Here're some conclusions that we can draw from the result above:
- obviously, "meta" attributes is the real thing
- it doesn't seem there're minimal/optimal levels for other non-meta attributes that must be reached
- "non-meta" attributes still also matter because increasing 4 meta attributes to 20 gave less boost to the score than increased only 1 meta attribute but having other "non-meta" attributes at a much higher level - https://fm-arena.com/tactic/7528-5-points-to-pace-for-all-positions/. Yes, "non-meta" attributes also matter but their impact is much less than the impact of "meta" attributes.
Also, there's one important thing to understand when in our tactic testing league we set Acceleration attribute of a player to "20" then his Accelerating attribute will be 5-6 points higher than the Acceleration attribute any other player in the league.
But when you play the game in normal game and you try to outsmart the AI mangers by focusing on the meta attributes, you really shouldn't expect "miracle results", especially, when you play in the top leagues such as English Premier League and other because just look at the players in the top clubs of such leagues:
As you can see there's a lot of players in the top clubs that have the meta attributes at 17-20 level so when you play in the top leagues and even if you manage to bring in your club players that have the meta attributes at 17-18 level then still you won't be dominate the league because there're many clubs that also have a lot of player with maximized meta attributes.
Zippo said: As you can see there's a lot of players in the top clubs that have the meta attributes at 17-20 level so when you play in the top leagues and even if you manage to bring in your club players that have the meta attributes at 17-18 level then still you won't be dominate the league because there're many clubs that also have a lot of player with maximized meta attributes. Expand
That's why I always wonder when I see people ask "is 15 Acceleration enough for a player?"
15 Acceleration might be enough if your opponents have 10 Acceleration but what if your opponents have 20 Acceleration? So would be 15 Acceleration enough in this case?
People must understand that your players might be great but you still lose if your opponent have greater players.
In my career as a player with a +400k database, there are only so many players who are pace-acc-jumping-dribbling, attributes +15, and 3 of them are in my own team (Samsunspor, in 2047).
Again, in the same game, there is only 1 player with pace-acc-dribbling attributes +17.
Again, in the same game, there is only 1 player with pace-acc attributes +18.
Solaris said: That's why I always wonder when I see people ask "is 15 Acceleration enough for a player?"
15 Acceleration might be enough if your opponents have 10 Acceleration but what if your opponents have 20 Acceleration? So would be 15 Acceleration enough in this case?
People must understand that your players might be great but you still lose if your opponent have greater players. Expand
There is when meta tactics comes into play they make the game easier cause you outplay them in tactics, AI tactics are a meme most play with wing play so 10-20 rated here and ofc easy to win with Torino first season, if AI played meta overachieving would be absolutely impossible because you will face 5-10 teams in the league who play attacking high tempo attacking roles and high press but hey the game is also for the non meta players who with an AI who is smarter in tactcis would suffer alot.
pixar said: In my career as a player with a +400k database, there are only so many players who are pace-acc-jumping-dribbling, attributes +15, and 3 of them are in my own team (Samsunspor, in 2047).
Again, in the same game, there is only 1 player with pace-acc-dribbling attributes +17.
Again, in the same game, there is only 1 player with pace-acc attributes +18.
Cheers for those tests, very interesting results! I've seen quite a few hefty discussions about the implications of your tests, but I haven't been able to find some relevant info that would be required to actually understand what they mean.
In your test above, you simply "hard set" and froze the attributes, so the game does not distribute a few more attributes to get back to the CA, is that correct? Can you confirm that you did the same thing in the "Player Attribute Testing", e.g. setting +5 Pace does not decrease other attributes so the CA stays the same?
Because depending on that, the meaning of results changes quite a bit.
If +5 for an attribute means its plain +5 and everything else stays the same, this wouldn't account for the fact that some attributes affect CA more than others. On the other hand, this would also mean that it's very odd to see barely any changes for most attributes compared to the "default" test, as the actual CA would be increased.
If +5 for an attribute means its increased by +5 and the game scales the other attributes so that the CA stays the same, this would mean that the increased "meta" attributes in that specific scenario provide the most benefit. This would also mean, if there's no change to the overall CA, it would be expected that we don't see any changes in the end result for most attributes, as it should roughly balance out. I was hoping that this was the case, as this would mean that most attributes would be farely balanced.
------
Irregardless of this, I think your statement:
Zippo said: Also, there's one important thing to understand when in our tactic testing league we set Acceleration attribute of a player to "20" then his Accelerating attribute will be 5-6 points higher than the Acceleration attribute any other player in the league. Expand
Cannot be stressed enough. The current meta tactics all use very high tempo and lots of dribbling, so setting some attribute like passing or overview +5 is maybe relevant to the DMs and AMs, but mostly irrelevant for most other players. Changing the physical attibutes, however, affects each and every position by quite a lot, as their direct counterpart will ALWAYS be inferior in a direct comparsion (ceteris paribus). The only "odd one out" is the dribbling attribute, but all meta tactics use "more dribbling" in general and for each individual role, so it would be interesting to see the results for some possession based tactic.
Have you tried these exact same tests with a "Clean Sheet" Tactic?
Thanks a lot for your work and Merry Christmas Svonn
@Zippo Question regarding the lower ranked attributes.
I frequently see on several "attribute weighting" tests (squirrel_plays) or the weighting on the editor highly value "decisions" for multiple positions. However, testing on FM consistently ranks +5 decisions the same as base attributes.
What can we draw from this? I'm kind of stuck if these lower ranked attributes in the FM Arena tests do matter more than I think?
Zippo said: If your are talking abut the official attribute weighting then it's been proven many times by our tests that they are far away from being "correct". Expand
Thanks. Really bugs me that it's the case, but glad to hear that it's been disproved.
so does this mean if you have a squad with players that have more pace/acc compared to other club in your league you will most certainly beat everyone?
I've been signing players with minimum 15 pace/acc and it's amazing how well they perform despite mediocre stats elsewhere.
Take this guy, 750K from Rangers. He's fast, agile and can dribble but that's about it. Even his poor mentals didn't stop him averaging a 7.0 rating over 20 games.
Here is another very strong physical player that cost only 2.8mil. He has poor marking and position stats (by Serie A standards) which is what you'd think should be important for playing DM but he averaged a 7.05 in 31 games.
I have the highest average acceleration, pace and agility in Serie A and won the league in my first season. 3rd best crossing and dribbling across all positions but most other attributes are average or above average.
My strikers have below the league average in finishing and off the ball but they are about 3 points higher in pace/acc than the league average, highest dribbling too so I guess they're just walking the ball into the net. My midfield also has below average passing but that doesn't seem to matter, as long as they have the best pace and acceleration - 2nd highest dribbling too which helps.
So, now I sold my slower expensive players, brought in some guys who run fast for cheap as well as potential wonderkids, and still have 50mil in transfer funds with 100k leftover p/w for wages. What I take from that is you can safely ignore your scouts rating players only 2.5 stars as long as they have good physicals and can dribble.
Hi, @Zippo i really like this test you do but after i see each players attributes i have one thought, are we using the players looks like wingers more,playing as a striker in the test?? how did it affect the test result??the first thing come to my head is in all these years good tactics use the same way cross the ball and never appears a target forward position (i know low crosses still work if you have strikers with good jumping reach, but if all of the strikers in your team have just 9 jumping reach, you wont let them to be the target forward, you wont make your wing player aim crosses at your target forward, and i think the only efficient way you cross the ball is low crosses )
once again, i want to say i show all my love and respect to you and @Droid &any other guys help to do all kind of tests. your work and other members tactic makes FMARENA such a a place i love, not only with my FM life you know, also affect in my real life. So i trying to do something become a small part of FMARENA, i mix good tactic together(dont have ability create my own one), and i find potential incoming improvement to the test league :separate striker with these winger position
here is some search i do in the FM24 editor, want to see how many real players can fufill the meta player attributes in game. its important to claim i strongly agree the TOP 3 attributes is PACE, ACCELERATION,JUMPING REACH, so thats the filter,i dont care about other things. in conclusion the search shows that strikers in real game seams have less pace&acc than the strikers in test league but with better jumping reach. because strikers in most time fight with opposites central defender i also doing the search of CDs
CDs attributes is 13 in PACE&ACC,15 IN JUMPING REACH, MR,ML,AMR,AML,ST is 15 in PACE&ACC,9 in Jumping Reach Playing positions rating I use 18 cross all position & a single 16 in strikers Players accomplished in MR&LR is rare, I make it not so clear to see and didnt compare with other position
From all these stats I think the average meta player attributes for a striker in test league should be close to 14 in pace&acc, 12 in jumping reach instead of the 15 15 9 same as wingers
It was something that I thought about too @hziz1 but not in this way.
