EA SPORTS FC25 OS Community Sliders

[WoodsFC]

Re: EA SPORTS FC25 OS Community Sliders

I've noticed it is easier to get past CBs in version 3 compared to version 2, I'm not getting shutout anymore. Low-block teams are ridiculously easy to beat now.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/US6ugc5LuQA?si=VWgv2RmfkPb7P5TX" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>

[1860fan]

Re: EA SPORTS FC25 OS Community Sliders

That's right, it's too easy, why don't the CPU defenders attack? I haven't tested the new set v3 yet, which console are you playing on? I will test the Xbox Series X tomorrow.

[g98smith]

Re: EA SPORTS FC25 OS Community Sliders

I've noticed it is easier to get past CBs in version 3 compared to version 2, I'm not getting shutout anymore. Low-block teams are ridiculously easy to beat now.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/US6ugc5LuQA?si=VWgv2RmfkPb7P5TX" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>

Great video examples of some of the things I mentioned on the previous page.

Line Height - so, Plymouth’s default tactics are set to have a “Deep” defensive line (aka 30). Couple that with the V3 slider value of 58, and you end up with huge gaps - that first goal in your video demonstrates it perfectly and it’s game-breaking. A lot of lower league teams have that “Deep” defensive line tactic and it really doesn’t work well.

Sprint Speed - for the first goal, also notice how the CB (no.22) is literally jogging after you once you turn him - personally I think that’s down to Sprint being too low at 30. He should be sprinting to try and make a recovery - looks like it’s Brendan Galloway; he has 64 Acc & 67 Sprint, which isn’t even on the slower end of the spectrum for centre backs in-game. Same problem I mentioned in my last post.

Pass Speed - not sure if you play FUMA (and if so what your power bar value is set to), or if you were using RB/R1 for driven passes, but some of the passes in those clips are crazy fast too haha.

[metalman1555]

Re: EA SPORTS FC25 OS Community Sliders

I must admit, when I first saw some of the V3 values I was quite surprised - especially the further reduction in Sprint, increase in Acceleration and reduction in Line Height. I had my doubts before I’d even tried it (which is wrong, I know!).

Having actually now played a handful of games with the V3 values, I have to say I still agree with my initial sentiment. I just can’t get on board with 30 Sprint - playing as Shrewsbury Town vs Leyton Orient, there were two instances in the first 20 mins of a game where the CPU striker ran past my two CBs, and even when fully holding down RT/R2, it looked like they were jogging - and they aren’t even particularly slow for defenders (Feeney & Nsiala with 66 & 62 pace respectively). I got absolutely nowhere near the striker and he ran through for 2 easy goals. For me, Sprint can’t go lower than ~35 if it means certain players don’t actually ‘sprint’ anymore - and I much prefer that paired with a flat 50/50 Acceleration, especially when you factor in the impact on player stamina.

Whilst I felt that Pass Speed at 38 was slightly too slow in V2, the increase to 45 feels a bit drastic, at times it felt like every pass was driven - personally 40-42 is the sweet spot, but appreciate everyone has their individual preferences.

The other major change for me is the Line Height reduction. Previously it felt necessary to keep this value high, especially given a lot of lower league teams seem to have their default tactical line height set to “Deep” (which is around 20 I think) - leaving gigantic gaps in between the midfield and the defensive line. With the slider value set to 58, even using the “High” value of 70 in the tactical setup, I’m still finding my defenders sitting deeper than they should be, which soon becomes a real problem when the CPU start to exploit the gaps.

I understand some of these changes were needed to combat the “bursting” issue on WC (I play on Leg so wasn’t aware of that) - but could those tweaks not have been specific to WC if it was just that difficulty that was impacted? I hadn’t observed any issues with the V2 values on Leg, but as mentioned above I’ve started to now when using the new pace sliders.

Anyway, I know (as always) the values are just a base set for us all to tweak as we see fit - just wanted to provide my personal feedback. Some of the other changes around Marking/RF are great, but I think I’ll be sticking to the V2 values for Sprint, Acc, Pass Speed and Line Height (or similar anyway - I mentioned a few minor tweaks in my last post).

Intrigued to see how everyone else gets on as ever - would be good to get some feedback from others that are playing in lower leagues (League One & Two, 3 Liga etc) as I think that definitely changes your perspective on some of the values compared to using 4 and 5 star teams with 75/80+ rated players.

Cheers to Matt and the testers for their work as always.

I tried the exact same thing, some players almost seem to go in slow motion when they run and have unnatural movements.
The same thing goes for the defense, the opposing attackers overcome me very easily in some cases, this didn't happen before</pre>

[Matt10]

Re: EA SPORTS FC25 OS Community Sliders

Great video examples of some of the things I mentioned on the previous page.

