes on and on in a league where I am playing:
Seriously?! What is this? A joke?
#Changethegamesim
OSM is becoming a complete non sense!
It would be cool to have a moderator saying something about the plan to change this? Is there an action plan on the run? What will GB or Miniclip do about this?
The ridiculous situations keep happening on a daily basis!
Elite Legends Gold Crewboss
Crew Cup World Staff Member
Associação Portuguesa Grupos Staff Member
-
And the list goes on and on in a league where I am playing:
Seriously?! What is this? A joke?
#Changethegamesim
OSM is becoming a complete non sense!
It would be cool to have a moderator saying something about the plan to change this? Is there an action plan on the run? What will GB or Miniclip do about this?
The ridiculous situations keep happening on a daily basis!
-
@ruipsc5 the question for these gamestats we show here is: „are the numbers and the information of the simulation only for our gaming experience, or a result of the tactical formation and settings“.
@markusrw5 I didn't understand, sorry. Can you rephrase it?
-
@astroblade I don't agree with you!
I normally win against 4231 when I'm better, using a balanced 433A or B WP.
If you play really offensive you can lose. But if you play in a balance way, normally you win. You can have a draw, max, but you don't lose.My issue with OSM atm is just the way the engine protects the inactive or irresponsible players. It's completly stupid.
When you are way better, but the opponent prepares a defensive tactic and prepares the game properly, being online, with all the 11 players on the pitch and so on... you can lose.
But when your opponent plays with 10 players, having no subs, plays with 50 or 60 overall players and that player with 50 or 60 overall scores the winning goal... It's just ridiculous, stupid and a total lack of respect for the manager who loses.It's time for the game to be better. This simply cannot continue!
@ruipsc5 Yes, I agree- playing balanced increases your chances of winning. But, I think @Ahmḛɗ-Khalḛɗ10 lost the match solely on the tactical superiority of his opponent. I'll explain everything, here take a look:
1] Much of the game was played in the mid-region. Ahmed had a 4-3-3A formation, so I'm presuming he didn't push his midfielders up. So, there were 3 forwards against a wall of 5 mids and 4 defs. Do you think scoring can be possible? I also think that the opponent had man-marking on, which just boosted his team's defense.
2] 7 shots taken! Ahmed took 13 shots, and Ahmed claims that the opponent was weaker. So either, counter-attack or shoot-on-sight was the play style. I'm more inclined to believe it was shoot-on-sight, cause if it was a counter-attack, you had 1 forward with 3 better defs.
3] Ahmed received no card, while the opponent received 2. The ref was an orange one- very strict. I think Ahmed had his tackling set to careful, while his opponent had it normal. That also creates an impact, a higher form of tackling can be useful against high pressing.
-
@ruipsc5 Yes, I agree- playing balanced increases your chances of winning. But, I think @Ahmḛɗ-Khalḛɗ10 lost the match solely on the tactical superiority of his opponent. I'll explain everything, here take a look:
1] Much of the game was played in the mid-region. Ahmed had a 4-3-3A formation, so I'm presuming he didn't push his midfielders up. So, there were 3 forwards against a wall of 5 mids and 4 defs. Do you think scoring can be possible? I also think that the opponent had man-marking on, which just boosted his team's defense.
2] 7 shots taken! Ahmed took 13 shots, and Ahmed claims that the opponent was weaker. So either, counter-attack or shoot-on-sight was the play style. I'm more inclined to believe it was shoot-on-sight, cause if it was a counter-attack, you had 1 forward with 3 better defs.
3] Ahmed received no card, while the opponent received 2. The ref was an orange one- very strict. I think Ahmed had his tackling set to careful, while his opponent had it normal. That also creates an impact, a higher form of tackling can be useful against high pressing.
@astroblade
What about ratings? As if it was another match
I also said the difference in power was 95 compared to 83 for the opponent, meaning that there is absolutely no chance, and certainly a coach who has been playing for 10 years will not make a mistake in an easy match like this
And I have to be honest, your explanation is very convincing, but after every end of a match I analyze it in detail to know the reason for winning and losing/powers caused by anything. The pressure was good or bad, and so on. -
Hey everyone,
Even though i am nowhere near the best manager in this game, i am passionate about theorycrafting by force, due to my elevated number of losses in the most various contexts obligating me to go in circles about apparent no logic driven outcomes, so i got a bit excited when i saw this recent activity about exposing so called "bad match engine".
