I tried both on this screen and on the screen before that since when I export the fixture on this screen I cannot sim it with customized seeds (error saying that fixture data has changed - don't remember exact prompt off the top of my head).
If you're using the command-line, tacking `--keep-build` on to the end of the sims should fix it; if you're using the UI then latest version of the app has a checkbox called "Skip rebuild" with this option already selected. Let me know if you're still having difficulty.
Sure thing, will give you a feedback once I get home and give it a try. Also, I'd like to ask you kindly to make the harness tool compatible with 24.2.2 (pre off-license patch) which I'm using on a daily basis and updated to 24.2.4 just to test things out. I'll send you probe output later on.
If I can downgrade to that version in Steam then I will try. If I can't, and the match engine is different in that version (I target 24.2.0.0, per the Game Status screen) then it'll be impossible to map it out.
The match engine is the same as everything else. The only difference between versions is licensing or rather lack of it in the last version. They pushed this update once it was official that FM25 won't happen and some licesing deals signed just for 24 meet EOL and weren't renewed. You can downgrade using steam console and keeping manifast file from the newest version to prevent automatic updates. Bit of a hassle for you if you ask me, I thought you need only FM24.exe build timestamp which I can easily deliver.
I'm currently running an experiment in which I take the top 32 goalkeepers and pit them against each other in a league/knockout to see who is the best in the game.
1268 wins - Yann Sommer 1226 wins - David Raya 1140 wins - Aaron Ramsdale 1103 wins - Niklas Hedl
Group H
1255 wins - Esteban Andrada 1240 wins - Mike Maignan 1192 wins - Rui Patrício 1085 wins - Sean McDermott
Two identical teams play each other using Knap's 4-2-4 (with Haaland, Mbappe, Salah and Vini Jr. up front) with only the goalie swapped out. They play each other 500 times twice (home and away, just in case I haven't completely ruled out any bias). The top two from each group advance through and they play two a two-legged 16-team knockout. I'm stunned by how close Group A was. I might have to try another version in the future with the groups shuffled.
Also the reason I'm tracking wins and not goals conceded is because a) winning is all you care about when you build a team and b) goalkeepers can indirectly contribute goals and I didn't want to overlook that.
David de Gea vs Diogo Costa: 462-178-360 Alison vs Guglielmo Vicario: 420-208-372 Gregor Kobel vs Ivan Provedel: 407-207-386 Esteban Andrada vs David Raya: 380-206-414 Marc-André ter Stegen vs Jeremías Ledesma: 390-224-386 Wojciech Szczęsny vs Mike Maignan: 415-207-378 Yann Sommer vs Keylor Navas: 400-202-398 Emiliano Martínez vs Thibaut Courtois: 390-213-397
David De Gea vs Alisson: 403-212-385 Gregor Kobel vs David Raya: 392-204-404 Marc-André ter Stegen vs Wojciech Szczęsny: 404-216-380 Yann Sommer vs Thibaut Courtois: 404-198-398
David De Gea vs David Raya: 415-230-355 Marc-André ter Stegen vs Yann Sommer: 388-221-391
David De Gea vs Yann Sommer: 406-216-378
Well I don't think anybody saw this coming.
Were there flaws in this test? For sure. I should have maximised each players' familiarity with the tactics. I shouldn't have used an overpowered corner tactic. I should probably spend 64,000 matches on every goalie playing each other rather than a knockout tournament format, but we live and learn.
Still though. David de Gea. And it wasn't even close.
LightningFlik said: If you're using the command-line, tacking `--keep-build` on to the end of the sims should fix it; if you're using the UI then latest version of the app has a checkbox called "Skip rebuild" with this option already selected. Let me know if you're still having difficulty. Expand
So actually I can't see anywhere "Skip rebuild" checkbox in UI version but I've managed to do it with console and now it actually works as intended. I also coded simple python script and batch file for automation to play desired seed ingame, so I'm attaching that in case anyone without debugger knowledge can use it. Also, I PM'd you with probe output for mentioned game version.
FREVKY said: So actually I can't see anywhere "Skip rebuild" checkbox in UI version but I've managed to do it with console and now it actually works as intended. I also coded simple python script and batch file for automation to play desired seed ingame, so I'm attaching that in case anyone without debugger knowledge can use it. Also, I PM'd you with probe output for mentioned game version.
I'm trying to make a small app for myself to export players' data from the game but I need it for FM26.