Line Height - so, Plymouth’s default tactics are set to have a “Deep” defensive line (aka 30). Couple that with the V3 slider value of 58, and you end up with huge gaps - that first goal in your video demonstrates it perfectly and it’s game-breaking. A lot of lower league teams have that “Deep” defensive line tactic and it really doesn’t work well.

Sprint Speed - for the first goal, also notice how the CB (no.22) is literally jogging after you once you turn him - personally I think that’s down to Sprint being too low at 30. He should be sprinting to try and make a recovery - looks like it’s Brendan Galloway; he has 64 Acc & 67 Sprint, which isn’t even on the slower end of the spectrum for centre backs in-game. Same problem I mentioned in my last post.

Pass Speed - not sure if you play FUMA (and if so what your power bar value is set to), or if you were using RB/R1 for driven passes, but some of the passes in those clips are crazy fast too haha.

This is good feedback, as was your previous post. I'll preface my response with an apology of how layered it will be as there are so many variables that have to be considered now when troubleshooting.

First off, this looks to be against 4-2-3-1, one of the worst formations in FC25 because the lack of a box-to-box midfielder on preset tactics, rather the handicapping presence of two holding midfielders.

Nonetheless, we definitely spent time with lower league teams (that's a lot of my game-time) and 30 deep line matchups. The issue that I saw was how deep the midfield was, practically touching the defensive line. At the time, the height value was at 62. It wasn't until it was moved to 58 that there started to be some better spacing. In addition, the 58 worked well for those who had really high defensive lines such as 95.

In the video above, two of those goals are counters, the defensive line 30 won't step up to that value until the 60's gameplay slider or higher acc, or higher marking. Even then, the biggest issue is defenders not meeting attackers regardless of slider value.

When playing with a gradual build-up of numbers, such as not playing directly into the striker and turning, the defensive midfield can recover in the height 55-60 range relative to the 40-42 line length. The 3rd and 4th goal the defensive line is there, but get too tight and have no support from the two holding mids. If this is WC, I'd suggest acceleration discrepancy and try to recreate it, but honestly, games against a 4-2-3-1 are pretty poor. This is why I will change those teams to a 4-1-4-1 with box-to-box midfielders.

We need depth on both sides of the ball. Line Height gameplay slider works as an upfield pressure mechanic. It pushes/squeezes midfielders through, and if it's too high, it won't release enough of that pressure to let those midfielders back in. This is why some sets, and the sim mode for example uses lengths under 40 as we had before. The issue with that value was that there was too much instant retreating and jumbling up in the midfield which gave up more and more space.

For reference, here's s screenshot from one of the main games I played versus Burton Albion who are a 30 depth, and I'm using 62 height. It looks decent, and I'm on board with it:



Play a different game against a 95 depth team with 62 line height, and now the midfield has become a single flat unit with the defensive line.



So, we're in a conundrum here with the Height value. We go too high on 30 depth teams, then we send the higher depth teams out of the equation. In addition, the higher height will also prevent those midfielders from tracking backwards enough, unless we want to really reduce length again.

The tweaks made were not just for WC, the main change there is Acc, Length Discrepancy and Marking.

The Sprint 30 was an agreement that we had just increased pass speed and acceleration, we need to ensure the game doesn't become too fast. We were on Sprint 35 for a while, but that really started to feel like it was just a sprint fest. Gone was the gradual walk-jog-sprint aspect that FC25 started out of the box with. The only time that was recaptured was with 30 Sprint, not even 32 Sprint could reestablish that pattern. So, the testing was done with the higher acceleration to act as a modifier of the lower sprint, so we can maintain the gradual movements.

So as you can see we're fighting an uphill battle against proper movements, and essentially defensive and midfield depth that covers all bases. This post-update has resulted in the striker not being met by the defenders as often unless we really drop width well below 48 (we were at 45 for a while as well) like in Version 2. Even then there is no guarantee, and then we run the risk of our outside mids venturing off to the center of the pitch too early. Even on 48 you can see in those videos how the central midfielders get caught too tight.

For Pass Speed, 45 just came to have a lot of benefits. In essence it brought back mastering the ball, not just having it stuck to your feet. The best being passes into space from the CPU, more deflections overall, different types of deflections, and most importantly the ball not being stuck underneath players so they aren't unrealistically striking the ball where their foot would never meet the same type of power IRL.

From the video, @WoodsFC , I'd guess you're using R1/precision pass on the majority of those passes? If that's your choice, I'd suggest drop user pass speed significantly, to something like 35 or 38, because those driven passes are taking the 45 to a 55-60 level and the FT Control value isn't punishing enough on 60.