Without anymore circling, i will pretend to be the creator/lawyer of the match engine, and try to understand by my own interpretation of its own possible perception.
@ahmḛɗ-khalḛɗ10 said in OSM Engine 'stole' me:
It's clear that OSM rewards amateur coaches even if they deserve to be defeated
The difference in strength in my favor was 95, and the 83 opponent who scored the goal was 69 Although my goalkeeper strength is 95.
All we take from that should improve the offensive line Game 1 (Ahmed):
There are no lineups available anymore, due to the league ending before i saw this, so let's take ahmed's word as the truth about team's strength (95 vs 83 in favour of ahmed).
First image (ratings):
We only know the defensive player ratings, but we can conclude that there is a higher average rating for ahmeds side on the 6 players that were shown. My defence for the match engine will come with my analysis on the remaining stats of the 2nd image presented.
Second image (stats):
There was a larger number of shots to ahmed's team (almost double). However, despite that, previous image has shown the opponent's goalkeeper had a 5 rating. This means a great majority of shots must have been off-target, and when we see ahmed's goalkeeper rating (7), even despite conceding a goal, makes me reach the conclusion that the away team had more shots on target than ahmed's team. So now we have realized that the away team was more dangerous, let's look again at the average rating of defenders. There was an equal distribution (all 7's) from ahmed's team, which means the opponent attacked through the 3 sections of the field in a somewhat equal distribution, and if i was a betting man, i would say his 4-2-3-1 had a counter attacking purpose (style of play). Now let's look closely to the opponent's ratings. There are two clear standouts there, the 2 center backs that had '8' rating. If we associate their rating with their goalkeeper rating (5), we can see that the center defenders blocked the vast majority of ahmed's attacking play, which makes me think that his 4-3-3A had a passing intent (style of play), focusing more on exploring the middle of the park, relying more on his 2 central midfielders and his 1 central attacking midfielder to build his attacking play. If this theory is right, then average ratings are based on the percentage between how many successful actions your players had compared to the number of total actions they had to take, which would justify why, sometimes, the average rating of a losing team is higher than the one of a winning team. The number of corners of each team (3 to 6), can also back my theory.
The most plausible reason was probably not a "counter-tactic" issue, but an issue from within his own team, to fulfill the tactic demands. I would point at one of two things as the most probable causes.
-
Ahmed's team was playing someone off-position within the midfield trio, for example, playing a central midfielder as a center attacking midfielder.
-
Ahmed's team was maybe more suited to a different type of play (could have better attacking wingers than midfielders, which would make wing play more suitable, for example).
@ruipsc5 said in OSM Engine 'stole' me:
Good evening.
You guys must do something about the game simulator.
Ridiculous situations keep happening over and over again and it simply kills or drive and motivation to play.When the opponent invests time in the game, build a strong squad and is better tactically than you, all you have to do is keep trying to be better.
But when something like what I'm about to show you happen... it just shows how random this game is and illogical.
Yesterday:
Easy win having a slight better team.
Today:
My team improved from 84 to 94,or so, and my opponent almost didn't use the transfer madness.
The opponents team has an overall of 81.
He only had 10 players on the pitch.
A striker played as midfielder.
He only has 4 defenders, one of them awith an overall of 63.
I use the same tactic that has beaten stronger 451s in the past at home and away.The result:
I'm a very experienced player, a leader of a Top 20 crew, I invest time playing other games in the offer wall, I invest money when I don't have enough BC's to be competitive on hard leagues where I am representing my crew and I am really finding it difficult to accept this kind of situations.
You must start to protect the players that invest their time.
You keep on protecting the players that forget to line up and get a draw and sometimes a win having 50 or 60 overall players.
STOP doing that! Just STOP, please!
I don't know what you guys are doing in order to improve the game, but it's not enough.
I'm really disappointed with you guys and it makes me think whether I should or shouldn't continue my time with OSM.It's just sad.
