Note that this has nothing to do with your claim that stamina is the most important attribute for fullbacks. You remind me of those insufferable 3rd worlders living in slums under despots who look at the George Floyd debacle and reiterate with a mischievous grin 'See, I told you America is collapsing!'. Expand
😂😂. Most important? I never said that. If you have to tell lies, whilst spewing out this other crap, it shows how badly you handle any criticism and how desperate you are to be loved by strangers online. I said it was more important than several other attributes you'd listed and hadn't mentioned stamina. You replied saying it wasn't. Now you've discovered it's important overall? We knew this years ago. Show me where I did l said it was the most important you liar.
Your replies are hilarious. Attributes are speed, jumping each, dribbling and then stamina. Again we knew the years ago. Then you have anticipation. You can't be seriously working this out in 2026 when we knew this in 2023.
If you were any good at this you'd be working out which attributes were more important by position, rather than just which attributes are important. The tests you did on players was funny as well. Goncalo Ramos?? Honestly concentrate on your school work. You've probably got your exams next year.
Ps I also don't remember dribbling being hard to find. It's one of the best attacking attributes, after speed of course if you were thinking about telling more lies saying I said it's the most important.
So it turns out the GK does matter quite a bit. The most surprising finding is that technique 13 > 8 results in going from 6th to relegation, though that is with my knife-edge 15 pace/acc roster of outfield players. Both pace & acc also turn out to be fairly important.
A fair number of the attributes result in 1-2 places position drop if you go from 13/14 > 8, so I think in general you want the GK to be reasonably well-rounded.
Behold, the ultimate goalkeeper:
With this GK, the team finished 3rd, 5th, 4th, 1st.
BTW, I don't keep track of this, but I know that I've simulated at least over 10,000 real Premier Leagues matches in full detail now with these 15 pace/acc templates and coming ~4th-5th ~80-90%+ of the time.
Now I know some genuinely care about the accuracy question rather than just looking for any god-of-the-gaps excuse for SI's lies and imbecility. For these people, I have two things to say:
1) Yes, the points total even for a full season varies greatly, but the final position is much more stable. So my 15 pace/acc team might get 57 points or 81 points, but its position ~8 times out of 10 will be 3th-6th. Occasionally it will be 2nd or 8th or 10th. Rarely it will be 1st or 12th say.
2) Think about it deductively. If the RNG was so powerful that you couldn't tell reliably whether a team would come 1st or 10th in one season of samples, then you would have a fair chance every season of Liverpool coming 10th and not even qualifying for a cup spot. Ok, sometimes this does happen in the game, but let's be real, it's pretty rare.
I have a hypothesis as to why position is more stable than points. Rather than RNG causing the difference between the two, I would suspect it could be weather. Or some factor(s) other than just RNG, because the strange thing is that it must effect most or all teams equally, since the positions remain pretty stable, and I highly doubt that the game is looking at one team's 1-0 result and determining that the other game must end 2-0 to line the positions up at the end of the season.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: So it turns out the GK does matter quite a bit. The most surprising finding is that technique 13 > 8 results in going from 6th to relegation, though that is with my knife-edge 15 pace/acc roster of outfield players. Both pace & acc also turn out to be fairly important.
A fair number of the attributes result in 1-2 places position drop if you go from 13/14 > 8, so I think in general you want the GK to be reasonably well-rounded.
Behold, the ultimate goalkeeper:
With this GK, the team finished 3rd, 5th, 4th, 1st.
BTW, I don't keep track of this, but I know that I've simulated at least over 10,000 real Premier Leagues matches in full detail now with these 15 pace/acc templates and coming ~4th-5th ~80-90%+ of the time.
Now I know some genuinely care about the accuracy question rather than just looking for any god-of-the-gaps excuse for SI's lies and imbecility. For these people, I have two things to say:
1) Yes, the points total even for a full season varies greatly, but the final position is much more stable. So my 15 pace/acc team might get 57 points or 81 points, but its position ~8 times out of 10 will be 3th-6th. Occasionally it will be 2nd or 8th or 10th. Rarely it will be 1st or 12th say.
2) Think about it deductively. If the RNG was so powerful that you couldn't tell reliably whether a team would come 1st or 10th in one season of samples, then you would have a fair chance every season of Liverpool coming 10th and not even qualifying for a cup spot. Ok, sometimes this does happen in the game, but let's be real, it's pretty rare.
I have a hypothesis as to why position is more stable than points. Rather than RNG causing the difference between the two, I would suspect it could be weather. Or some factor(s) other than just RNG, because the strange thing is that it must effect most or all teams equally, since the positions remain pretty stable, and I highly doubt that the game is looking at one team's 1-0 result and determining that the other game must end 2-0 to line the positions up at the end of the season. Expand
Based on this are you going to be changing GK weights drastically or mostly just technique?
