Evoweb Gameplay Lab, FIFA 20 (Frostbite FIFAs?)

I've made a few small edits based on the info in the thread (with a couple of slight adjustments) and I've been using them for quite a few games in career mode and I'm really happy with the change it's made on the game. The changes I've made are what @papinho81 suggested in regards to ball mass and ball roll friction, however I also added a slight bit of extra ball density. The only other adjustment I made was based on @manmachine driven pass speed find. I lowered the driven ground pass speeds by 20%.

With this combination I've noticed the following changes -

- Pass selection has become much more important. Due to the slightly heavier ball you really have to think about the elevation and power on your passes, meaning you need to use the different pass types available in the game. I've noticed many more interceptions in the middle of the pitch and more of a midfield game. Also, the driven pass speed is now slower, but still faster than the normal pass, so it becomes a necessary and useful option.

- Headers are much more useful now. I've seen some great headed goals and long ball contests in the air seem more balanced and rewarding.

- The shooting physics for me are more 'reliable'. I don't feel that floatiness when shooting, taking a shot feels more satisfying. I've really seen a lot more variety in the types of goals being scored from user and CPU.

- As papinho said, the ball feels more alive, a little more free and this adds some more physicality to the play.

I'm using OS Sliders V3 with the only difference to shot error (I use 65 instead of 70 for both CPU and User), legendary, normal speed, tactical defending, assisted passing and semi shooting (although I’m thinking about moving to manual shooting for some extra control). For me, the game plays really well now. Thanks to all for their findings on frosty editor, it's no easy task! I've uploaded the changes if anyone wants to give it a try.

https://mega.nz/file/UEFgwQJK#H470DO7ZfPeht2adxbg8-zutagy1FHf_9ou0sSNlnXI
 
Last edited:
I have decided to let the physic and movement for a while as I am content with it, players floatiness/slidiness put aside. Shoots are some time too powerful but overall it better fit my taste than the default game.
I am starting to enjoy a bit less the game because of its core issue with positioning, marking and aggressivity. The time I have (and the CPU have) on the ball and the easy passes options in key areas of the pitch (mostly at the centre of the pitch from one box to the other) are sucking the fun out of me. I played some FIFA16 (which I haven't done since weeks) and man, I needed to think quickly of what would be my next move which resulted in me taking a lot of bad decisions and ultimately leading to more rewarding passing play.

So I have decided to have a look at it. I usually (well always since 3 years) play with the Pro cam which is not ideal for giving a general overview of the pitch. Of course I could not miss the absolute absence of marking of my strikers when they slide between the D line and the midfielders. It has almost always happened in FIFA, but here the time and space you have is just too much. It must go.
So I launched a couple of CPU vs CPU games with the co-op cam mostly between EPL side and I was choked about how rigid the tactics have become in FIFA. The CBs, no matter the height of the defensive line in the tactic, never cross the midfield line when their team have the ball. So in offensive phases, with attacking minded teams like Liverpool, you have all the players supporting the attack (including the CDM) except the 2 CBs who are literally sticking to the midfield line, letting completely free the opposition striker with acre of space between the CDM and the CBs. Why? It is not like that in 16, one of the two CBs follows the ST.

Fixing these two things (if possible) would significantly improve my gaming experience.
 
Last edited:
Anyone has any clue about the tactics system introduced in fifa 19? There's little/no reference to the various tactics options in the gp database files. Stuff like number of players in the box, offensive & defensive mentalities. Can they be altered in the legacy db? I know there's a table where each team is assigned these options, but I'm not looking at changing the assigned tactics for each team, but the tactics themselves, as I find both "balanced" and "high pressure" tactics equally ridiculous on the pitch for example.
 
The most promising project! Keep it up. :WORSHIP:

I don't know about gameplay files, but it would be interesting to find a way to edit stats (Squads.txt) via locale.ini. Balance/Agility/Ballcontrol have a huge weight in this. Editing them via RDBM+Excel is not fast.

Here you have some strings to edit GK stats via locale. Try to set them in 80 (0-100). Better animations and performance.
Code: 
[]
GOALKEEPER_GK_POSITIONING=90
GOALKEEPER_GK_HANDLING=80
GOALKEEPER_GK_DIVING=80
GOALKEEPER_GK_REFLEXES=80
GOALKEEPER_GK_KICKING=90

I would like to find the rest of the stats strings. All players stats are overrated...
 
manmachine said:
Anyone has any clue about the tactics system introduced in fifa 19? There's little/no reference to the various tactics options in the gp database files. Stuff like number of players in the box, offensive & defensive mentalities. Can they be altered in the legacy db? I know there's a table where each team is assigned these options, but I'm not looking at changing the assigned tactics for each team, but the tactics themselves, as I find both "balanced" and "high pressure" tactics equally ridiculous on the pitch for example.
Click to expand...