Best regards
Rui
Game 1 (ruipsc5):
According to the current squad to this day ( https://gyazo.com/d6c7823a620827e56917a7763ef0b43b ; https://gyazo.com/8c34cd0b48d939bee6354f948dcf6d15), the team seems suited to be playing on a 433A with passing intent. If i am not mistaken, there is no nationality bonus in the current lineup.
The game was one-sided, so the match engine is suggesting that you have played well your strengths compared to the opposition. The available stats make me think you played with normal tackling, while your opponent played with aggressive tackling. The goalless game by your opponent suggest that you played your defense zonal with offside trap, which seems correct, due to the (at least today) superior team u have combined with the 2 center backs against 1 striker situation. The number of corners are tricking me a little bit, on one hand, you have 9 corners, but on the other hand, for a 4-0 result, it seems like a short amount of corners for a wingplay attacking team. So i would say you played passing style, which seems sustained by your possession numbers (64%).
Game 2:
There is no tactical screenshot, but we can assume that your opponent played 451 according to what u have said alonside the screenshot presented. On the same screenshot, we can see you probably played a type of 433 (A or B), and with a closer look at your squad, we can probably guess it was, again, a 433A. Right off the bat, it is noticeable you used Mbappé as a RF, when he is a ST according to the game. This will become relevant, not because it is just a player out of position, like you might think, but because the non-existance of a RF actually stopped you from playing what was, after some heading against the wall, my view of what would have been the "optimal strategy", 433A wingplay.
What did i mean by this? Let's check opponent's screenshotted lineup. If he indeed played 451, he has two players out of position, his left and right midfielders. So, his weakness is on the wings, however, since you played a RF that is not a RF, it means that you cannot fully abuse the opposition's weakness, and instead, you played through the middle of the park (passing style), which would also be the strong point of your opponent's individual quality (his strong points were his 3 well positioned and rated players, according to the standard of his team), point that which was been proven, by the total average rating of the 3 midfielders being 8 out of 10!
I have to say this is a complicated to game to analyse, and there are a lot of tricky stuff here, such as, understanding that a forward playing left midfielder will actually be good offensively, which provoked the average rating '6' of your right back, Cancelo. So basically, we can assume by this specific context that was presented, that playing a left/right forward on a left/right midfield position is actually better than playing a CDM like Xhaka on those same positions, despite Xhaka being a midfielder, while Adeyemi is considered to being a forward.
Also, to end the analysis, i believe the '5' of Maddison serves more as a "punishment" of the match engine due to you not picking the subjective optimal strategy, rather than Maddison just being a bad player
.@ruipsc5 said in OSM Engine 'stole' me:
And the list goes on and on in a league where I am playing:
Seriously?! What is this? A joke?
#Changethegamesim
OSM is becoming a complete non sense!
It would be cool to have a moderator saying something about the plan to change this? Is there an action plan on the run? What will GB or Miniclip do about this?
The ridiculous situations keep happening on a daily basis!
Game 3:
I assume this was not your game, however i tracked who the teams were, so we have a better analysis.
League table: https://gyazo.com/a2338ca759e0f4ea7751d0c14913329f
Home Team: ( https://gyazo.com/872f0cc5aea8c58f97329c47d63fea3b ; https://gyazo.com/ec9f931c0447baf4cf050bacf917b613 )
Away Team: ( https://gyazo.com/e42ab75d71d9af83b2585628da39cf3a ; https://gyazo.com/db0b2f98ef149ddc758fd046ea5189e3 )
From the league table, we can see that the home team has a morale advantage, and from the team screenshots, we can also say that the home team has nationality bonus, while if we gather away's team best possible lineup, they do not have access to that same nationality bonus.
Let's start with referee/card analysis. Impetuous/Red referee would demand a Cautious/Green/Blue tackling approach to avoid red cards (while also risking injuries perpetrated by opponent's possible higher tackling choice) which was definitely not followed by neither of the teams, that tried to gamble their ways with normal tackling so they would get an extra advantage over eachother, with the away team flipping the right side of the coin on this regard. This is backed by the same number of fouls eachtime did (14 to 14).
By the short amount of corners by OSM standards, we can tell both teams played either passing or shoot on sight styles, more centric approaches.