Rain said: Based on this are you going to be changing GK weights drastically or mostly just technique? Expand Drastic changes I reckon
You can use chatgpt to calculate the new weights already. Important hiddens are same as outfield: Consistency, Important Matches, Professionalism, Pressure 13.
I haven't done it myself yet because I haven't finished completely yet. I haven't actually tested Agility & Reflexes individually yet for example, but I think there's probably only some minor changes to go.
I thought it would be amusing to give a jarring illustration of something that is possible that I learned from my 1 CA testing
Unfortunately I couldn't quite finish the season before getting sacked, but here you can see I was 8th with 4 games to go (Man City):
The conditions were:
All fullbacks - 1 stamina All wingers - 1 pace All strikers - 1 finishing All defensive midfielders - 1 passing All centrebacks - 1 tackling All goalkeepers - 1 handling
All players - No other changes from my 15 pace/acc template
Example player (AML/AMR):
There's something useful in this. For some attributes you only need 1 or 2 guys to do the job (i.e. finishing, jumping reach), whereas others need to be on everyone (i.e. pace, acc). However there also seems to be some built-in leeway for at least 1 missing player, even for pace/acc. My guess is that this is to cope with the red card system. The takeaway here is that the 15 pace/acc template will be brittle, yes, but even if you skirt it fine you can still afford to have one player that has say 13 instead of 15 pace, and another who has 5 stamina instead of 13.
Keepers are the least important position in FM24 over a season. However in a single game they can make the difference. Once you reach a certain level with your team, challenging for the biggest trophies, your keeper can be the difference in a semi or final for example. Maybe this is also true in relegation scrap, but I don't have any experience of those.
Let's say Haaland is 99.99%(he should be) using genie scout and your team was 80%. You don't want any positions to be too far behind. Having ten players at 80% and then one at 70% is going to hold you back. Sometimes that 70% player might have a stellar season, but they won't repeat it every year. They will need to be upgraded. The same goes for keeper. But if you had the choice between a 85% outfield player or 85% keeper, and you keeper was already the same as your outfield players, you choose the outfield player every time. Caveat being maybe if he had high important matches and pressure he could win you a final. Even more if your keeper is lacking that and you're trying to win the biggest competitions. Overall you'd still be better off with the 85% outfield player.
The game isn't that complicated and although a lot of people make the mistake of applying real life logic, in some cases, such as you should try to upgrade your worst position are true. Although teams irl will probably still buy a top DM over a full back. But full backs can be really strong in FM, so that's where the real life logic goes out the window a bit.
Anyway I'm sure Lockjaw will disagree with most of that.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said:
Note that this has nothing to do with your claim that stamina is the most important attribute for fullbacks. You remind me of those insufferable 3rd worlders living in slums under despots who look at the George Floyd debacle and reiterate with a mischievous grin 'See, I told you America is collapsing!'.
😂😂. Most important? I never said that. If you have to tell lies, whilst spewing out this other crap, it shows how badly you handle any criticism and how desperate you are to be loved by strangers online. I said it was more important than several other attributes you'd listed and hadn't mentioned stamina. You replied saying it wasn't. Now you've discovered it's important overall? We knew this years ago. Show me where I did l said it was the most important you liar.
Your replies are hilarious. Attributes are speed, jumping each, dribbling and then stamina. Again we knew the years ago. Then you have anticipation. You can't be seriously working this out in 2026 when we knew this in 2023.
If you were any good at this you'd be working out which attributes were more important by position, rather than just which attributes are important. The tests you did on players was funny as well. Goncalo Ramos?? Honestly concentrate on your school work. You've probably got your exams next year.
Ps I also don't remember dribbling being hard to find. It's one of the best attacking attributes, after speed of course if you were thinking about telling more lies saying I said it's the most important.
So it turns out the GK does matter quite a bit. The most surprising finding is that technique 13 > 8 results in going from 6th to relegation, though that is with my knife-edge 15 pace/acc roster of outfield players. Both pace & acc also turn out to be fairly important.
A fair number of the attributes result in 1-2 places position drop if you go from 13/14 > 8, so I think in general you want the GK to be reasonably well-rounded.
Behold, the ultimate goalkeeper:
With this GK, the team finished 3rd, 5th, 4th, 1st.
BTW, I don't keep track of this, but I know that I've simulated at least over 10,000 real Premier Leagues matches in full detail now with these 15 pace/acc templates and coming ~4th-5th ~80-90%+ of the time.
Now I know some genuinely care about the accuracy question rather than just looking for any god-of-the-gaps excuse for SI's lies and imbecility. For these people, I have two things to say:
1) Yes, the points total even for a full season varies greatly, but the final position is much more stable. So my 15 pace/acc team might get 57 points or 81 points, but its position ~8 times out of 10 will be 3th-6th. Occasionally it will be 2nd or 8th or 10th. Rarely it will be 1st or 12th say.
2) Think about it deductively. If the RNG was so powerful that you couldn't tell reliably whether a team would come 1st or 10th in one season of samples, then you would have a fair chance every season of Liverpool coming 10th and not even qualifying for a cup spot. Ok, sometimes this does happen in the game, but let's be real, it's pretty rare.
I have a hypothesis as to why position is more stable than points. Rather than RNG causing the difference between the two, I would suspect it could be weather. Or some factor(s) other than just RNG, because the strange thing is that it must effect most or all teams equally, since the positions remain pretty stable, and I highly doubt that the game is looking at one team's 1-0 result and determining that the other game must end 2-0 to line the positions up at the end of the season.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: So it turns out the GK does matter quite a bit. The most surprising finding is that technique 13 > 8 results in going from 6th to relegation, though that is with my knife-edge 15 pace/acc roster of outfield players. Both pace & acc also turn out to be fairly important.
A fair number of the attributes result in 1-2 places position drop if you go from 13/14 > 8, so I think in general you want the GK to be reasonably well-rounded.
Behold, the ultimate goalkeeper:
With this GK, the team finished 3rd, 5th, 4th, 1st.
BTW, I don't keep track of this, but I know that I've simulated at least over 10,000 real Premier Leagues matches in full detail now with these 15 pace/acc templates and coming ~4th-5th ~80-90%+ of the time.
Now I know some genuinely care about the accuracy question rather than just looking for any god-of-the-gaps excuse for SI's lies and imbecility. For these people, I have two things to say:
1) Yes, the points total even for a full season varies greatly, but the final position is much more stable. So my 15 pace/acc team might get 57 points or 81 points, but its position ~8 times out of 10 will be 3th-6th. Occasionally it will be 2nd or 8th or 10th. Rarely it will be 1st or 12th say.
2) Think about it deductively. If the RNG was so powerful that you couldn't tell reliably whether a team would come 1st or 10th in one season of samples, then you would have a fair chance every season of Liverpool coming 10th and not even qualifying for a cup spot. Ok, sometimes this does happen in the game, but let's be real, it's pretty rare.
I have a hypothesis as to why position is more stable than points. Rather than RNG causing the difference between the two, I would suspect it could be weather. Or some factor(s) other than just RNG, because the strange thing is that it must effect most or all teams equally, since the positions remain pretty stable, and I highly doubt that the game is looking at one team's 1-0 result and determining that the other game must end 2-0 to line the positions up at the end of the season.
Based on this are you going to be changing GK weights drastically or mostly just technique?
Rain said: Based on this are you going to be changing GK weights drastically or mostly just technique?
Drastic changes I reckon
You can use chatgpt to calculate the new weights already. Important hiddens are same as outfield: Consistency, Important Matches, Professionalism, Pressure 13.
I haven't done it myself yet because I haven't finished completely yet. I haven't actually tested Agility & Reflexes individually yet for example, but I think there's probably only some minor changes to go.
I thought it would be amusing to give a jarring illustration of something that is possible that I learned from my 1 CA testing
Unfortunately I couldn't quite finish the season before getting sacked, but here you can see I was 8th with 4 games to go (Man City):
The conditions were:
All fullbacks - 1 stamina
All wingers - 1 pace
All strikers - 1 finishing
All defensive midfielders - 1 passing
All centrebacks - 1 tackling
All goalkeepers - 1 handling
All players - No other changes from my 15 pace/acc template
Example player (AML/AMR):
There's something useful in this. For some attributes you only need 1 or 2 guys to do the job (i.e. finishing, jumping reach), whereas others need to be on everyone (i.e. pace, acc). However there also seems to be some built-in leeway for at least 1 missing player, even for pace/acc. My guess is that this is to cope with the red card system. The takeaway here is that the 15 pace/acc template will be brittle, yes, but even if you skirt it fine you can still afford to have one player that has say 13 instead of 15 pace, and another who has 5 stamina instead of 13.
Keepers are the least important position in FM24 over a season. However in a single game they can make the difference. Once you reach a certain level with your team, challenging for the biggest trophies, your keeper can be the difference in a semi or final for example. Maybe this is also true in relegation scrap, but I don't have any experience of those.
Let's say Haaland is 99.99%(he should be) using genie scout and your team was 80%. You don't want any positions to be too far behind. Having ten players at 80% and then one at 70% is going to hold you back. Sometimes that 70% player might have a stellar season, but they won't repeat it every year. They will need to be upgraded. The same goes for keeper. But if you had the choice between a 85% outfield player or 85% keeper, and you keeper was already the same as your outfield players, you choose the outfield player every time. Caveat being maybe if he had high important matches and pressure he could win you a final. Even more if your keeper is lacking that and you're trying to win the biggest competitions. Overall you'd still be better off with the 85% outfield player.
The game isn't that complicated and although a lot of people make the mistake of applying real life logic, in some cases, such as you should try to upgrade your worst position are true. Although teams irl will probably still buy a top DM over a full back. But full backs can be really strong in FM, so that's where the real life logic goes out the window a bit.
Anyway I'm sure Lockjaw will disagree with most of that.