Overall, I hope you understand how we got to where we are - and why some decisions were made. It's not to say we won't change them, it's just that if you provide examples, you have to know that there is a rule of opposites that follow where those examples or suggestions won't add up. Like any FIFA/FC, we have to sacrifice some things and maybe have to modify some things to get more out of the game. This year is filled with the need to modify to your personal preference and what you like. You're not playing or testing in the same fashion here. If 90% of the teams you face are going to be 30 depth teams, then please, change the value to what you want or already know that works.

[Samustrumpet29]

Re: EA SPORTS FC25 OS Community Sliders

I must admit, when I first saw some of the V3 values I was quite surprised - especially the further reduction in Sprint, increase in Acceleration and reduction in Line Height. I had my doubts before I’d even tried it (which is wrong, I know!).

Having actually now played a handful of games with the V3 values, I have to say I still agree with my initial sentiment. I just can’t get on board with 30 Sprint - playing as Shrewsbury Town vs Leyton Orient, there were two instances in the first 20 mins of a game where the CPU striker ran past my two CBs, and even when fully holding down RT/R2, it looked like they were jogging - and they aren’t even particularly slow for defenders (Feeney & Nsiala with 66 & 62 pace respectively). I got absolutely nowhere near the striker and he ran through for 2 easy goals. For me, Sprint can’t go lower than ~35 if it means certain players don’t actually ‘sprint’ anymore - and I much prefer that paired with a flat 50/50 Acceleration, especially when you factor in the impact on player stamina.

Whilst I felt that Pass Speed at 38 was slightly too slow in V2, the increase to 45 feels a bit drastic, at times it felt like every pass was driven - personally 40-42 is the sweet spot, but appreciate everyone has their individual preferences.

The other major change for me is the Line Height reduction. Previously it felt necessary to keep this value high, especially given a lot of lower league teams seem to have their default tactical line height set to “Deep” (which is around 20 I think) - leaving gigantic gaps in between the midfield and the defensive line. With the slider value set to 58, even using the “High” value of 70 in the tactical setup, I’m still finding my defenders sitting deeper than they should be, which soon becomes a real problem when the CPU start to exploit the gaps.

I understand some of these changes were needed to combat the “bursting” issue on WC (I play on Leg so wasn’t aware of that) - but could those tweaks not have been specific to WC if it was just that difficulty that was impacted? I hadn’t observed any issues with the V2 values on Leg, but as mentioned above I’ve started to now when using the new pace sliders.

Anyway, I know (as always) the values are just a base set for us all to tweak as we see fit - just wanted to provide my personal feedback. Some of the other changes around Marking/RF are great, but I think I’ll be sticking to the V2 values for Sprint, Acc, Pass Speed and Line Height (or similar anyway - I mentioned a few minor tweaks in my last post).

Intrigued to see how everyone else gets on as ever - would be good to get some feedback from others that are playing in lower leagues (League One & Two, 3 Liga etc) as I think that definitely changes your perspective on some of the values compared to using 4 and 5 star teams with 75/80+ rated players.

Cheers to Matt and the testers for their work as always.

I think the same about sprint speed. 35-38 should be the values to work with. The line Height it's great for me , I'm playing in bundesliga 3 on legendary and is been challenging but I have to say the CPU has +1 sprint speed +1 acceleration. Now I can say I got what I wanted, A CHALLENGE!! but without losing realism. Of course, I had to set shoot error and pass error for the CPU at 50, but it was necessary. Also the CPU behavior it's been crucial. I'm not gonna share any values here but you should know , if you mix the first touch pass frequency (80-90) with buildup speed (45-48) you'll get good results. Finally try activate Player based difficulty and set the dribble frequency at 1 and skill move at +75. Thanks Matt and his team for sharing his vision.

[plevs]

Re: EA SPORTS FC25 OS Community Sliders

I must admit, when I first saw some of the V3 values I was quite surprised - especially the further reduction in Sprint, increase in Acceleration and reduction in Line Height. I had my doubts before I’d even tried it (which is wrong, I know!).

Having actually now played a handful of games with the V3 values, I have to say I still agree with my initial sentiment. I just can’t get on board with 30 Sprint - playing as Shrewsbury Town vs Leyton Orient, there were two instances in the first 20 mins of a game where the CPU striker ran past my two CBs, and even when fully holding down RT/R2, it looked like they were jogging - and they aren’t even particularly slow for defenders (Feeney & Nsiala with 66 & 62 pace respectively). I got absolutely nowhere near the striker and he ran through for 2 easy goals. For me, Sprint can’t go lower than ~35 if it means certain players don’t actually ‘sprint’ anymore - and I much prefer that paired with a flat 50/50 Acceleration, especially when you factor in the impact on player stamina.