By analysing the away team, we can see that his LB and RB are lackluster, compared to the standard of his team. Unlike what was shown in game 2, despite the home team playing a passing/centric approach, the 3 forwards the team has, means that the LB and RB will have defensive functions, regardless of the more centric approach, while the LM and RM did not have as many defensive responsabilies, due to them having a LB and a RB behind them, while also facing an opposition0s centric approach.
Conversion rates can be justified by morale and strategic error by the away team.
I'm done with the analysis, i hope it helped bring a new perspective to the way of thinking of Ahmed, Rui, and anyone else that is reading, and remember, we gotta see problems as an opportunity to show how much we can skillgap our opponent, not getting personal/emotional with our ideas, the ideas are not what define us, our will to chase and refine them is what makes us... us. Kinda cliche and random (sometimes cliches exist for a reason), but i felt it was needed in this context.
Best of luck on the field, and the best wishes for self-development!
-
-
Hey everyone,
Even though i am nowhere near the best manager in this game, i am passionate about theorycrafting by force, due to my elevated number of losses in the most various contexts obligating me to go in circles about apparent no logic driven outcomes, so i got a bit excited when i saw this recent activity about exposing so called "bad match engine".
Without anymore circling, i will pretend to be the creator/lawyer of the match engine, and try to understand by my own interpretation of its own possible perception.
@ahmḛɗ-khalḛɗ10 said in OSM Engine 'stole' me:
It's clear that OSM rewards amateur coaches even if they deserve to be defeated
The difference in strength in my favor was 95, and the 83 opponent who scored the goal was 69 Although my goalkeeper strength is 95.
All we take from that should improve the offensive line Game 1 (Ahmed):
There are no lineups available anymore, due to the league ending before i saw this, so let's take ahmed's word as the truth about team's strength (95 vs 83 in favour of ahmed).
First image (ratings):
We only know the defensive player ratings, but we can conclude that there is a higher average rating for ahmeds side on the 6 players that were shown. My defence for the match engine will come with my analysis on the remaining stats of the 2nd image presented.
Second image (stats):
There was a larger number of shots to ahmed's team (almost double). However, despite that, previous image has shown the opponent's goalkeeper had a 5 rating. This means a great majority of shots must have been off-target, and when we see ahmed's goalkeeper rating (7), even despite conceding a goal, makes me reach the conclusion that the away team had more shots on target than ahmed's team. So now we have realized that the away team was more dangerous, let's look again at the average rating of defenders. There was an equal distribution (all 7's) from ahmed's team, which means the opponent attacked through the 3 sections of the field in a somewhat equal distribution, and if i was a betting man, i would say his 4-2-3-1 had a counter attacking purpose (style of play). Now let's look closely to the opponent's ratings. There are two clear standouts there, the 2 center backs that had '8' rating. If we associate their rating with their goalkeeper rating (5), we can see that the center defenders blocked the vast majority of ahmed's attacking play, which makes me think that his 4-3-3A had a passing intent (style of play), focusing more on exploring the middle of the park, relying more on his 2 central midfielders and his 1 central attacking midfielder to build his attacking play. If this theory is right, then average ratings are based on the percentage between how many successful actions your players had compared to the number of total actions they had to take, which would justify why, sometimes, the average rating of a losing team is higher than the one of a winning team. The number of corners of each team (3 to 6), can also back my theory.
The most plausible reason was probably not a "counter-tactic" issue, but an issue from within his own team, to fulfill the tactic demands. I would point at one of two things as the most probable causes.
-
Ahmed's team was playing someone off-position within the midfield trio, for example, playing a central midfielder as a center attacking midfielder.
-
Ahmed's team was maybe more suited to a different type of play (could have better attacking wingers than midfielders, which would make wing play more suitable, for example).
@ruipsc5 said in OSM Engine 'stole' me:
Good evening.
You guys must do something about the game simulator.
Ridiculous situations keep happening over and over again and it simply kills or drive and motivation to play.When the opponent invests time in the game, build a strong squad and is better tactically than you, all you have to do is keep trying to be better.
But when something like what I'm about to show you happen... it just shows how random this game is and illogical.