I would be very grateful if you could point me in the right direction how to find "RVA_PEOPLE_LIST [p] {start, end}"
Is there any approach you can suggest?
Thanks in advance! Expand
I found it by browsing RAM in Cheat Engine. If you're familiar with pointer scanning, you can search for something that you _know_ exists on a Person entity (like their UID). Scan for this value across multiple resets of the game and eventually Cheat Engine will give you the static address + offsets that will reliably point to this person. (There will probably be a few ways of getting from a static address to the thing you care about, in which case you can probably pick the simplest. In this case, there's a list of pointers all packed next to each other that refer to various things: Cities, Nations, Weather, Injuries, People, Competitions etc. so we might as well start there).
If you aren't familiar with pointer scanning then you need to get familiar.
Alternatively, someone has probably already found that address and published it (you could search for a Cheat Engine table for the game and open that), or find an open source Player Analyser that someone has made.
I don't have FM 26 or I could tell you what it is myself.
LightningFlik said: I found it by browsing RAM in Cheat Engine. If you're familiar with pointer scanning, you can search for something that you _know_ exists on a Person entity (like their UID). Scan for this value across multiple resets of the game and eventually Cheat Engine will give you the static address + offsets that will reliably point to this person. (There will probably be a few ways of getting from a static address to the thing you care about, in which case you can probably pick the simplest. In this case, there's a list of pointers all packed next to each other that refer to various things: Cities, Nations, Weather, Injuries, People, Competitions etc. so we might as well start there).
If you aren't familiar with pointer scanning then you need to get familiar.
Alternatively, someone has probably already found that address and published it (you could search for a Cheat Engine table for the game and open that), or find an open source Player Analyser that someone has made.
I don't have FM 26 or I could tell you what it is myself. Expand
Thanks!
I've figured out how to find it.
And many other things also aren't that hard to find.
But ONLY ONE THING is still giving me nightmares and it's the TACTIC.
Any thoughts how to crack the TACTIC?
Where it can be stored?
I mean, I need to extract at least the Formation, I'm talking about the tactic that a human manager can setup for his team.
Reflexes = 19.88 Acceleration = 12.10 Pace = 12.10 Command of Area = 8.53 Determination = 3.97 One On Ones = 2.31 Aerial Reach = 2.19 First Touch = 2.19 Rushing Out (Tendency) = 1.74 Punching (Tendency) = 1.70 Concentration = 1.46 Technique = 0.41 Handling = 0.20 Throwing = -0.24 Communication = -0.45 Eccentricity = -2.55 Jumping Reach = -3.63 Strength = -4.11 Kicking = -4.41 Stamina = -6.70
Notes:
The attributes are represented as relative to each other. +1 reflexes on the GK is equivalent to +0.2 pace on ALL outfield players.
I count +1 for win and +0.333 for draw (before conversion), that's all I'm judging by.
The negative GK attributes are not mistakes from one-off outliers. For instance for Strength here's the tests and trend:
Strength 1 (1000 samples) = W 262 (26.2%), D 209 (20.9%), L 529 (52.9%), 1.29-1.85 Strength 10 (1000 samples) = W 257 (25.7%), D 203 (20.3%), L 540 (54.0%), 1.27-1.84 Strength 12 (1000 samples) = W 252 (25.2%), D 212 (21.2%), L 536 (53.6%), 1.27-1.86 Strength 16 (1000 samples) = W 244 (24.4%), D 204 (20.4%), L 552 (55.2%), 1.23-1.83
I'm being selective about what I test. Some I just do '1' and '18'. If the result is unusual, like Strength, or crucial, like Reflexes, I do more intervals. I haven't done this for 1 or 2 yet though such as GK stamina.
Because attributes are non-linear, I've decided to represent the results here as more typical/realistic values rather than simply '1' vs. '20'. A few examples to illustrate what some of the above figures are derived from:
I've found a few (relatively minor but notable) differences to blackbird's results so far. For instance aggression does matter, but mostly only going from 1 > 6 (blackbird only did 4 > 8, and higher). I did not see a significant difference for Strength going from 10 > 20, but 6 > 10 is significant. I'll be posting the extended results later that bears this out.
It could partly be that blackbird used a tactic that affects the outcomes. I've used a variant of the Mars Attacks V7 tactic (433 formation) for my testing. I've previously done all my testing with the Knap tactic, so when I realized I was using the V7 tactic, I figured I'll just continue with it anyway since that will shed light at the same time on whether tactics/formations affect attribute outcomes or not. And it doesn't seem that they do.. so long as they are an intense gegenpress style tactic at least I guess.
Later on my results should be able to mostly complement blackbird's results to give a more complete picture (i.e. values for 1, 4, 6, 8, 10, etc.)
If we use Pace as the standard (100), and if 3 attribute combos are being tested, I think it's interesting to first test Pace+Acceleration+others, to see, which third attributes have most synergy with Pace+Acceleration.
Reflexes = 19.88 Acceleration = 12.10 Pace = 12.10 Command of Area = 8.53 Determination = 3.97 One On Ones = 2.31 Aerial Reach = 2.19 First Touch = 2.19 Rushing Out (Tendency) = 1.74 Punching (Tendency) = 1.70 Concentration = 1.46 Technique = 0.41 Handling = 0.20 Throwing = -0.24 Communication = -0.45 Eccentricity = -2.55 Jumping Reach = -3.63 Strength = -4.11 Kicking = -4.41 Stamina = -6.70
Notes:
The attributes are represented as relative to each other. +1 reflexes on the GK is equivalent to +0.2 pace on ALL outfield players.
I count +1 for win and +0.333 for draw (before conversion), that's all I'm judging by.
The negative GK attributes are not mistakes from one-off outliers. For instance for Strength here's the tests and trend:
Strength 1 (1000 samples) = W 262 (26.2%), D 209 (20.9%), L 529 (52.9%), 1.29-1.85 Strength 10 (1000 samples) = W 257 (25.7%), D 203 (20.3%), L 540 (54.0%), 1.27-1.84 Strength 12 (1000 samples) = W 252 (25.2%), D 212 (21.2%), L 536 (53.6%), 1.27-1.86 Strength 16 (1000 samples) = W 244 (24.4%), D 204 (20.4%), L 552 (55.2%), 1.23-1.83
I'm being selective about what I test. Some I just do '1' and '18'. If the result is unusual, like Strength, or crucial, like Reflexes, I do more intervals. I haven't done this for 1 or 2 yet though such as GK stamina.
Because attributes are non-linear, I've decided to represent the results here as more typical/realistic values rather than simply '1' vs. '20'. A few examples to illustrate what some of the above figures are derived from:
I've found a few (relatively minor but notable) differences to blackbird's results so far. For instance aggression does matter, but mostly only going from 1 > 6 (blackbird only did 4 > 8, and higher). I did not see a significant difference for Strength going from 10 > 20, but 6 > 10 is significant. I'll be posting the extended results later that bears this out.
It could partly be that blackbird used a tactic that affects the outcomes. I've used a variant of the Mars Attacks V7 tactic (433 formation) for my testing. I've previously done all my testing with the Knap tactic, so when I realized I was using the V7 tactic, I figured I'll just continue with it anyway since that will shed light at the same time on whether tactics/formations affect attribute outcomes or not. And it doesn't seem that they do.. so long as they are an intense gegenpress style tactic at least I guess.
Later on my results should be able to mostly complement blackbird's results to give a more complete picture (i.e. values for 1, 4, 6, 8, 10, etc.) Expand
And that your result is almost the same what FM-Arena tested for us 2 years ago
1) Acceleration, Pace and Dribbling are the most valuable attributes by FAR for Outfield and if you look for them for your Outfields then you're safe, you just can't go wrong because they are MASSIVE compared to other attributes.
2) Reflexes, Agility and Acceleration are the most valuable attributes by FAR for GKs and if you look for them for your GKs then you're safe, you just can't go wrong because they are MASSIVE compared to other attributes.
And you're getting a very similar pictures here.
P.S. You should also tested Agility for GK, it did well in FM-Arena's test.
1) Acceleration, Pace and Dribbling are the most valuable attributes by FAR for Outfield and if you look for them for your Outfields then you're safe.
2) Reflexes, Agility and Acceleration are the most valuable attributes by FAR for GKs and if you look for them for your GK's then you're safe.
And you're getting a very similar pictures here.
P.S. You should also tested Agility for GK, it did well in FM-Arena's test. Expand *cracks knuckles*
I kind of had a feeling people would interpret it this way - I had in mind that some people are no doubt going to unwittingly take this as a set of weights to plug into Genie Scout, which is basically the same error.
What I found since those 2 years ago is that real player rankings do not line up with the attribute test data.
This is why on the first page my attribute template has dribbling at '13' and work rate at '11', while in my FMST26 weights just below it, dribbling is 14.3 and work rate is 66.5. We have evolved beyond individual attribute testing as the source of weights, or at least I have. The method I came up with was to change the attribute weights around until it fit as closely as possible the real player results - and I've tested the resulting weights and found them to be superior.
Now someone might chime in and say 'well I'm not interested in weights, I just wanted to know what going from '8' pace to '20' pace results in'. To that I'd say good for you, but in regards to what I'm doing, I'm going beyond that.
Now, returning to the present.. Why am I doing attribute tests now then?
The plan is this:
1) Utilize LightningFlik's program to more accurately identify attribute result curves, and previously unknown attribute combinations
2) Use the program to also rapidly do mass testing of individual players for the real player ranking list
3) Use what turns up out of it all to make better informed guesses for the selection of weights to try and match real player rankings
Attribute testing isn't the main benefit of LightingFlik's tool IMO, it's stuff like what's he posted finding about how the game works, and the ability to do mass tests of player swaps with ease, and perhaps a lot more.
The ability to do attribute testing 20+ times faster is nice, but not exactly a game changer. You could already do it before, and it was done - by FM Arena, Harvest Green, myself, etc. - it's just about how much time are you willing to sink into it.
That said, the ability to do 1000 samples in 3 minutes or so does enable some previously unrealistic things, like getting accurate read on the GK attributes. Even my own manual findings on GK have not been that satisfactory.
I did do agility, I forgot to add it in. I'll add it in now.
Edit: Actually I see why I left agility out. I've got mixed results on it. What we can glean from that at least is that agility probably doesn't matter that much, but I want to do some more testing on it to provide further clarification.
Attribute testing is like all these health studies that tell you 2 eggs/week = +14% death risk
Calibrating weights to real player rankings is like eating the Mediterranean diet because people who eat it live longer and are generally healthier.
Sometimes the two contradict each other, but they're probably largely consistent with each other if only you were aware of the nuance.
And what we can do is use one to tell us about the other. Perhaps one is more valid than the other, but nonetheless both kinds of information remain important.
Meanwhile LightingFlik just came up with the AI that can cure cancer, but we're using it to verify the basics first, like what foods are best to eat and just how healthy are eggs exactly.
When are you exporting the fixture? You need to do it on this screen:
I tried both on this screen and on the screen before that since when I export the fixture on this screen I cannot sim it with customized seeds (error saying that fixture data has changed - don't remember exact prompt off the top of my head).
If you're using the command-line, tacking `--keep-build` on to the end of the sims should fix it; if you're using the UI then latest version of the app has a checkbox called "Skip rebuild" with this option already selected. Let me know if you're still having difficulty.
Sure thing, will give you a feedback once I get home and give it a try. Also, I'd like to ask you kindly to make the harness tool compatible with 24.2.2 (pre off-license patch) which I'm using on a daily basis and updated to 24.2.4 just to test things out. I'll send you probe output later on.
If I can downgrade to that version in Steam then I will try. If I can't, and the match engine is different in that version (I target 24.2.0.0, per the Game Status screen) then it'll be impossible to map it out.
The match engine is the same as everything else. The only difference between versions is licensing or rather lack of it in the last version. They pushed this update once it was official that FM25 won't happen and some licesing deals signed just for 24 meet EOL and weren't renewed. You can downgrade using steam console and keeping manifast file from the newest version to prevent automatic updates. Bit of a hassle for you if you ask me, I thought you need only FM24.exe build timestamp which I can easily deliver.
Well to make it launch I only need the build timestamp, but if they've changed stuff too then there might be more to it. Fingers and toes crossed.
I'm currently running an experiment in which I take the top 32 goalkeepers and pit them against each other in a league/knockout to see who is the best in the game.