I briefly tried to find relevant files without success. Legacy lua files may be?

Concerning those tactics, the stamina depletion is something I wish we could find as of now teams that uses the team press and overload the ball side are at huge disadvantage. They are burned already at the half time.
 
papinho81 said:
I briefly tried to find relevant files without success. Legacy lua files may be?

Concerning those tactics, the stamina depletion is something I wish we could find as of now teams that uses the team press and overload the ball side are at huge disadvantage. They are burned already at the half time.
Click to expand...

There's also a tacticsMappingTableForMaxDistFromFormationPos table in "gp_positioning_markingdist_runtime" that I found. And I think the Y axis is a reference number for various tactical options, that's why I wonder where on earth are those defined in the first place.
 
@manmachine I did a search for files that could control the tactics but didn't find anything in the Legacy files and only very few variables in the gp files. It could be coded in the exe.

Edit: The only thing I ve found is the default_mentalities table from the DB.
The D pad tactics are only mentionned once in the exe, all in the same block around (0)59db960.
 
Last edited:
manmachine said:
Here's a first test modding passing only and nothing else. But i included the slight increase to the ball size and the pitch friction change.
Click to expand...
Is there any chance this could be supplied as a Frosty project file please? I would love to add these changes into my own personal tweaks.
Anth James said:
I've made a few small edits based on the info in the thread (with a couple of slight adjustments) and I've been using them for quite a few games in career mode and I'm really happy with the change it's made on the game. The changes I've made are what @papinho81 suggested in regards to ball mass and ball roll friction, however I also added a slight bit of extra ball density. The only other adjustment I made was based on @manmachine driven pass speed find. I lowered the driven ground pass speeds by 20%.
Click to expand...
Same with this one please!

I refuse to give up on FIFA - there are so many wonderfully organic moments thanks to the general freedom of movement.
 
I agree with @Chris Davies , there's a lot of good things in this game. I will not give up (yet) either. It just that it take so much time to test things, but we just started don't we?
Sometimes I feel like I have the time to try things, I open the editor and search for potentially interesting variables. I stop on one file then think this one variable could be intresting but it looks complicate. Then I open another file, I stop on another variable, then move to another files ect, ect... I can spend half an hour or more like that and in the end I test absolutely nothing...

Just curious, does everyone has thrown away the walk speed "fix"?

Personnally I am still using it as I find it really makes for a more believeable defensive game (until we manage to figure out what makes the defsense so passive more accurately), at the cost of an increased overall speed yes (bearable for me) and the adavantage bug with the ref :)
I think what the fix tells us is that players are often walking when they shouldn't.
 
Last edited:
Chris Davies said:
Is there any chance this could be supplied as a Frosty project file please? I would love to add these changes into my own personal tweaks.
I refuse to give up on FIFA - there are so many wonderfully organic moments thanks to the general freedom of movement.
Click to expand...

Here it is:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/158x6fbpq9blql6/fifa20_gp_shotpass.fbproject/file

Files in kickpass slow down passes and a couple of cross types, files in kickerror increase contextual errors, in physics it's just the ball size and pitch tweaks, in cpuai I just try to make the cpu try more shots.
 
I tested this one tonight:

gp_positioning_rundistfromformation_runtime
maxBestDistFromFormation [0-7] only tested the X: default: from 0.0016 to 0.875 by 0.125 Tested: all down to 0; all up to 1.
Observation: It seems like it has an effect on the positioning rigidity of the players on the pitch. With all the eight X values down to 0, it looks like players are more aware of oponents runs, that they also follow better. Overall it looks much more dynamic (may be too much).
I have absolutely no clue about what the [0] to [7] stand for though. The position on the pitch from the CB to the ST? The distance/importance of danger?... Probably pure placebo. Needs more testing following the recommendations of @manmachine few post after.
 
Last edited:
papinho81 said:
I tested this one tonight:

gp_positioning_rundistfromformation_runtime
maxBestDistFromFormation [0-7] only tested the X: default: from 0.0016 to 0.875 by 0.125 Tested: all down to 0; all up to 1.
Observation: It seems like it has an effect on the positioning rigidity of the players on the pitch. With all the eight X values down to 0, it looks like players are more aware of oponents runs, that they also follow better. Overall it looks much more dynamic (may be too much).
I have absolutely no clue about what the [0] to [7] stand for though. The position on the pitch from the CB to the ST? The distance/importance of danger?...
Click to expand...

Capture00.JPG

Does this help? Yeah, I don't think I have a clue either. Not sure I notice any effect. Is it for the team in possesion or the team defending. Marking values and pressing mentalities seem to control the shape of the team defending. And then you have line settings which do have an effect. So I don't know about this one. Sometimes a winger will get the ball and run down the wing and then wait for the rest to catchup. Maybe it's just runs like that?
 
Last edited:
manmachine said:
View attachment 45555

Does this help? Yeah, I don't think I have a clue either. Not sure I notice any effect. Is it for the team in possesion or the team defending. Marking values and pressing mentalities seem to control the shape of the team defending. And then you have line settings which do have an effect. So I don't know about this one.
Click to expand...

The file I tried is the rundistfromformation without x or z. I think the x and z stands for axes in the 3 dimensional space. If that's correct, the x version may control how far away a player can be from his position along the length axes and the z version along the width axes or vice versa.

The one without the x or z could be more general. The boxes 0 to 7 have their Y values set to 0.

I ve tested it with CPU vs CPU game between Arsenal and Man City using the co-op cam. I think it affects both the attacking and the defending positioning. Not really the positioning but the variation in the positioning. I ve seen Aguero doing deep runs toward his midfielders with the ball at the foot. Marhez and sterling are following their respective fbs really deep in the defense. De bruyne, when his team is defending and the ball is not on his side will join the others midfielders more easily instead of standing and looking right and left.

It could be placebo I concede, but it really looked way more chaotic to me.
 
I still can't see me playing this in the future, but at least there are some random scrappy plays with the tweaks to passing and shooting.

 
papinho81 said:
I tested this one tonight:

gp_positioning_rundistfromformation_runtime
maxBestDistFromFormation [0-7] only tested the X: default: from 0.0016 to 0.875 by 0.125 Tested: all down to 0; all up to 1.
Observation: It seems like it has an effect on the positioning rigidity of the players on the pitch. With all the eight X values down to 0, it looks like players are more aware of oponents runs, that they also follow better. Overall it looks much more dynamic (may be too much).
I have absolutely no clue about what the [0] to [7] stand for though. The position on the pitch from the CB to the ST? The distance/importance of danger?...
Click to expand...

After testing this more and watching the recording it seems like it controls the runs of the players of the attacking team. With all the values at 0 you can see midfielders including CDM doing runs in the opposition penalty area way more than with the default values. As a consequence the player that mark them are trying to track them which brings more chaos. Not sure this is something interesting.
 
papinho81 said:
After testing this more and watching the recording it seems like it controls the runs of the players of the attacking team. With all the values at 0 you can see midfielders including CDM doing runs in the opposition penalty area way more than with the default values. As a consequence the player that mark them are trying to track them which brings more chaos. Not sure this is something interesting.
Click to expand...

I think the actual values are on the Y axis. Usually the values that go from 0 to 1 are a reference to something else (difficulty levels are like that elsewhere). I could be wrong of course and there could be exceptions. For example the default attacking aggressiveness (another term for the run frequency in the db) is set to 0.5 in another file. So it could be that when it is set to 0.5 the corresponding Y axis value is the max length of runs. I think it makes sense cause that's what the run frequency controls. If that's the case then it's not a particularly interesting table as you can already reduce the length of runs with the run freq. value.
 
Last edited:
manmachine said:
I think the actual values are on the Y axis. Usually the values that go from 0 to 1 are a reference to something else (difficulty levels are like that elsewhere). I could be wrong of course and there could be exceptions. For example the default attacking aggressiveness (another term for the run frequency in the db) is set to 0.5 in another file. So it could be that when it is set to 0.5 the corresponding Y axis value is the max length of runs. I think it makes sense cause that's what the run frequency controls. If that's the case then it's not a particularly interesting table as you can already reduce the length of runs with the run freq. value.
Click to expand...

That's sound logical Y is the response variable, it should be the one that has an effect depending on X but there is so many of those "FloatCurve" that have varying X for identical Y. Why bother using a curve when you could use a single value?
But you are probably right, I am just looking at various positioningformation files and all the curves I looked at share the same X values along their 8 points (0-7), the same X values than the one I tested above.
 
Last edited:
Chris Davies said:
Tell me more... ;)
Click to expand...
Again a single value change. There is a perception increase check box in the playerbheavior perception file, it is unticked by default. The mod just tick it.

It doesn't resolve the 1vs1 thing but I believe it really helps, the players are reacting quicker to what is happening and to where is the danger.
 
Last edited:
papinho81 said:
You probably want to give a go at this one, before giving up on this game:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/6b3evdqopb3acbe/PaP_gameplay_perception1.fbmod/file
http://www.mediafire.com/file/szl1bf3gyaiekur/test_perception_increase.fbproject/file

I reccommand trying it as is first.
Click to expand...
Trying now. First impressions, players seem more engaged, there's more intensity. Is that what you are seeing? I'm seeing it potentially in attacking also (more dribbling, few more runs etc)
 
Anth James said:
Trying now. First impressions, players seem more engaged, there's more intensity. Is that what you are seeing? I'm seeing it potentially in attacking also (more dribbling, few more runs etc)
Click to expand...

Yes, more intensity and more runs in attack also. Also don't you feel like you can more rely on your teammates in defense? The cpu is closing down quicker too. For exemple, when the ST is free between the lines, one of the cb or a cdm will close him much quicker.
 
papinho81 said:
Yes, more intensity and more runs in attack also. Also don't you feel like you can more rely on your teammates in defense? The cpu is closing down quicker too. For exemple, when the ST is free between the lines, one of the cb or a cdm will close him much quicker.
Click to expand...
Yes, it's like the players have woken up haha. Could be placebo, but I feel I'm seeing a little bit of an improvement in contextual decision making. I (feel) like I've seen a little more passing at the back, dribbling, a couple more long shots. Logically, if their perception is increased I guess it could make sense.

The AI don't easily let you run by them now, they keep fighting. Great find man.
 
@papinho81 Are you noticing a few more fouls also? Last couple of games I have. Not sure if it's a combination of this with the ball physics or this on it's own, but the CPU seems a little more strong in the challenge.
 
Anth James said:
@papinho81 Are you noticing a few more fouls also? Last couple of games I have. Not sure if it's a combination of this with the ball physics or this on it's own, but the CPU seems a little more strong in the challenge.
Click to expand...
I could not test it extensively yesterday as it was getting late, but I ve had a few relentless challenges.
So you are confirming my impression, it is not a placebo, this one has quite an impact?
 
Last edited:
papinho81 said:
I could not test it extensively yesterday as it was getting late, but I ve had a few relentless challenges.
So you are confirming my impression, it is not a placebo, this one has quite an impact?
Click to expand...
I haven't had loads of time with it either. I think my thought on a bit more passing at the back etc may have been placebo, not really noticing that now. I've tried playing a game with it off and a game with it on and I do feel there is a step up in intensity and awareness.
 
@papinho81 One of the reasons I can tell it’s having an impact for sure is when it’s on I’m getting destroyed haha. 3-0 down at half time type destroyed in some of my test kick off games.
 
Anth James said:
@papinho81 One of the reasons I can tell it’s having an impact for sure is when it’s on I’m getting destroyed haha. 3-0 down at half time type destroyed in some of my test kick off games.
Click to expand...
I had a tough one too yesterday with OL against Zenith while testing it. Did you use any error mod in parallel?
If it is confirmed it really improves intensity and awareness of AI players (users and cpu ones) but it makes it OP we can try to dilute it afterwards.
I think it is probably easier to dumb down a too good AI than the other way around.
It remains a IF until we test it more extensively.
 
papinho81 said:
I had a tough one too yesterday with OL against Zenith while testing it. Did you use any error mod in parallel?
If it is confirmed it really improves intensity and awareness of AI players (users and cpu ones) but it makes it OP we can try to dilute it afterwards.
I think it is probably easier to dumb down a too good AI than the other way around.
It remains a IF until we test it more extensively.
Click to expand...
I’m playing on OS V3 which I know probably isn’t the best for general test purposes, but I just can’t play the game on default. My reference points are from the sliders and if I start playing from default I’ll lose my bearings on all of the values. I didn’t really feel it was OP, just a harder challenge (at this point anyway). I’m still noticing my own midfielders not tracking into the box enough but I feel there is a definite increase in intensity/aggression across the pitch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom