Evoweb Gameplay Lab, FIFA 20 (Frostbite FIFAs?)

darkoj2007 said:
mate I liked the way gameplay feels. my two points are:
1. With manual passing I have to reduce passing error for me and cpu to 10 becouse passes are really weird even with top class players the made a lot of mistakes, first time passes were almost impossible.
2.Players need to get more closer, I mean mine players vs cpu players. there is a lot of space in the pitch especially on flanks.

Other than that amazing gameplay.
P.S I used only these 3 mods inside the zip.
Click to expand...
Good to hear. Yeah I agree, I’m completely reworking the passing error. I’ve got it playing much better with more depth to it. Using lots more of the variables vs the first time.
 
On a different note, I have come to a conclusion, and possibly a suggestion.

There are no MAGIC values. Like GIVEN_VALUE to 10 and that's it. There's ranges. Some might like 5, some might like 20. They all work, it's minor adjustments and personal preferences.

What I am starting to think is that maybe we should have a shared Google Spreadsheet table, with Name, Description, default values and proposed values, so that anybody can go there and see who is testing what and what values are being used.

For example, I have used @Anth James ' files, but could not be sure what values he touched and what values were left as default. The only way to find out would be to have 2 instances of Frosty Editor open (which is not possible, I think) and compare defualt values and the values in the project.

I am just throwing this one out here...
 
papinho81 said:
I would love to bring them closer when defending, especially the midfield and the d line (a bit like the length slider would do). I would like to have high d line teams to actually keep a high line instead of dropping like they do too often. I would like to awake the zombies, I mean by that having players more involved into zonal defending (where the ball and the danger is) than one man marking. I ve been able to awake the zombies with extreme values but completely lost the balance. I am far from getting something good but I am making slow progress at least.
Click to expand...

I am having good results, or at least FEELING an improvement by editing the Pressing Values and Contain distance. They don't tell ALL teams to use pressing as a tactic constantly. They just ramp up the pressing for all teams. Meaning that everybody will just press harder now, but if you face a team that parks the bus, they will still do that. They will just be more aggressive closing down spaces.

Give this fbmod a try, putting it BELOW all 3 files by Anth James: http://www.mediafire.com/file/cso8urd1yf99j6s/Pressing.fbmod/file
 
Rafter84 said:
On a different note, I have come to a conclusion, and possibly a suggestion.

There are no MAGIC values. Like GIVEN_VALUE to 10 and that's it. There's ranges. Some might like 5, some might like 20. They all work, it's minor adjustments and personal preferences.

What I am starting to think is that maybe we should have a shared Google Spreadsheet table, with Name, Description, default values and proposed values, so that anybody can go there and see who is testing what and what values are being used.

For example, I have used @Anth James ' files, but could not be sure what values he touched and what values were left as default. The only way to find out would be to have 2 instances of Frosty Editor open (which is not possible, I think) and compare defualt values and the values in the project.

I am just throwing this one out here...
Click to expand...
I think that was probably the original purpose of the thread and a really good idea. I’ll need to see what I can do with it, the only issue is when you go down the rabbit hole and start making changes you can lose track a little and your base becomes what you were working on before instead of default. With the passing error I’m reworking for example, it’s more a combination of different files and how they work with each other.
 
Rafter84 said:
I am having good results, or at least FEELING an improvement by editing the Pressing Values and Contain distance. They don't tell ALL teams to use pressing as a tactic constantly. They just ramp up the pressing for all teams. Meaning that everybody will just press harder now, but if you face a team that parks the bus, they will still do that. They will just be more aggressive closing down spaces.

Give this fbmod a try, putting it BELOW all 3 files by Anth James: http://www.mediafire.com/file/cso8urd1yf99j6s/Pressing.fbmod/file
Click to expand...
Would you mind sharing a project file too? So we can have a look at specific variables and values?
 
Anth James said:
I think that was probably the original purpose of the thread and a really good idea. I’ll need to see what I can do with it, the only issue is when you go down the rabbit hole and start making changes you can lose track a little and your base becomes what you were working on before instead of default. With the passing error I’m reworking for example, it’s more a combination of different files and how they work with each other.
Click to expand...

Sure. My thought was that having default values saved in an external file for the sake of comparison with our own changes and changes from other users can definitely help.
 
Rafter84 said:
On a different note, I have come to a conclusion, and possibly a suggestion.

There are no MAGIC values. Like GIVEN_VALUE to 10 and that's it. There's ranges. Some might like 5, some might like 20. They all work, it's minor adjustments and personal preferences.