Yesterday:
Easy win having a slight better team.
Today:
My team improved from 84 to 94,or so, and my opponent almost didn't use the transfer madness.
The opponents team has an overall of 81.
He only had 10 players on the pitch.
A striker played as midfielder.
He only has 4 defenders, one of them awith an overall of 63.
I use the same tactic that has beaten stronger 451s in the past at home and away.The result:
I'm a very experienced player, a leader of a Top 20 crew, I invest time playing other games in the offer wall, I invest money when I don't have enough BC's to be competitive on hard leagues where I am representing my crew and I am really finding it difficult to accept this kind of situations.
You must start to protect the players that invest their time.
You keep on protecting the players that forget to line up and get a draw and sometimes a win having 50 or 60 overall players.
STOP doing that! Just STOP, please!
I don't know what you guys are doing in order to improve the game, but it's not enough.
I'm really disappointed with you guys and it makes me think whether I should or shouldn't continue my time with OSM.It's just sad.
Best regards
Rui
Game 1 (ruipsc5):
According to the current squad to this day ( https://gyazo.com/d6c7823a620827e56917a7763ef0b43b ; https://gyazo.com/8c34cd0b48d939bee6354f948dcf6d15), the team seems suited to be playing on a 433A with passing intent. If i am not mistaken, there is no nationality bonus in the current lineup.
The game was one-sided, so the match engine is suggesting that you have played well your strengths compared to the opposition. The available stats make me think you played with normal tackling, while your opponent played with aggressive tackling. The goalless game by your opponent suggest that you played your defense zonal with offside trap, which seems correct, due to the (at least today) superior team u have combined with the 2 center backs against 1 striker situation. The number of corners are tricking me a little bit, on one hand, you have 9 corners, but on the other hand, for a 4-0 result, it seems like a short amount of corners for a wingplay attacking team. So i would say you played passing style, which seems sustained by your possession numbers (64%).
Game 2:
There is no tactical screenshot, but we can assume that your opponent played 451 according to what u have said alonside the screenshot presented. On the same screenshot, we can see you probably played a type of 433 (A or B), and with a closer look at your squad, we can probably guess it was, again, a 433A. Right off the bat, it is noticeable you used Mbappé as a RF, when he is a ST according to the game. This will become relevant, not because it is just a player out of position, like you might think, but because the non-existance of a RF actually stopped you from playing what was, after some heading against the wall, my view of what would have been the "optimal strategy", 433A wingplay.
What did i mean by this? Let's check opponent's screenshotted lineup. If he indeed played 451, he has two players out of position, his left and right midfielders. So, his weakness is on the wings, however, since you played a RF that is not a RF, it means that you cannot fully abuse the opposition's weakness, and instead, you played through the middle of the park (passing style), which would also be the strong point of your opponent's individual quality (his strong points were his 3 well positioned and rated players, according to the standard of his team), point that which was been proven, by the total average rating of the 3 midfielders being 8 out of 10!
I have to say this is a complicated to game to analyse, and there are a lot of tricky stuff here, such as, understanding that a forward playing left midfielder will actually be good offensively, which provoked the average rating '6' of your right back, Cancelo. So basically, we can assume by this specific context that was presented, that playing a left/right forward on a left/right midfield position is actually better than playing a CDM like Xhaka on those same positions, despite Xhaka being a midfielder, while Adeyemi is considered to being a forward.
Also, to end the analysis, i believe the '5' of Maddison serves more as a "punishment" of the match engine due to you not picking the subjective optimal strategy, rather than Maddison just being a bad player
.@ruipsc5 said in OSM Engine 'stole' me:
And the list goes on and on in a league where I am playing:
Seriously?! What is this? A joke?
#Changethegamesim
OSM is becoming a complete non sense!
It would be cool to have a moderator saying something about the plan to change this? Is there an action plan on the run? What will GB or Miniclip do about this?
The ridiculous situations keep happening on a daily basis!
Game 3:
I assume this was not your game, however i tracked who the teams were, so we have a better analysis.
League table: https://gyazo.com/a2338ca759e0f4ea7751d0c14913329f
Home Team: ( https://gyazo.com/872f0cc5aea8c58f97329c47d63fea3b ; https://gyazo.com/ec9f931c0447baf4cf050bacf917b613 )
Away Team: ( https://gyazo.com/e42ab75d71d9af83b2585628da39cf3a ; https://gyazo.com/db0b2f98ef149ddc758fd046ea5189e3 )
From the league table, we can see that the home team has a morale advantage, and from the team screenshots, we can also say that the home team has nationality bonus, while if we gather away's team best possible lineup, they do not have access to that same nationality bonus.
Let's start with referee/card analysis. Impetuous/Red referee would demand a Cautious/Green/Blue tackling approach to avoid red cards (while also risking injuries perpetrated by opponent's possible higher tackling choice) which was definitely not followed by neither of the teams, that tried to gamble their ways with normal tackling so they would get an extra advantage over eachother, with the away team flipping the right side of the coin on this regard. This is backed by the same number of fouls eachtime did (14 to 14).
By the short amount of corners by OSM standards, we can tell both teams played either passing or shoot on sight styles, more centric approaches.
By analysing the away team, we can see that his LB and RB are lackluster, compared to the standard of his team. Unlike what was shown in game 2, despite the home team playing a passing/centric approach, the 3 forwards the team has, means that the LB and RB will have defensive functions, regardless of the more centric approach, while the LM and RM did not have as many defensive responsabilies, due to them having a LB and a RB behind them, while also facing an opposition0s centric approach.
Conversion rates can be justified by morale and strategic error by the away team.
I'm done with the analysis, i hope it helped bring a new perspective to the way of thinking of Ahmed, Rui, and anyone else that is reading, and remember, we gotta see problems as an opportunity to show how much we can skillgap our opponent, not getting personal/emotional with our ideas, the ideas are not what define us, our will to chase and refine them is what makes us... us. Kinda cliche and random (sometimes cliches exist for a reason), but i felt it was needed in this context.
Best of luck on the field, and the best wishes for self-development!
Hello and thank you for your contribution.
You are trying or best, but you are incorrect in your analysis.
Playing Passing Style against a SoS tactic is suicidal, so, no, I haven´t played like that.
Also, due to the lack of men in the midfield I have played with the front guys supporting the midfielders, so that I wasn't outplayed.
I played with a striker as RF, of course, but I have won lots of games playing like that in games that are trickier than this one.
The morale of my team was at its best, as I haven't conceded a goal in the league.
So... it was just a complete nonsense losing that match against a weaker team which had a Striker playing as LM and a 60 something overall defender in their lineup against a 92 striker.
Concerning the other game... the guy who had a player sent off lost the previous game against me 4-0, so their morale couldn't be at his best. It was just a ridiculous situation like so many others that keep happening.
But I appreciate your analysis.
Best regards,
Rui
-
-
Hey everyone,
Even though i am nowhere near the best manager in this game, i am passionate about theorycrafting by force, due to my elevated number of losses in the most various contexts obligating me to go in circles about apparent no logic driven outcomes, so i got a bit excited when i saw this recent activity about exposing so called "bad match engine".
Without anymore circling, i will pretend to be the creator/lawyer of the match engine, and try to understand by my own interpretation of its own possible perception.
@ahmḛɗ-khalḛɗ10 said in OSM Engine 'stole' me:
It's clear that OSM rewards amateur coaches even if they deserve to be defeated
The difference in strength in my favor was 95, and the 83 opponent who scored the goal was 69 Although my goalkeeper strength is 95.
All we take from that should improve the offensive line Game 1 (Ahmed):
There are no lineups available anymore, due to the league ending before i saw this, so let's take ahmed's word as the truth about team's strength (95 vs 83 in favour of ahmed).
First image (ratings):
We only know the defensive player ratings, but we can conclude that there is a higher average rating for ahmeds side on the 6 players that were shown. My defence for the match engine will come with my analysis on the remaining stats of the 2nd image presented.