Whilst I felt that Pass Speed at 38 was slightly too slow in V2, the increase to 45 feels a bit drastic, at times it felt like every pass was driven - personally 40-42 is the sweet spot, but appreciate everyone has their individual preferences.

The other major change for me is the Line Height reduction. Previously it felt necessary to keep this value high, especially given a lot of lower league teams seem to have their default tactical line height set to “Deep” (which is around 20 I think) - leaving gigantic gaps in between the midfield and the defensive line. With the slider value set to 58, even using the “High” value of 70 in the tactical setup, I’m still finding my defenders sitting deeper than they should be, which soon becomes a real problem when the CPU start to exploit the gaps.

I understand some of these changes were needed to combat the “bursting” issue on WC (I play on Leg so wasn’t aware of that) - but could those tweaks not have been specific to WC if it was just that difficulty that was impacted? I hadn’t observed any issues with the V2 values on Leg, but as mentioned above I’ve started to now when using the new pace sliders.

Anyway, I know (as always) the values are just a base set for us all to tweak as we see fit - just wanted to provide my personal feedback. Some of the other changes around Marking/RF are great, but I think I’ll be sticking to the V2 values for Sprint, Acc, Pass Speed and Line Height (or similar anyway - I mentioned a few minor tweaks in my last post).

Intrigued to see how everyone else gets on as ever - would be good to get some feedback from others that are playing in lower leagues (League One & Two, 3 Liga etc) as I think that definitely changes your perspective on some of the values compared to using 4 and 5 star teams with 75/80+ rated players.

Cheers to Matt and the testers for their work as always.

Having played some games with V3 I think this feedback is pretty spot on, and I'll add some of my thoughts too:

The reduction in SS makes little sense because some players now don't sprint at all which is game breaking more than whatever it was trying to fix. Also agree that V2 had already found the sweet spot for SS is 35. Personally I wouldn't deviate from that value.

It's a shame Acc has such a big impact on stamina because 35 SS with 48 Acc feels the most natural in terms of player movements and animation speeds, but even dropping Acc to 48 means that players don't get tired nearly enough, so dropping under 50 isn't feasible because of that sadly.

So 35 SS and 50 Acc is the best available combination here at the moment IMO.

Passing error/speed - this is where I disagree with V3 the most. The pass speed of 38 in V2 was already too high IMO, and increasing it further to 45 I think really is a step in the wrong direction. The pace of every pass (with little variation) and the way even lower league players ping the ball around with ease and precision is completely unrealistic. Not even Premier League players ping the ball around like that, let alone League 1 players. Passing should be more deliberate and precise, and every pass should be a calculated decision - 45 doesn't provide that at all as every pass is pinged perfectly at an unrealistic pace, and you don't have to consider the weight of pass at all. I really think these values need to be revisited for V4, as passing is the essence of the game and if that's off then all the other sliders matter less.

IMO passing speed should be in the 31-33 range which I think is the realistic sweet spot (I'm using 33). Something weird happens to the passing if you go below 31 and it feels more like old school PES passing where every pass bascially has to be perfect, and it becomes a little too monotonous.
So the CPU remian competent in their attack the passing error should be readuced as a relative value to 50. I think this provides a great balance of realistic passing speed, variety in passes and speed, and also puts more significance on every pass being a calculated decision as it should be.

The justification for the change to 45 pass speed says "The finding here is that this brings the ball itself to be more lively. More passes into space and thus an emphasis for ball mastery rather than the ball just sticking to players' feet". For me, that couldn't be less accurate and a lower passing speed is much more effective in providing what is stated.

Another way to achieve the ball not just sticking to a players feet is to increase the FT error. There are hardly ANY loose touches in the game, and in my opnion the value of 65 for FT error needs a big bump. I have been using 99 for FT error and there are still minimal loose touches even in lower leagues. This also increases the amount of loose balls and scrappy passages of play - again there are hardly any in the game which is a shame.

And my final peice of feedback for V3 is that now there is basically no resistance in midfield and it's far too easy to play through and around the opposition midfield. I think this would be due to a combination of the line height, length and marking changes from V2. CBs are also a bit more passive in defending (probably because they can't sprint with 30 SS) and both these things makes the game ridiculously easy now - my first 2 games using V3 were 6-0 and 5-1 wins (Legendary 10 minute halves), before I reverted some values.

Like others I really appreciate all the effort and testing from Matt and the team that goes into these sliders, but I really feel like V3 is a step backwards and a lot of the changes are in the wrong direction, and that's why I want to provide detailed feedback.