What I am starting to think is that maybe we should have a shared Google Spreadsheet table, with Name, Description, default values and proposed values, so that anybody can go there and see who is testing what and what values are being used.

For example, I have used @Anth James ' files, but could not be sure what values he touched and what values were left as default. The only way to find out would be to have 2 instances of Frosty Editor open (which is not possible, I think) and compare defualt values and the values in the project.

I am just throwing this one out here...
Click to expand...

I am using such a spreadsheet myself to keep track of what I tried and it is indeed a very good idea to have one shared.
Like @Anth James , said the original purpose of the thread was more about sharing discoveries than full gameplay mods. As much I am sur we all want a simulation, we likely and legetimatetely have different conception of what is a simulation.

Testing gameplay takes a lot of time and reporting what the x variable adds even more time to a testing session (I have myself stopped filling my spreadsheet because of that lately) BUT it actually save time for the OTHERS who will not have to reinvent the wheel.
I can't incite you enough to make your research more transparent and to take the extra time to share it (again even negative results).
The original format I proposed was may be not a good one (I am not good at those things). If anyone has a more efficient/nice way of putting things, that would be really welcomed.

I can share the spreadsheet I am using later today and let me know then if you have better format ideas.
 
Last edited:
papinho81 said:
I am using such a spreadsheet myself to keep track of what I tried and it is indeed a very good idea to have one shared.
Like @Anth James , said the original purpose of the thread was more about sharing discoveries than full gameplay mods. As much I am sur we all want a simulation, we likely and legetimatetely have different conception of what is a simulation.

Testing gameplay takes a lot of time and reporting what the x variable adds even more time to a testing session (I have myself stopped filling my spreadsheet because of that lately) BUT it actually save time for the OTHERS who will not have to reinvent the wheel.
I can't incite you enough to make your research more transparent and to take the extra time to share it (again even negative results).
The original format I proposed was may be not a good one (I am not good at those things). If anyone has a more efficient/nice way of putting things, that would be really welcomed.

I can share the spreadsheet I am using later today and let me know then if you have better format ideas.
Click to expand...
I agree and I'm all for sharing which is why I'm uploading the project files as well. I'd say most of what is being discovered will probably be more useful for FIFA 21 than FIFA 20 which is why the more we can find out as a group the better. I'm not great with organisation myself, I have a very unorganised way of testing and I confuse myself half the time haha, but I'm happy to make some notes as I go of what files do. I think this afternoon I got up to 15 different test mods and I can only tell you what's in the latest one haha.
 
Oh and I'm also happy to help anyone who is learning what some of the files I have used do (to the best of my knowledge anyway).
 
Rafter84 said:
Happy to share. Please do let me know how the mod feels for you, I have multiplied Pressing values roughly x2. If too passive, we can always try x5 and see what happens! 😅
Click to expand...

I will give it a go tonight!
What is the variable responsible for this pressing thing?
 
papinho81 said:
I will give it a go tonight!
What is the variable responsible for this pressing thing?
Click to expand...

Never mind, I found out. I didn't dive into those cpu files yet but this cpuaimarker looks quite promising. I wander if by cpuai it means players from the cpu team or cpu players in general? It would be great if it could be the second one.

By the way, it is possible to open two frosty editors window and to compare the changed values with default ones. It doesn't mean we should not share a progress spreadsheet.

Here is the spreadsheet I am using:
Everyone can edit it and/or suggest a better formatting. Once we settle on something format wise we are happy with, I will add the link to one of the opening posts.

Note that I haven't filled it religiously lately as I am actually adding every variable I want to test to the cheat engine table because it makes testing way more flexible, but adding the variables to the CT plus keeping a record of my tests on the spreadsheet just takes a lot of time.
 
Last edited:
Rafter84 said:
Wow, if our efforts here end up having an effect on the official gameplay, it would be crazy!

If I had just ONE piece of feedback, or request, it would definitely be FUT playing differently than Offline/simulation. I understand superquick animations make for more responsive passing, but that's definitely parting away from reality and its simulation.

Sometimes if you "play" a fancy-pass with your central defender, the guy will actually pull his leg back and then kick the ball. That's not fancy, that's what happens with every pass actually, and it drives me crazy that that is not the default animation in some cases, instead of the move-foot-forward-ball-flies animation.
Click to expand...