Second image (stats):
There was a larger number of shots to ahmed's team (almost double). However, despite that, previous image has shown the opponent's goalkeeper had a 5 rating. This means a great majority of shots must have been off-target, and when we see ahmed's goalkeeper rating (7), even despite conceding a goal, makes me reach the conclusion that the away team had more shots on target than ahmed's team. So now we have realized that the away team was more dangerous, let's look again at the average rating of defenders. There was an equal distribution (all 7's) from ahmed's team, which means the opponent attacked through the 3 sections of the field in a somewhat equal distribution, and if i was a betting man, i would say his 4-2-3-1 had a counter attacking purpose (style of play). Now let's look closely to the opponent's ratings. There are two clear standouts there, the 2 center backs that had '8' rating. If we associate their rating with their goalkeeper rating (5), we can see that the center defenders blocked the vast majority of ahmed's attacking play, which makes me think that his 4-3-3A had a passing intent (style of play), focusing more on exploring the middle of the park, relying more on his 2 central midfielders and his 1 central attacking midfielder to build his attacking play. If this theory is right, then average ratings are based on the percentage between how many successful actions your players had compared to the number of total actions they had to take, which would justify why, sometimes, the average rating of a losing team is higher than the one of a winning team. The number of corners of each team (3 to 6), can also back my theory.
The most plausible reason was probably not a "counter-tactic" issue, but an issue from within his own team, to fulfill the tactic demands. I would point at one of two things as the most probable causes.
-
Ahmed's team was playing someone off-position within the midfield trio, for example, playing a central midfielder as a center attacking midfielder.
-
Ahmed's team was maybe more suited to a different type of play (could have better attacking wingers than midfielders, which would make wing play more suitable, for example).
@ruipsc5 said in OSM Engine 'stole' me:
Good evening.
You guys must do something about the game simulator.
Ridiculous situations keep happening over and over again and it simply kills or drive and motivation to play.When the opponent invests time in the game, build a strong squad and is better tactically than you, all you have to do is keep trying to be better.
But when something like what I'm about to show you happen... it just shows how random this game is and illogical.
Yesterday:
Easy win having a slight better team.
Today:
My team improved from 84 to 94,or so, and my opponent almost didn't use the transfer madness.
The opponents team has an overall of 81.
He only had 10 players on the pitch.
A striker played as midfielder.
He only has 4 defenders, one of them awith an overall of 63.
I use the same tactic that has beaten stronger 451s in the past at home and away.The result:
I'm a very experienced player, a leader of a Top 20 crew, I invest time playing other games in the offer wall, I invest money when I don't have enough BC's to be competitive on hard leagues where I am representing my crew and I am really finding it difficult to accept this kind of situations.
You must start to protect the players that invest their time.
You keep on protecting the players that forget to line up and get a draw and sometimes a win having 50 or 60 overall players.
STOP doing that! Just STOP, please!
I don't know what you guys are doing in order to improve the game, but it's not enough.
I'm really disappointed with you guys and it makes me think whether I should or shouldn't continue my time with OSM.It's just sad.
Best regards
Rui
Game 1 (ruipsc5):
According to the current squad to this day ( https://gyazo.com/d6c7823a620827e56917a7763ef0b43b ; https://gyazo.com/8c34cd0b48d939bee6354f948dcf6d15), the team seems suited to be playing on a 433A with passing intent. If i am not mistaken, there is no nationality bonus in the current lineup.
The game was one-sided, so the match engine is suggesting that you have played well your strengths compared to the opposition. The available stats make me think you played with normal tackling, while your opponent played with aggressive tackling. The goalless game by your opponent suggest that you played your defense zonal with offside trap, which seems correct, due to the (at least today) superior team u have combined with the 2 center backs against 1 striker situation. The number of corners are tricking me a little bit, on one hand, you have 9 corners, but on the other hand, for a 4-0 result, it seems like a short amount of corners for a wingplay attacking team. So i would say you played passing style, which seems sustained by your possession numbers (64%).
Game 2:
There is no tactical screenshot, but we can assume that your opponent played 451 according to what u have said alonside the screenshot presented. On the same screenshot, we can see you probably played a type of 433 (A or B), and with a closer look at your squad, we can probably guess it was, again, a 433A. Right off the bat, it is noticeable you used Mbappé as a RF, when he is a ST according to the game. This will become relevant, not because it is just a player out of position, like you might think, but because the non-existance of a RF actually stopped you from playing what was, after some heading against the wall, my view of what would have been the "optimal strategy", 433A wingplay.