I'd be interested to hear what the testers and others thought of the following adjustments:

Sprint speed - 35/35 (V2 values so all players can sprint)
Acceleration - 50/50 (V2 values), OR 48/48 for more natural animations if you don't care about players having a bit more stamina.
Pass error - 50/50 (to enable realistic passing speed and still maintain CPU effectiveness)
Pass speed - 33/33 (more relaistic passing speed)
FT error - 99/99 (more loose touches and loose balls, and the ball isn't glued to players feet as much)

[Matt10]

Re: EA SPORTS FC25 OS Community Sliders

Having played some games with V3 I think this feedback is pretty spot on, and I'll add some of my thoughts too:

The reduction in SS makes little sense because some players now don't sprint at all which is game breaking more than whatever it was trying to fix. Also agree that V2 had already found the sweet spot for SS is 35. Personally I wouldn't deviate from that value.

It's a shame Acc has such a big impact on stamina because 35 SS with 48 Acc feels the most natural in terms of player movements and animation speeds, but even dropping Acc to 48 means that players don't get tired nearly enough, so dropping under 50 isn't feasible because of that sadly.

So 35 SS and 50 Acc is the best available combination here at the moment IMO.

Passing error/speed - this is where I disagree with V3 the most. The pass speed of 38 in V2 was already too high IMO, and increasing it further to 45 I think really is a step in the wrong direction. The pace of every pass (with little variation) and the way even lower league players ping the ball around with ease and precision is completely unrealistic. Not even Premier League players ping the ball around like that, let alone League 1 players. Passing should be more deliberate and precise, and every pass should be a calculated decision - 45 doesn't provide that at all as every pass is pinged perfectly at an unrealistic pace, and you don't have to consider the weight of pass at all. I really think these values need to be revisited for V4, as passing is the essence of the game and if that's off then all the other sliders matter less.

IMO passing speed should be in the 31-33 range which I think is the realistic sweet spot (I'm using 33). Something weird happens to the passing if you go below 31 and it feels more like old school PES passing where every pass bascially has to be perfect, and it becomes a little too monotonous.
So the CPU remian competent in their attack the passing error should be readuced as a relative value to 50. I think this provides a great balance of realistic passing speed, variety in passes and speed, and also puts more significance on every pass being a calculated decision as it should be.

The justification for the change to 45 pass speed says "The finding here is that this brings the ball itself to be more lively. More passes into space and thus an emphasis for ball mastery rather than the ball just sticking to players' feet". For me, that couldn't be less accurate and a lower passing speed is much more effective in providing what is stated.

Another way to achieve the ball not just sticking to a players feet is to increase the FT error. There are hardly ANY loose touches in the game, and in my opnion the value of 65 for FT error needs a big bump. I have been using 99 for FT error and there are still minimal loose touches even in lower leagues. This also increases the amount of loose balls and scrappy passages of play - again there are hardly any in the game which is a shame.

And my final peice of feedback for V3 is that now there is basically no resistance in midfield and it's far too easy to play through and around the opposition midfield. I think this would be due to a combination of the line height, length and marking changes from V2. CBs are also a bit more passive in defending (probably because they can't sprint with 30 SS) and both these things makes the game ridiculously easy now - my first 2 games using V3 were 6-0 and 5-1 wins (Legendary 10 minute halves), before I reverted some values.

Like others I really appreciate all the effort and testing from Matt and the team that goes into these sliders, but I really feel like V3 is a step backwards and a lot of the changes are in the wrong direction, and that's why I want to provide detailed feedback.

I'd be interested to hear what the testers and others thought of the following adjustments:

Sprint speed - 35/35 (V2 values so all players can sprint)
Acceleration - 50/50 (V2 values), OR 48/48 for more natural animations if you don't care about players having a bit more stamina.
Pass error - 50/50 (to enable realistic passing speed and still maintain CPU effectiveness)
Pass speed - 33/33 (more relaistic passing speed)
FT error - 99/99 (more loose touches and loose balls, and the ball isn't glued to players feet as much)

I've just sent that to the testers. I've tested it myself in this stream as well.

First stream: Version 3, WC

<iframe width="750" height="422" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-_vySBSNpeU?si=GAVPNoNdsCfz8Fsh" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Second stream: Version 3, with your adjustments (skip ahead as I forgot to put the FT control in, then also forgot to change the CPU's Roles and continued anyway as I was pressed for time).

I also eventually changed to 35/50 Sprint/Acc. I don't mind it, but could burst at times, not as bad - so jury is still out and I don't mind testing it more.

<iframe width="750" height="422" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/bMRcbMl76Mg?si=8Z-SFHC9LwJiZvzU" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Findings:

I personally have always liked a lower pass error, but low pass speed just kills the ball. The second stream is anchored by the pass error value, not necessarily the pass speed. Being able to use Pass Error at 50 will always result in better play, but at what cost?