@Mathgamer I would like to add to this excellent post that the 1vs1 thing which is new to fifa20 is from a simulation point of view a terrible thing. Football and more particularly the defending side of the game has to be a team effort. Having AI teammates and CPU ai players far from the action switching off like if someone removed their batteries like they do now is 1) looking bad 2) affecting the gameplay in a bad way. A game that could be otherwise close to excellent is really plagued by this.

A naive question for your contact. Is there a switch on/off somewhere in the game files to move away from this 1vs1 thing? I remember the beta was not like that.
 
papinho81 said:
@Mathgamer I would like to add to this excellent post that the 1vs1 thing which is new to fifa20 is from a simulation point of view a terrible thing. Football and more particularly the defending side of the game has to be a team effort. Having AI teammates and CPU ai players far from the action switching off like if someone removed their batteries like they do now is 1) looking bad 2) affecting the gameplay in a bad way. A game that could be otherwise close to excellent is really plagued by this.

A naive question for your contact. Is there a switch on/off somewhere in the game files to move away from this 1vs1 thing? I remember the beta was not like that.
Click to expand...

Okay, I'll pass the feedback. Thanks. We'll see gameplay news this week, maybe.
 
Anth James said:
@papinho81 You having much luck with the positioning?
Click to expand...

:LMAO: I am making reaaaaaally slow progress trying to figure out what those 0->7 dots stands for with the defensiveLinePosWeightMappingTable variable.
That's three evening already I am on this one and I feel it can be quite promising, that's why I am insisting this much. I am also trying to see if the X values have any impact too.
What I am seeing so far with the Y0=100 (default is 0) the dline of the team without the ball is running up like crazy if I play a long ball back to my keeper when in the other half of the pitch. They outrun the strikers and put them offside. This doesn't happen on default, they accompany the strikers.
With Y7=100, the defending team doesn't do that instead they mark much closer the ball carrier in their own half and midfielders are tracking much deeper in their own half. In addition to that if I change X7 from 1 to -10000 (don't ask me why -10000 :D ) the attackers of the defensive team are dropping much deeper to help the defense instead of them staying at the midfield line.
The variable also does affects the offensive runs like the [0] impact the full back runs among things.

May be, may be... the 0->7 dots represent the ball positions on the pitch with 0 being the ball is in the box of the other side of the pitch and 7 the ball is in the own box and Y says how much the players should react.

I am trying to have a systematic approach but it is not easy. I am finding I am more able to analyse what is going on on the pitch when using two controllers, one with switch set to auto that I almost don't touch.

EDIT: If you want tot test a bit the potential of this, keep the X values to default and change the Y to 1000 for the 8 points of the above variable in the gp_positioningformation_defensivebaseline_runtime files. You will see midfielder tracking much more in the box and way more movements (particularly defensive movements) throughout the pitch.
 
Last edited:
papinho81 said:
:LMAO: I am making reaaaaaally slow progress trying to figure out what those 0->7 dots stands for with the defensiveLinePosWeightMappingTable variable.
That's three evening already I am on this one and I feel it can be quite promising, that's why I am insisting this much. I am also trying to see if the X values have any impact too.
What I am seeing so far with the Y0=100 (default is 0) the dline of the team without the ball is running up like crazy if I play a long ball back to my keeper when in the other half of the pitch. They outrun the strikers and put them offside. This doesn't happen on default, they accompany the strikers.
With Y7=100, the defending team doesn't do that instead they mark much closer the ball carrier in their own half and midfielders are tracking much deeper in their own half. In addition to that if I change X7 from 1 to -10000 (don't ask me why -10000 :D ) the attackers of the defensive team are dropping much deeper to help the defense instead of them staying at the midfield line.
The variable also does affects the offensive runs like the [0] impact the full back runs among things.

May be, may be... the 0->7 dots represent the ball positions on the pitch with 0 being the ball is in the box of the other side of the pitch and 7 the ball is in the own box and Y says how much the players should react.

I am trying to have a systematic approach but it is not easy. I am finding I am more able to analyse what is going on on the pitch when using two controllers, one with switch set to auto that I almost don't touch.

EDIT: If you want tot test a bit the potential of this, keep the X values to default and change the Y to 1000 for the 8 points of the above variable in the gp_positioningformation_defensivebaseline_runtime files. You will see midfielder tracking much more in the box and way more movements (particularly defensive movements) throughout the pitch.
Click to expand...
Sounds really promising, but very complicated hahaha. I will give that a try and see. I know how time consuming it can all be!!
 