Group A
1208 wins - Alisson
1206 wins - Ivan Provedel
1205 wins - Gianluigi Donarumma
1123 wins - Dorde Petrovic
Group B
1256 wins - Gregor Kobel
1189 wins - Sinan Bolat
1169 wins - Keylor Navas
1128 wins - Alphonse Areola
Group C
1239 wins - Emiliano Martínez
1231 wins - Thibaut Courtois
1176 wins - André Onana
1115 wins - Daniel Peretz
Group D
1230 wins - Wojciech Szczęsny
1184 wins - Jeremías Ledesma
1168 wins - Jan Oblak
1164 wins - Uğurcan Çakır
Group E
1352 wins - David De Gea
1165 wins - Diogo Costa
1128 wins - Manuel Neuer
1110 wins - Dean Henderson
Group F
1270 wins - Marc-André ter Stegen
1255 wins - Guglielmo Vicario
1158 wins - Ederson
1124 wins - Weverton
Group G
1268 wins - Yann Sommer
1226 wins - David Raya
1140 wins - Aaron Ramsdale
1103 wins - Niklas Hedl
Group H
1255 wins - Esteban Andrada
1240 wins - Mike Maignan
1192 wins - Rui Patrício
1085 wins - Sean McDermott
Two identical teams play each other using Knap's 4-2-4 (with Haaland, Mbappe, Salah and Vini Jr. up front) with only the goalie swapped out. They play each other 500 times twice (home and away, just in case I haven't completely ruled out any bias). The top two from each group advance through and they play two a two-legged 16-team knockout. I'm stunned by how close Group A was. I might have to try another version in the future with the groups shuffled.
Also the reason I'm tracking wins and not goals conceded is because a) winning is all you care about when you build a team and b) goalkeepers can indirectly contribute goals and I didn't want to overlook that.
EDIT: league phase done.
Knockout seeds
1. David De Gea: 1352 wins
2. Marc-André ter Stegen: 1270 wins
3. Yann Sommer: 1268 wins
4. Gregor Kobel: 1256 wins
5. Esteban Andrada: 1255 wins
6. Emiliano Martínez: 1239 wins
7. Wojciech Szczęsny: 1230 wins
8. Alisson: 1208 wins
9. Guglielmo Vicario: 1255 wins
10. Mike Maignan: 1240 wins
11. Thibaut Courtois: 1231 wins
12. David Raya: 1226 wins
13. Ivan Provedel: 1206 wins
14. Keylor Navas: 1189 wins
15. Jeremías Ledesma: 1184 wins
16. Diogo Costa: 1165 wins
David de Gea vs Diogo Costa: 462-178-360
Alison vs Guglielmo Vicario: 420-208-372
Gregor Kobel vs Ivan Provedel: 407-207-386
Esteban Andrada vs David Raya: 380-206-414
Marc-André ter Stegen vs Jeremías Ledesma: 390-224-386
Wojciech Szczęsny vs Mike Maignan: 415-207-378
Yann Sommer vs Keylor Navas: 400-202-398
Emiliano Martínez vs Thibaut Courtois: 390-213-397
David De Gea vs Alisson: 403-212-385
Gregor Kobel vs David Raya: 392-204-404
Marc-André ter Stegen vs Wojciech Szczęsny: 404-216-380
Yann Sommer vs Thibaut Courtois: 404-198-398
David De Gea vs David Raya: 415-230-355
Marc-André ter Stegen vs Yann Sommer: 388-221-391
David De Gea vs Yann Sommer: 406-216-378
Well I don't think anybody saw this coming.
Were there flaws in this test? For sure. I should have maximised each players' familiarity with the tactics. I shouldn't have used an overpowered corner tactic. I should probably spend 64,000 matches on every goalie playing each other rather than a knockout tournament format, but we live and learn.
Still though. David de Gea. And it wasn't even close.
LightningFlik said: If you're using the command-line, tacking `--keep-build` on to the end of the sims should fix it; if you're using the UI then latest version of the app has a checkbox called "Skip rebuild" with this option already selected. Let me know if you're still having difficulty.
So actually I can't see anywhere "Skip rebuild" checkbox in UI version but I've managed to do it with console and now it actually works as intended. I also coded simple python script and batch file for automation to play desired seed ingame, so I'm attaching that in case anyone without debugger knowledge can use it. Also, I PM'd you with probe output for mentioned game version.
https://filebin.net/iqo7yi1xpxpkf3dq
put both files in the same directory and run "run_fm24_seed.bat" when you are on this screen: https://fm-arena.com/find-comment/54673/
FREVKY said: So actually I can't see anywhere "Skip rebuild" checkbox in UI version but I've managed to do it with console and now it actually works as intended. I also coded simple python script and batch file for automation to play desired seed ingame, so I'm attaching that in case anyone without debugger knowledge can use it. Also, I PM'd you with probe output for mentioned game version.
https://filebin.net/iqo7yi1xpxpkf3dq
put both files in the same directory and run "run_fm24_seed.bat" when you are on this screen: https://fm-arena.com/find-comment/54673/
Let me know how this goes: v1.0.30
@LightningFlik, hi!
I'm trying to make a small app for myself to export players' data from the game but I need it for FM26.
I would be very grateful if you could point me in the right direction how to find "RVA_PEOPLE_LIST [p] {start, end}"
Is there any approach you can suggest?
Thanks in advance!
Lapidus said: @LightningFlik, hi!
I'm trying to make a small app for myself to export players' data from the game but I need it for FM26.
I would be very grateful if you could point me in the right direction how to find "RVA_PEOPLE_LIST [p] {start, end}"
Is there any approach you can suggest?
Thanks in advance!
I found it by browsing RAM in Cheat Engine. If you're familiar with pointer scanning, you can search for something that you _know_ exists on a Person entity (like their UID). Scan for this value across multiple resets of the game and eventually Cheat Engine will give you the static address + offsets that will reliably point to this person. (There will probably be a few ways of getting from a static address to the thing you care about, in which case you can probably pick the simplest. In this case, there's a list of pointers all packed next to each other that refer to various things: Cities, Nations, Weather, Injuries, People, Competitions etc. so we might as well start there).
If you aren't familiar with pointer scanning then you need to get familiar.
Alternatively, someone has probably already found that address and published it (you could search for a Cheat Engine table for the game and open that), or find an open source Player Analyser that someone has made.
I don't have FM 26 or I could tell you what it is myself.
LightningFlik said: I found it by browsing RAM in Cheat Engine. If you're familiar with pointer scanning, you can search for something that you _know_ exists on a Person entity (like their UID). Scan for this value across multiple resets of the game and eventually Cheat Engine will give you the static address + offsets that will reliably point to this person. (There will probably be a few ways of getting from a static address to the thing you care about, in which case you can probably pick the simplest. In this case, there's a list of pointers all packed next to each other that refer to various things: Cities, Nations, Weather, Injuries, People, Competitions etc. so we might as well start there).
If you aren't familiar with pointer scanning then you need to get familiar.
Alternatively, someone has probably already found that address and published it (you could search for a Cheat Engine table for the game and open that), or find an open source Player Analyser that someone has made.
I don't have FM 26 or I could tell you what it is myself.
Thanks!
I've figured out how to find it.
And many other things also aren't that hard to find.
But ONLY ONE THING is still giving me nightmares and it's the TACTIC.
Any thoughts how to crack the TACTIC?
Where it can be stored?
I mean, I need to extract at least the Formation, I'm talking about the tactic that a human manager can setup for his team.
Any help would be much appreciated.
Thanks in advance!
Done around 120,000 samples so far - 1000 per test.
Here's what I have so far:
Outfield:
Pace = 100.00
Acceleration = 93.84
Dribbling = 25.28
Vision + Passing + Decisions combo = 23.58
Strength = 15.72
Marking + Tackling + Positioning combo = 15.23
Crossing + Technique + Longshots combo = 11.23
Leadership = 4.67
Aggression = 1.62
GK:
Reflexes = 19.88
Acceleration = 12.10
Pace = 12.10
Command of Area = 8.53
Determination = 3.97
One On Ones = 2.31
Aerial Reach = 2.19
First Touch = 2.19
Rushing Out (Tendency) = 1.74
Punching (Tendency) = 1.70
Concentration = 1.46
Technique = 0.41
Handling = 0.20
Throwing = -0.24
Communication = -0.45
Eccentricity = -2.55
Jumping Reach = -3.63
Strength = -4.11
Kicking = -4.41
Stamina = -6.70
Notes:
The attributes are represented as relative to each other. +1 reflexes on the GK is equivalent to +0.2 pace on ALL outfield players.
I count +1 for win and +0.333 for draw (before conversion), that's all I'm judging by.
The negative GK attributes are not mistakes from one-off outliers. For instance for Strength here's the tests and trend:
Strength 1 (1000 samples) = W 262 (26.2%), D 209 (20.9%), L 529 (52.9%), 1.29-1.85
Strength 10 (1000 samples) = W 257 (25.7%), D 203 (20.3%), L 540 (54.0%), 1.27-1.84
Strength 12 (1000 samples) = W 252 (25.2%), D 212 (21.2%), L 536 (53.6%), 1.27-1.86
Strength 16 (1000 samples) = W 244 (24.4%), D 204 (20.4%), L 552 (55.2%), 1.23-1.83
I'm being selective about what I test. Some I just do '1' and '18'. If the result is unusual, like Strength, or crucial, like Reflexes, I do more intervals. I haven't done this for 1 or 2 yet though such as GK stamina.
Because attributes are non-linear, I've decided to represent the results here as more typical/realistic values rather than simply '1' vs. '20'. A few examples to illustrate what some of the above figures are derived from:
Pace 15 > 16 or 14 = 51.4165
Acceleration 15 > 16 or 14 = 48.25
Leadership 8 > 18 = 24
Strength 6 > 10 = 32.334
Aggression 6 > 12 = 5
Dribbling 6 > 10 = 52
I've found a few (relatively minor but notable) differences to blackbird's results so far. For instance aggression does matter, but mostly only going from 1 > 6 (blackbird only did 4 > 8, and higher). I did not see a significant difference for Strength going from 10 > 20, but 6 > 10 is significant. I'll be posting the extended results later that bears this out.
It could partly be that blackbird used a tactic that affects the outcomes. I've used a variant of the Mars Attacks V7 tactic (433 formation) for my testing. I've previously done all my testing with the Knap tactic, so when I realized I was using the V7 tactic, I figured I'll just continue with it anyway since that will shed light at the same time on whether tactics/formations affect attribute outcomes or not. And it doesn't seem that they do.. so long as they are an intense gegenpress style tactic at least I guess.
Later on my results should be able to mostly complement blackbird's results to give a more complete picture (i.e. values for 1, 4, 6, 8, 10, etc.)
If we use Pace as the standard (100), and if 3 attribute combos are being tested, I think it's interesting to first test Pace+Acceleration+others, to see, which third attributes have most synergy with Pace+Acceleration.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: Done around 120,000 samples so far - 1000 per test.
Here's what I have so far:
Outfield:
Pace = 100.00
Acceleration = 93.84
Dribbling = 25.28
Vision + Passing + Decisions combo = 23.58
Strength = 15.72
Marking + Tackling + Positioning combo = 15.23
Crossing + Technique + Longshots combo = 11.23
Leadership = 4.67
Aggression = 1.62
GK:
Reflexes = 19.88
Acceleration = 12.10
Pace = 12.10
Command of Area = 8.53
Determination = 3.97
One On Ones = 2.31
Aerial Reach = 2.19
First Touch = 2.19
Rushing Out (Tendency) = 1.74
Punching (Tendency) = 1.70
Concentration = 1.46
Technique = 0.41
Handling = 0.20
Throwing = -0.24
Communication = -0.45
Eccentricity = -2.55
Jumping Reach = -3.63
Strength = -4.11
Kicking = -4.41
Stamina = -6.70
Notes:
The attributes are represented as relative to each other. +1 reflexes on the GK is equivalent to +0.2 pace on ALL outfield players.
I count +1 for win and +0.333 for draw (before conversion), that's all I'm judging by.
The negative GK attributes are not mistakes from one-off outliers. For instance for Strength here's the tests and trend:
Strength 1 (1000 samples) = W 262 (26.2%), D 209 (20.9%), L 529 (52.9%), 1.29-1.85
Strength 10 (1000 samples) = W 257 (25.7%), D 203 (20.3%), L 540 (54.0%), 1.27-1.84
Strength 12 (1000 samples) = W 252 (25.2%), D 212 (21.2%), L 536 (53.6%), 1.27-1.86
Strength 16 (1000 samples) = W 244 (24.4%), D 204 (20.4%), L 552 (55.2%), 1.23-1.83
I'm being selective about what I test. Some I just do '1' and '18'. If the result is unusual, like Strength, or crucial, like Reflexes, I do more intervals. I haven't done this for 1 or 2 yet though such as GK stamina.
Because attributes are non-linear, I've decided to represent the results here as more typical/realistic values rather than simply '1' vs. '20'. A few examples to illustrate what some of the above figures are derived from:
Pace 15 > 16 or 14 = 51.4165
Acceleration 15 > 16 or 14 = 48.25
Leadership 8 > 18 = 24
Strength 6 > 10 = 32.334
Aggression 6 > 12 = 5
Dribbling 6 > 10 = 52
I've found a few (relatively minor but notable) differences to blackbird's results so far. For instance aggression does matter, but mostly only going from 1 > 6 (blackbird only did 4 > 8, and higher). I did not see a significant difference for Strength going from 10 > 20, but 6 > 10 is significant. I'll be posting the extended results later that bears this out.
It could partly be that blackbird used a tactic that affects the outcomes. I've used a variant of the Mars Attacks V7 tactic (433 formation) for my testing. I've previously done all my testing with the Knap tactic, so when I realized I was using the V7 tactic, I figured I'll just continue with it anyway since that will shed light at the same time on whether tactics/formations affect attribute outcomes or not. And it doesn't seem that they do.. so long as they are an intense gegenpress style tactic at least I guess.
Later on my results should be able to mostly complement blackbird's results to give a more complete picture (i.e. values for 1, 4, 6, 8, 10, etc.)
And that your result is almost the same what FM-Arena tested for us 2 years ago
https://fm-arena.com/thread/14009-attribute-testing-football-manager-24/
From FM-Arena's test we learned that:
1) Acceleration, Pace and Dribbling are the most valuable attributes by FAR for Outfield and if you look for them for your Outfields then you're safe, you just can't go wrong because they are MASSIVE compared to other attributes.
2) Reflexes, Agility and Acceleration are the most valuable attributes by FAR for GKs and if you look for them for your GKs then you're safe, you just can't go wrong because they are MASSIVE compared to other attributes.
And you're getting a very similar pictures here.
P.S. You should also tested Agility for GK, it did well in FM-Arena's test.
Tsubasa said: And that your result is almost the same what FM-Arena tested for us 2 years ago
https://fm-arena.com/thread/14009-attribute-testing-football-manager-24/
From FM-Arena's test we learned that:
1) Acceleration, Pace and Dribbling are the most valuable attributes by FAR for Outfield and if you look for them for your Outfields then you're safe.
2) Reflexes, Agility and Acceleration are the most valuable attributes by FAR for GKs and if you look for them for your GK's then you're safe.
And you're getting a very similar pictures here.
P.S. You should also tested Agility for GK, it did well in FM-Arena's test.
*cracks knuckles*
I kind of had a feeling people would interpret it this way - I had in mind that some people are no doubt going to unwittingly take this as a set of weights to plug into Genie Scout, which is basically the same error.
What I found since those 2 years ago is that real player rankings do not line up with the attribute test data.
This is why on the first page my attribute template has dribbling at '13' and work rate at '11', while in my FMST26 weights just below it, dribbling is 14.3 and work rate is 66.5. We have evolved beyond individual attribute testing as the source of weights, or at least I have. The method I came up with was to change the attribute weights around until it fit as closely as possible the real player results - and I've tested the resulting weights and found them to be superior.
Now someone might chime in and say 'well I'm not interested in weights, I just wanted to know what going from '8' pace to '20' pace results in'. To that I'd say good for you, but in regards to what I'm doing, I'm going beyond that.
Now, returning to the present.. Why am I doing attribute tests now then?
The plan is this:
1) Utilize LightningFlik's program to more accurately identify attribute result curves, and previously unknown attribute combinations
2) Use the program to also rapidly do mass testing of individual players for the real player ranking list
3) Use what turns up out of it all to make better informed guesses for the selection of weights to try and match real player rankings
Attribute testing isn't the main benefit of LightingFlik's tool IMO, it's stuff like what's he posted finding about how the game works, and the ability to do mass tests of player swaps with ease, and perhaps a lot more.
The ability to do attribute testing 20+ times faster is nice, but not exactly a game changer. You could already do it before, and it was done - by FM Arena, Harvest Green, myself, etc. - it's just about how much time are you willing to sink into it.
That said, the ability to do 1000 samples in 3 minutes or so does enable some previously unrealistic things, like getting accurate read on the GK attributes. Even my own manual findings on GK have not been that satisfactory.
I did do agility, I forgot to add it in. I'll add it in now.
Edit: Actually I see why I left agility out. I've got mixed results on it. What we can glean from that at least is that agility probably doesn't matter that much, but I want to do some more testing on it to provide further clarification.
Attribute testing is like all these health studies that tell you 2 eggs/week = +14% death risk
Calibrating weights to real player rankings is like eating the Mediterranean diet because people who eat it live longer and are generally healthier.
Sometimes the two contradict each other, but they're probably largely consistent with each other if only you were aware of the nuance.
And what we can do is use one to tell us about the other. Perhaps one is more valid than the other, but nonetheless both kinds of information remain important.
Meanwhile LightingFlik just came up with the AI that can cure cancer, but we're using it to verify the basics first, like what foods are best to eat and just how healthy are eggs exactly.
That's my take on it.