I'll need to play some tiki-taka teams, and higher caliber teams at that, but the gameplay was decent. I'll have to play more with 35/50 Sprint/Acc on higher pass speed as well.

With that said, I can't agree with your comment about the findings of Pass Speed 45 being incorrect or "less accurate", as you can see in the first stream it's clear how the ball has to be controlled so much more. You can see clearly in my stream that not every pass is a ping type pass. There is plenty of calm needed, and the ball bobbles on the pitch because the foot contact isn't ideal. That's the difference with lower pass error here, the foot to ball contact is pure a lot of the time, so the pass speed is of course not even playing like a 33, it's like a 40.

You can see at times there are players who legs have to warp into position to receive the passes at the lower pass speed as well. In addition, the passes into space are accurate, none overhit. Despite the FT being so high, the control from every player is immaculate unless there is a decent collision - which was nice to see.

So it's not that findings are "inaccurate", they are just different. There are moments where the driven pass makes the 45 look terrible, but then there are moments where some of the ball physics would never be seen on 33. This is what I'm talking about sacrifices of FIFA.

You made a mention about PES and as a PES vet myself, the ball physics were always king. It was about controlling the ball, and not everyone had the perfect touch. Also like PES, retro specifically, you had to be careful with who you wanted to sprint with and be cautious on what type of passes you would try.

Again, I appreciate the feedback and as you can see I'll test whatever is provided, so the fact you provided something to try made it even more intriguing. Hopefully we can get more eyes from the testers. I know the majority here will side with the lower pass speed + pass error, and that's fine. I hope a middle ground can be found.

[WoodsFC]

Re: EA SPORTS FC25 OS Community Sliders

I dropped the pass speed to 33, went FUMA, and the precision pass feature is still overpowered; it is a manual pass so I don't think it is that big of a deal, there should be skill based mechanics in the game. there are many times where I screw up the direction and/or power and get punished for it.


also i increased the first touch error to 99 and didn't notice a difference, so that's wonderful...

[plevs]

Re: EA SPORTS FC25 OS Community Sliders

I've just sent that to the testers. I've tested it myself in this stream as well.

First stream: Version 3, WC

<iframe width="750" height="422" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-_vySBSNpeU?si=GAVPNoNdsCfz8Fsh" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Second stream: Version 3, with your adjustments (skip ahead as I forgot to put the FT control in, then also forgot to change the CPU's Roles and continued anyway as I was pressed for time).

I also eventually changed to 35/50 Sprint/Acc. I don't mind it, but could burst at times, not as bad - so jury is still out and I don't mind testing it more.

<iframe width="750" height="422" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/bMRcbMl76Mg?si=8Z-SFHC9LwJiZvzU" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Findings:

I personally have always liked a lower pass error, but low pass speed just kills the ball. The second stream is anchored by the pass error value, not necessarily the pass speed. Being able to use Pass Error at 50 will always result in better play, but at what cost?

I'll need to play some tiki-taka teams, and higher caliber teams at that, but the gameplay was decent. I'll have to play more with 35/50 Sprint/Acc on higher pass speed as well.

With that said, I can't agree with your comment about the findings of Pass Speed 45 being incorrect or "less accurate", as you can see in the first stream it's clear how the ball has to be controlled so much more. You can see clearly in my stream that not every pass is a ping type pass. There is plenty of calm needed, and the ball bobbles on the pitch because the foot contact isn't ideal. That's the difference with lower pass error here, the foot to ball contact is pure a lot of the time, so the pass speed is of course not even playing like a 33, it's like a 40.

You can see at times there are players who legs have to warp into position to receive the passes at the lower pass speed as well. In addition, the passes into space are accurate, none overhit. Despite the FT being so high, the control from every player is immaculate unless there is a decent collision - which was nice to see.

So it's not that findings are "inaccurate", they are just different. There are moments where the driven pass makes the 45 look terrible, but then there are moments where some of the ball physics would never be seen on 33. This is what I'm talking about sacrifices of FIFA.

You made a mention about PES and as a PES vet myself, the ball physics were always king. It was about controlling the ball, and not everyone had the perfect touch. Also like PES, retro specifically, you had to be careful with who you wanted to sprint with and be cautious on what type of passes you would try.

Again, I appreciate the feedback and as you can see I'll test whatever is provided, so the fact you provided something to try made it even more intriguing. Hopefully we can get more eyes from the testers. I know the majority here will side with the lower pass speed + pass error, and that's fine. I hope a middle ground can be found.

Thanks Matt, appreciate that you guys take feedback on board and try different things to improve the slider set - also hope that my feedback didn't come accross as overly negative or anything (I'm trying to be constructive). Also realise that everyone wants/values different things from the gameplay experience, and plays the game differently, so finding a set that suits everyone is really impossible.

I've watched your testing videos and my main observation is that the gameplay looks the same to me. I thought that was strange and then I saw you were adjusting the sliders and restarting the match between changes - this isn't going to change the sliders from what you loaded into that match with and tweaking sliders during a match even if you restart it won't have any effect at all. Any adjustments won't take effect until the next match you play - it's really stupid but that's just how it is in FC25.

So while I really appreciate you trying to test the values I suggested, you were actually still using the sliders you loaded into the match with, so your observations/comments are placebo.

You'll need to set the sliders in the settings screen before going to matchday for the changes to take effect - suggest using all the new values together rather than testing one at a time. You should notice a more significant difference than what is evident in your video.

One thing I did find really interesting in your videos is that the higher pass speed did seem a lot more calm than it does for me, and a slower game speed in general, it actually looks quite good. I think it's been mentioned in this thread before, but the camera settings a player uses seems to have an effect on how the game plays and is can be percieved, which is pretty weird. This just reinforced that for me as this looks nothing like the how the V3 sliders play for me - I use the Tele Broadcast camera with 20 height and 0 zoom.

I'll see if I can record some gameplay to show the difference.

[plevs]

Re: EA SPORTS FC25 OS Community Sliders

I've recorded playing the same game twice, first game with V3 Legendary sliders, and second with the adjustments I suggested to show the difference:

Sprint speed - 35/35 (V2 values so all players can sprint)
Acceleration - 50/50 (V2 values), OR 48/48 for more natural animations if you don't care about players having a bit more stamina.
Pass error - 50/50 (to enable realistic passing speed and still maintain CPU effectiveness)
Pass speed - 33/33 (more relaistic passing speed)
FT error - 99/99 (more loose touches and loose balls, and the ball isn't glued to players feet as much)

Provided some thoughts and commentary on the difference between matches as I was recording:

<iframe width="750" height="422" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dn8Zc9_kcTI?si=zZm_HGnLslaEm4Fr" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[g98smith]

Re: EA SPORTS FC25 OS Community Sliders

This is good feedback, as was your previous post. I'll preface my response with an apology of how layered it will be as there are so many variables that have to be considered now when troubleshooting.

First off, this looks to be against 4-2-3-1, one of the worst formations in FC25 because the lack of a box-to-box midfielder on preset tactics, rather the handicapping presence of two holding midfielders.

Nonetheless, we definitely spent time with lower league teams (that's a lot of my game-time) and 30 deep line matchups. The issue that I saw was how deep the midfield was, practically touching the defensive line. At the time, the height value was at 62. It wasn't until it was moved to 58 that there started to be some better spacing. In addition, the 58 worked well for those who had really high defensive lines such as 95.

In the video above, two of those goals are counters, the defensive line 30 won't step up to that value until the 60's gameplay slider or higher acc, or higher marking. Even then, the biggest issue is defenders not meeting attackers regardless of slider value.

When playing with a gradual build-up of numbers, such as not playing directly into the striker and turning, the defensive midfield can recover in the height 55-60 range relative to the 40-42 line length. The 3rd and 4th goal the defensive line is there, but get too tight and have no support from the two holding mids. If this is WC, I'd suggest acceleration discrepancy and try to recreate it, but honestly, games against a 4-2-3-1 are pretty poor. This is why I will change those teams to a 4-1-4-1 with box-to-box midfielders.

We need depth on both sides of the ball. Line Height gameplay slider works as an upfield pressure mechanic. It pushes/squeezes midfielders through, and if it's too high, it won't release enough of that pressure to let those midfielders back in. This is why some sets, and the sim mode for example uses lengths under 40 as we had before. The issue with that value was that there was too much instant retreating and jumbling up in the midfield which gave up more and more space.

For reference, here's s screenshot from one of the main games I played versus Burton Albion who are a 30 depth, and I'm using 62 height. It looks decent, and I'm on board with it:



Play a different game against a 95 depth team with 62 line height, and now the midfield has become a single flat unit with the defensive line.



So, we're in a conundrum here with the Height value. We go too high on 30 depth teams, then we send the higher depth teams out of the equation. In addition, the higher height will also prevent those midfielders from tracking backwards enough, unless we want to really reduce length again.

The tweaks made were not just for WC, the main change there is Acc, Length Discrepancy and Marking.

The Sprint 30 was an agreement that we had just increased pass speed and acceleration, we need to ensure the game doesn't become too fast. We were on Sprint 35 for a while, but that really started to feel like it was just a sprint fest. Gone was the gradual walk-jog-sprint aspect that FC25 started out of the box with. The only time that was recaptured was with 30 Sprint, not even 32 Sprint could reestablish that pattern. So, the testing was done with the higher acceleration to act as a modifier of the lower sprint, so we can maintain the gradual movements.

So as you can see we're fighting an uphill battle against proper movements, and essentially defensive and midfield depth that covers all bases. This post-update has resulted in the striker not being met by the defenders as often unless we really drop width well below 48 (we were at 45 for a while as well) like in Version 2. Even then there is no guarantee, and then we run the risk of our outside mids venturing off to the center of the pitch too early. Even on 48 you can see in those videos how the central midfielders get caught too tight.

For Pass Speed, 45 just came to have a lot of benefits. In essence it brought back mastering the ball, not just having it stuck to your feet. The best being passes into space from the CPU, more deflections overall, different types of deflections, and most importantly the ball not being stuck underneath players so they aren't unrealistically striking the ball where their foot would never meet the same type of power IRL.

From the video, @WoodsFC , I'd guess you're using R1/precision pass on the majority of those passes? If that's your choice, I'd suggest drop user pass speed significantly, to something like 35 or 38, because those driven passes are taking the 45 to a 55-60 level and the FT Control value isn't punishing enough on 60.

Overall, I hope you understand how we got to where we are - and why some decisions were made. It's not to say we won't change them, it's just that if you provide examples, you have to know that there is a rule of opposites that follow where those examples or suggestions won't add up. Like any FIFA/FC, we have to sacrifice some things and maybe have to modify some things to get more out of the game. This year is filled with the need to modify to your personal preference and what you like. You're not playing or testing in the same fashion here. If 90% of the teams you face are going to be 30 depth teams, then please, change the value to what you want or already know that works.

Firstly, really appreciate the detailed response Matt. You make some great points regarding the impact of formations/roles and midfield spacing/depth.

One thing I would say is that you mentioned a couple of times teams that have a very high defensive line (95) - but even teams that are set to “High” by default, such as Liverpool (who are notorious for having a very high line) still only have the value set to 65. Unless it can dynamically increase during a game? If so that’s a feature I was completely unaware of. Either way, completely agree that this is one of those classic “pick your poison” situations; personally, given the majority of teams (in the lower leagues at least) seem to be either “Deep” (30) or “Balanced” (50), it seems preferable to me to use a higher line height slider value - I’ll definitely give 62 a try later today and feed back. Would you suggest pairing that with a slightly reduced line length value (i.e. 38-40) as a consequence to release some of the upfield pressure?

Completely agree with you on wanting to recapture the walk-jog-sprint animations that we started with, but unfortunately I’m personally seeing too many instances on 30 Sprint where it’s more like walk-jog-jog, especially with centre backs. I think they need more of a helping hand in trying to recover and the Acc bump isn’t quite enough to do it. As ever, it’s a very fine balancing act which I can completely understand.

Pass Speed is definitely going to come down to personal preference, especially depending on how much the individual utilises RB/R1 driven passes - I tend to use those quite a lot, so 45 is mayhem for me. I agree with you that anything too low kills the ball; personally I think 38-40 is the sweet spot, paired with 50-55 error - perhaps this is the middle ground you mentioned? One thing I haven’t experimented with up to now is the FT error, so it’s interesting to see the feedback from others - will definitely give this a try later too.

Would just like to add it’s great to see this level of productive, constructive discussion which is absolutely what this thread should be about. Cheers all.

[Milo1990]

Re: EA SPORTS FC25 OS Community Sliders

Can someone please explain to me how to make the AI make more passing errors? I've been playing as Liverpool v Arsenal, probably 20 times using Pass Error of 1-99 (using v3 sliders) and the AI have a passing accuracy of 90-92% on WC.
It's starting to bend my brain. I just want the AI to play with realistic pass accuracy and the pass error slider seems to have zero impact.

[Sylvioros]

Re: EA SPORTS FC25 OS Community Sliders

Can someone please explain to me how to make the AI make more passing errors? I've been playing as Liverpool v Arsenal, probably 20 times using Pass Error of 1-99 (using v3 sliders) and the AI have a passing accuracy of 90-92% on WC.
It's starting to bend my brain. I just want the AI to play with realistic pass accuracy and the pass error slider seems to have zero impact.

By decreasing pass speed. However, Pass Error and Pass Speed and relative to LH (Line Length, Line Height). The more compact the players are, the fewer mistakes they will make.

90-92% for 5-star clubs is kinda realistic, specially in matches with 5-6min halves.

[Milo1990]

Re: EA SPORTS FC25 OS Community Sliders

By decreasing pass speed. However, Pass Error and Pass Speed and relative to LH (Line Length, Line Height). The more compact the players are, the fewer mistakes they will make.

90-92% for 5-star clubs is kinda realistic, specially in matches with 5-6min halves.

Ah that's interesting. Thanks for the colour.