I'm starting to get there with the passing, I should have something ready pretty soon I think! I have the ball much more free now, lots more unpredictable play where the ball itself is not so easy to get under control for a team. The challenge is to get the right balance with error vs realism. I'm finding if you have the error values low then its impact is not much and the game is overall much faster and more arcade. Too much error and it just frustrates you.

Edit: I think I have found a balance!

@papinho81 I gave those values a try. I see what you're saying! I quite like it, even with that extreme value, I hadn't really noticed much negativity about what it brought, have you? I definitely saw more movement and tracking into the box - great work.
 
Last edited:
papinho81 said:
@Anth James and @Rafter84 can I add the mods you recently shared to the thread list? Or would you prefer I wait you release a final version later, when you think they are not beta anymore?
Click to expand...

For me personally, I'd rather wait and have something closer to what we want.
But it also depends on if anyone tested it. If you did and thought it made an impact, maybe you can add it and we'll update later on.

If the impact is negligible, just don't bother... Right?
 
Rafter84 said:
For me personally, I'd rather wait and have something closer to what we want.
But it also depends on if anyone tested it. If you did and thought it made an impact, maybe you can add it and we'll update later on.

If the impact is negligible, just don't bother... Right?
Click to expand...

I tried your ball physics fouls mod together with the pressing one and I think they have an impact, particularly the pressing one. Markers were definitely closer to the ball carrier which I liked.
I think it can work well together with the positioning thing I am trying to improve.
 
Rafter84 said:
For me personally, I'd rather wait and have something closer to what we want.
But it also depends on if anyone tested it. If you did and thought it made an impact, maybe you can add it and we'll update later on.

If the impact is negligible, just don't bother... Right?
Click to expand...
Yeah I gave it a go too and agree, it got them closer to the ball carrier and more engaged. Good find!
 
papinho81 said:
I tried your ball physics fouls mod together with the pressing one and I think they have an impact, particularly the pressing one. Markers were definitely closer to the ball carrier which I liked.
I think it can work well together with the positioning thing I am trying to improve.
Click to expand...

What about fouls? To me, some games have many, some have few, but overall, i see more fouls...

Anth James said:
Yeah I gave it a go too and agree, it got them closer to the ball carrier and more engaged. Good find!
Click to expand...

Last test I made, I lowered Contain Distance even more. And I'm ready to test negative values! 😅

Pressing has 2 values: I suspect one is for the ball handler and one is for the rest of the team, but it's just my guess, and it's not so easy to test

I'm still not 100% happy about ball physics: many many variables and some 'break' the game. But if used carefully can have a HUGE impact (Constant Grip)
 
Last edited:
papinho81 said:
This a link toward a cheat engine table that allows you changing and testing gameplay values without quitting the game:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/yv1jt7stlrfdevr/FIFA20.CT/file

How to use it: Open your game (can be with frosties), double click on the ct table, it will attach automatically to the game.

The original idea, the design, the code and many variables are from @manmachine and some variables have been added by myself strictly recycling the code provided by manmachine.
It is very much a work in progress and anyone addition to the table is welcomed. Early added variable have a quite simple design while more recent ones comes with a script entry that allows quickly resetting default values (very much welcomed).
If you want to use the table and see values different from the default expected values, open the script (double click) of the variable you wan to edit and uncomment the line define... with the frosty offset and comment the other define... with the non frosty offset or vice et versa (like here:
View attachment 51539
)

The CT was designed on the 12.05.2020 version of the game and there are chances that offsets are differents in different game versions. Let us know if that's not the case.
Click to expand...

I'm bit embarrassed, but, while I managed to attach it to the game and it would show the values used, I wasn't able to apply live changes to the game... I'd love to, it would make testing much quicker...

I "activated" the script by clicking on the line (red X), changed values... But didn't get the expected results. I tested with ball size, made it 0.01, but the ball would still be regular size, just half-disappeared in the grass...
 
Rafter84 said:
I'm bit embarrassed, but, while I managed to attach it to the game and it would show the values used, I wasn't able to apply live changes to the game... I'd love to, it would make testing much quicker...

I "activated" the script by clicking on the line (red X), changed values... But didn't get the expected results. I tested with ball size, made it 0.01, but the ball would still be regular size, just half-disappeared in the grass...
Click to expand...

Did you restart the match after you changed the value?

Also does the default display for say ball size match your expectation: 0.365 I think? Depending on if you edited with frosty the files you want to test in CE you might need to open the corresponding script and uncomment the correct define... line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom