With the power of LARGE and XLOOKUP on Excel, I've saved hours now and in the future which brings this update to you.
This is the TOP 10 of non-CA Weighted Training Sessions for EACH POSITION using weights I designed for the top tactic on the FM24 Tactic Table.
With this caveat.
The Physical Trainings only weighted the Physical attributes + WorkRate and all the other trainings were weighted on everything other their Physical attributes.
Here are 2 observations.
1. Attacking Patient seems to be an Attacking Player's favorite meal. The Top training for the Attacking Midfielder and Striker. I have to wonder what if DL/DR and DM was also inserted into the Attacking Unit.
2. For the GK/Defensive Players, Defending Wide was the only Training in the TOP 10 for all 4 groups.
Unless, I really want to do more testing, these are the results gathered using EBFM's data.
I can do different formulas easier now for things like CA-Weighted or finding the best all-around training.
Eventually I'll test using Attacking Patient and Defending Wide, but for now you can explore the spreadsheet I've uploaded here.
If you have suggestions, I'm all ears. For now, I will explore what interests me on the day.
Happy FMing.
As a Bonus, this unscientific formula is how I made the Stamina weights.
For the GK/Defensive Players Defending seems much better. What about Defending for outfield players + 1 defensive shadow play for the GK ? GK's can improve until 30's but outfield players stop at age 26 generally(according to EBFM). So focusing on them is much more efficient i think and also keepers can play every match without getting tired so you can give them more game time.
Bafici said: For the GK/Defensive Players Defending seems much better. What about Defending for outfield players + 1 defensive shadow play for the GK ? GK's can improve until 30's but outfield players stop at age 26 generally(according to EBFM). So focusing on them is much more efficient i think and also keepers can play every match without getting tired so you can give them more game time. Expand
Yes you are correct, that defending is the best for those players. However, Physical, Resistance, Attacking, and Defending are already in the Foundational 11 incomplete training schedule from Part 2. I wasn't clear on this but this is trying to figure out what are the best other than those 4 trainings.
This is a 2nd table with all weighted attributes considered for all positions with Average of all positions on the right side.
A surprise here. With the usual suspects Defending, Match Practice, and Attacking, we have a hidden Handling at number 3 for best all-around training, and it's 3rd on the GK charts.
Match Practice, while not the best in either category is a great all-around training session.
Resistance and Physical both drop like a rock as they actually drop ratings from Technical and Mental.
Was I being too mean to Match Practice? Here's a table to find out.
So Resistance and Physical are on top like in Part 1 and double the Physicals rating of Match Practice.
The Match Practice training is really a all-around training. In my view, Match Practice doesn't train attributes the best. It's the best at being efficient, which is good if you are out of time in your week. However there are 2 cons.
1. It's a high intensity training. A 3 training day becomes a 2 training day if you aren't trying to kill your players.
2. It's not the best/top class at anything. Other trainings can fill its role better than Match Practice can.
I believe in a 2 match week, it's great for efficiency. HOWEVER, I have this untested belief that you could trade 2 match practice for 4 different trainings each and have your team be all-around better. Especially to help your Goalkeeper.
Do you use individual training? Because that's where I think match practice shines, focusing on those key attributes and possibly new position training.
Yarema said: Do you use individual training? Because that's where I think match practice shines, focusing on those key attributes and possibly new position training. Expand
Individual training has no effect on attributes within a position (no difference between e.g. no-nonsense centre-back and ball playing defender). It has an effect when you train a new position e.g. right defender learns wing-back position. But this is valid for all training sessions.
My test: Spoiler
DL is trained as DL (Wing-back attack) DR is trained as WB (Wing-back attack) Only match practice training Starting point of all attributes = 50 (ingame = 10) Players are 20 years old 4 runs
It seems that DR doesn't train natural fitness and strength.
So just to kind summarize everything, can anyone plz give a detailed break down of if we should players in their playing roles or leave it. If we should train players attributes or leave it blank. The best training schedule to use and finally the rest we should set. I know @ZaZ likes to reduce everything unless they are fully fit to keep players fresh for each game
Was I being too mean to Match Practice? Here's a table to find out.
So Resistance and Physical are on top like in Part 1 and double the Physicals rating of Match Practice.
The Match Practice training is really a all-around training. In my view, Match Practice doesn't train attributes the best. It's the best at being efficient, which is good if you are out of time in your week. However there are 2 cons.
1. It's a high intensity training. A 3 training day becomes a 2 training day if you aren't trying to kill your players.
2. It's not the best/top class at anything. Other trainings can fill its role better than Match Practice can.
I believe in a 2 match week, it's great for efficiency. HOWEVER, I have this untested belief that you could trade 2 match practice for 4 different trainings each and have your team be all-around better. Especially to help your Goalkeeper.
Meriten said: Individual training has no effect on attributes within a position (no difference between e.g. no-nonsense centre-back and ball playing defender). It has an effect when you train a new position e.g. right defender learns wing-back position. But this is valid for all training sessions.
My test: Spoiler
DL is trained as DL (Wing-back attack) DR is trained as WB (Wing-back attack) Only match practice training Starting point of all attributes = 50 (ingame = 10) Players are 20 years old 4 runs
It seems that DR doesn't train natural fitness and strength.
Expand
I can't tell a thing from this test. The valid comparison is no individual role selected in training vs selected, and then running match practice. Even then I suspect the difference is small.
I tried to perform similar analysis on EBFM's data to identify the best training session and ran into a problem.
The testing he performed involved training ONLY the specific training for a whole season. This resulted in any attribute which wasn't trained by the specific training degrading. This has the effect of:
-Messing with the measured CA growth of the training (since it will be the sum of the attributes increases and decreases) resulting in lower CA growth for more focused trainings. -Potentially changing the attribute growth measured as it there will be a different CA-PA delta than if there was no or minimal attribute degradation.
Since the goal here is to general identify which training sesssions are most efficient when combined with a generally (somewhat) balanced program, I think we need to gather another dataset in which each specific training session is tested alongside a balanced program (perhaps 1 attacking,defending,physical,match-practice) rather than in isolation.
With the power of LARGE and XLOOKUP on Excel, I've saved hours now and in the future which brings this update to you.
This is the TOP 10 of non-CA Weighted Training Sessions for EACH POSITION using weights I designed for the top tactic on the FM24 Tactic Table.
With this caveat.
The Physical Trainings only weighted the Physical attributes + WorkRate and all the other trainings were weighted on everything other their Physical attributes.
Here are 2 observations.
1. Attacking Patient seems to be an Attacking Player's favorite meal. The Top training for the Attacking Midfielder and Striker. I have to wonder what if DL/DR and DM was also inserted into the Attacking Unit.
2. For the GK/Defensive Players, Defending Wide was the only Training in the TOP 10 for all 4 groups.
Unless, I really want to do more testing, these are the results gathered using EBFM's data.
I can do different formulas easier now for things like CA-Weighted or finding the best all-around training.
Eventually I'll test using Attacking Patient and Defending Wide, but for now you can explore the spreadsheet I've uploaded here.
If you have suggestions, I'm all ears. For now, I will explore what interests me on the day.
Happy FMing.
As a Bonus, this unscientific formula is how I made the Stamina weights.
For the GK/Defensive Players Defending seems much better.
What about Defending for outfield players + 1 defensive shadow play for the GK ?
GK's can improve until 30's but outfield players stop at age 26 generally(according to EBFM). So focusing on them is much more efficient i think and also keepers can play every match without getting tired so you can give them more game time.
Bafici said: For the GK/Defensive Players Defending seems much better.
What about Defending for outfield players + 1 defensive shadow play for the GK ?
GK's can improve until 30's but outfield players stop at age 26 generally(according to EBFM). So focusing on them is much more efficient i think and also keepers can play every match without getting tired so you can give them more game time.
Yes you are correct, that defending is the best for those players. However, Physical, Resistance, Attacking, and Defending are already in the Foundational 11 incomplete training schedule from Part 2. I wasn't clear on this but this is trying to figure out what are the best other than those 4 trainings.
How fast can he create tables now? Very fast!
This is a 2nd table with all weighted attributes considered for all positions with Average of all positions on the right side.
A surprise here. With the usual suspects Defending, Match Practice, and Attacking, we have a hidden Handling at number 3 for best all-around training, and it's 3rd on the GK charts.
Match Practice, while not the best in either category is a great all-around training session.
Resistance and Physical both drop like a rock as they actually drop ratings from Technical and Mental.
Table 3: Physicals Only.
Was I being too mean to Match Practice? Here's a table to find out.
So Resistance and Physical are on top like in Part 1 and double the Physicals rating of Match Practice.
The Match Practice training is really a all-around training. In my view, Match Practice doesn't train attributes the best. It's the best at being efficient, which is good if you are out of time in your week. However there are 2 cons.
1. It's a high intensity training. A 3 training day becomes a 2 training day if you aren't trying to kill your players.
2. It's not the best/top class at anything. Other trainings can fill its role better than Match Practice can.
I believe in a 2 match week, it's great for efficiency. HOWEVER, I have this untested belief that you could trade 2 match practice for 4 different trainings each and have your team be all-around better. Especially to help your Goalkeeper.
Last table for now. I think?
Do you use individual training? Because that's where I think match practice shines, focusing on those key attributes and possibly new position training.
Yarema said: Do you use individual training? Because that's where I think match practice shines, focusing on those key attributes and possibly new position training.
Individual training has no effect on attributes within a position (no difference between e.g. no-nonsense centre-back and ball playing defender). It has an effect when you train a new position e.g. right defender learns wing-back position. But this is valid for all training sessions.
My test:
Spoiler DL is trained as DL (Wing-back attack)
DR is trained as WB (Wing-back attack)
Only match practice training
Starting point of all attributes = 50 (ingame = 10)
Players are 20 years old
4 runs
It seems that DR doesn't train natural fitness and strength.
So just to kind summarize everything, can anyone plz give a detailed break down of if we should players in their playing roles or leave it. If we should train players attributes or leave it blank. The best training schedule to use and finally the rest we should set. I know @ZaZ likes to reduce everything unless they are fully fit to keep players fresh for each game
Han106 said: Table 3: Physicals Only.
Was I being too mean to Match Practice? Here's a table to find out.
So Resistance and Physical are on top like in Part 1 and double the Physicals rating of Match Practice.
The Match Practice training is really a all-around training. In my view, Match Practice doesn't train attributes the best. It's the best at being efficient, which is good if you are out of time in your week. However there are 2 cons.
1. It's a high intensity training. A 3 training day becomes a 2 training day if you aren't trying to kill your players.
2. It's not the best/top class at anything. Other trainings can fill its role better than Match Practice can.
I believe in a 2 match week, it's great for efficiency. HOWEVER, I have this untested belief that you could trade 2 match practice for 4 different trainings each and have your team be all-around better. Especially to help your Goalkeeper.
Last table for now. I think?
Meriten said: Individual training has no effect on attributes within a position (no difference between e.g. no-nonsense centre-back and ball playing defender). It has an effect when you train a new position e.g. right defender learns wing-back position. But this is valid for all training sessions.
My test:
Spoiler DL is trained as DL (Wing-back attack)
DR is trained as WB (Wing-back attack)
Only match practice training
Starting point of all attributes = 50 (ingame = 10)
Players are 20 years old
4 runs
It seems that DR doesn't train natural fitness and strength.
I can't tell a thing from this test. The valid comparison is no individual role selected in training vs selected, and then running match practice. Even then I suspect the difference is small.
Great post! keep up the good work. I'm following it
I tried to perform similar analysis on EBFM's data to identify the best training session and ran into a problem.
The testing he performed involved training ONLY the specific training for a whole season. This resulted in any attribute which wasn't trained by the specific training degrading. This has the effect of:
-Messing with the measured CA growth of the training (since it will be the sum of the attributes increases and decreases) resulting in lower CA growth for more focused trainings.
-Potentially changing the attribute growth measured as it there will be a different CA-PA delta than if there was no or minimal attribute degradation.
Since the goal here is to general identify which training sesssions are most efficient when combined with a generally (somewhat) balanced program, I think we need to gather another dataset in which each specific training session is tested alongside a balanced program (perhaps 1 attacking,defending,physical,match-practice) rather than in isolation.