What did i mean by this? Let's check opponent's screenshotted lineup. If he indeed played 451, he has two players out of position, his left and right midfielders. So, his weakness is on the wings, however, since you played a RF that is not a RF, it means that you cannot fully abuse the opposition's weakness, and instead, you played through the middle of the park (passing style), which would also be the strong point of your opponent's individual quality (his strong points were his 3 well positioned and rated players, according to the standard of his team), point that which was been proven, by the total average rating of the 3 midfielders being 8 out of 10!
I have to say this is a complicated to game to analyse, and there are a lot of tricky stuff here, such as, understanding that a forward playing left midfielder will actually be good offensively, which provoked the average rating '6' of your right back, Cancelo. So basically, we can assume by this specific context that was presented, that playing a left/right forward on a left/right midfield position is actually better than playing a CDM like Xhaka on those same positions, despite Xhaka being a midfielder, while Adeyemi is considered to being a forward.
Also, to end the analysis, i believe the '5' of Maddison serves more as a "punishment" of the match engine due to you not picking the subjective optimal strategy, rather than Maddison just being a bad player
.@ruipsc5 said in OSM Engine 'stole' me:
And the list goes on and on in a league where I am playing:
Seriously?! What is this? A joke?
#Changethegamesim
OSM is becoming a complete non sense!
It would be cool to have a moderator saying something about the plan to change this? Is there an action plan on the run? What will GB or Miniclip do about this?
The ridiculous situations keep happening on a daily basis!
Game 3:
I assume this was not your game, however i tracked who the teams were, so we have a better analysis.
League table: https://gyazo.com/a2338ca759e0f4ea7751d0c14913329f
Home Team: ( https://gyazo.com/872f0cc5aea8c58f97329c47d63fea3b ; https://gyazo.com/ec9f931c0447baf4cf050bacf917b613 )
Away Team: ( https://gyazo.com/e42ab75d71d9af83b2585628da39cf3a ; https://gyazo.com/db0b2f98ef149ddc758fd046ea5189e3 )
From the league table, we can see that the home team has a morale advantage, and from the team screenshots, we can also say that the home team has nationality bonus, while if we gather away's team best possible lineup, they do not have access to that same nationality bonus.
Let's start with referee/card analysis. Impetuous/Red referee would demand a Cautious/Green/Blue tackling approach to avoid red cards (while also risking injuries perpetrated by opponent's possible higher tackling choice) which was definitely not followed by neither of the teams, that tried to gamble their ways with normal tackling so they would get an extra advantage over eachother, with the away team flipping the right side of the coin on this regard. This is backed by the same number of fouls eachtime did (14 to 14).
By the short amount of corners by OSM standards, we can tell both teams played either passing or shoot on sight styles, more centric approaches.
By analysing the away team, we can see that his LB and RB are lackluster, compared to the standard of his team. Unlike what was shown in game 2, despite the home team playing a passing/centric approach, the 3 forwards the team has, means that the LB and RB will have defensive functions, regardless of the more centric approach, while the LM and RM did not have as many defensive responsabilies, due to them having a LB and a RB behind them, while also facing an opposition0s centric approach.
Conversion rates can be justified by morale and strategic error by the away team.
I'm done with the analysis, i hope it helped bring a new perspective to the way of thinking of Ahmed, Rui, and anyone else that is reading, and remember, we gotta see problems as an opportunity to show how much we can skillgap our opponent, not getting personal/emotional with our ideas, the ideas are not what define us, our will to chase and refine them is what makes us... us. Kinda cliche and random (sometimes cliches exist for a reason), but i felt it was needed in this context.
Best of luck on the field, and the best wishes for self-development!
@suntern9
First, thank you for your interest and your explanation of the match
What I wanted to explain should be the difference in strength from the reasons for winning and losing clearly, not just tactics Know that tactics are the main reason for winning and losing but We spend coins on developing the team, to lose in these ways is a difficult thing to accept
In the end, this match did not affect us, we won the battle already, but such losses make you feel a bit frustrated in front of your teammates in the Osm. -