So what I had thought about, although I don't know if it would be better or unnecessary in the end, was that each attribute of the testing league players would be an average per position from the 5 major leagues in the game. For example to look at the "Aerial Reach" attribute and all the other GK attributes and come up with an average for each. Do the same for DRL and for other positions etc. There may be a problem here in this method though because there may be players who have 0 value in some or all of their attributes.
That way we would have an average team - roughly - for the 5 leagues. Also increase the reputation of the test league to 200 so that it reflects the importance of the matches as it is for the CL in-game. Again this might have an impact in ME.
Delicious said: Doing my save with de zerbi : none wanna join, so i do literally went for ... :
What can i say? Let's pray Expand
How did your save go with those players? I would like to know the opinion of someone who has tried "only - meta attributes - players" in a real scenario.
Stuaret said: How did your save go with those players? I would like to know the opinion of someone who has tried "only - meta attributes - players" in a real scenario.
Thank you very much! Expand
Won everything, i even made a run with all "maeda" and "zouma" physical attribute :
hziz1 said: TOP 3 attributes is PACE, ACCELERATION,JUMPING REACH Expand
Don't forget Dribbling. Jumping Reach (71.6 points) and Dribbling (69.8 points) are pretty close together. And then comes Balance (65.3) which isn't negligible. And then comes Concentration (64.5 points) and then Anticipation (64.3 points) and so on. https://fm-arena.com/table/26-player-attributes-testing/
Do you see the point? I can create a player which has e. g. lower Jumping Reach but higher Dribbling, Balance and Concentration and is therefore a better player. It is good that we have found Meta-Attributes but we should see these attributes in the right context and not in a "I don't care all other attributes" attitude because this is not adequate. Winning a league with only a few player attributes is spectacular, but it is not the optimal. Winning a league against AI managers isn't difficult. I can do this with any average team when I use the right tactic and improve team cohesion. That can't be the benchmark.
I noticed that the attribute testing is using a 4-2-3-1, whereas the current meta is dominated by a 4-2-2-2.
I'm curious whether running a 4-2-2-2 or 4-4-2 would rank the meta attributes differently, perhaps around the mid-tier.
The thing that has me a bit puzzled, is a bit of a chicken & egg problem. Do the tactics make pace & acceleration dominate, or do pace & acceleration make the tactics dominate?
Without knowing that, I wouldn't know how to answer the question: Is there a tactic in which Decision & Technique would dominate the way pace & acceleration dominate now?
Hey, everybody!
I'm sure many of you guys have seen the results of our Player Attributes Testing for FM24 - https://fm-arena.com/table/26-player-attributes-testing/
The results of the testing have raised many important questions and there're a few of them:
- Should you pay attention only to meta attributes such as Pace, Acceleration and some other?
- What about other attributes? Do they matter at all?
- Are there any "optimal" levels for non-meta attributes that must be reach before you can ignore them?
So we've done another testing in the hope that it can answers the questions above.
On the screenshots below you can find the default attributes of the players in our tactic testing league.
FORWARDS
MIDFIELDERS
CENTRAL DEFENDERS
FULL BACKS
Ok, now let's edit every player in the human controlled teams and set their non-meta attributes to "7" and their meta attributes to "20".
So the attributes of every player in the human controlled teams look like this:
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The CA of every player has decreased by 40-50 points.
Now, let's test re-test "Red General 4231 v1.0" tactic with the adjusted players - https://fm-arena.com/thread/8026-red-general-4231-v1-0/
Here're some conclusions that we can draw from the result above:
- obviously, "meta" attributes is the real thing
- it doesn't seem there're minimal/optimal levels for other non-meta attributes that must be reached
- "non-meta" attributes still also matter because increasing 4 meta attributes to 20 gave less boost to the score than increased only 1 meta attribute but having other "non-meta" attributes at a much higher level - https://fm-arena.com/tactic/7528-5-points-to-pace-for-all-positions/. Yes, "non-meta" attributes also matter but their impact is much less than the impact of "meta" attributes.
Also, there's one important thing to understand when in our tactic testing league we set Acceleration attribute of a player to "20" then his Accelerating attribute will be 5-6 points higher than the Acceleration attribute any other player in the league.
But when you play the game in normal game and you try to outsmart the AI mangers by focusing on the meta attributes, you really shouldn't expect "miracle results", especially, when you play in the top leagues such as English Premier League and other because just look at the players in the top clubs of such leagues:
As you can see there's a lot of players in the top clubs that have the meta attributes at 17-20 level so when you play in the top leagues and even if you manage to bring in your club players that have the meta attributes at 17-18 level then still you won't be dominate the league because there're many clubs that also have a lot of player with maximized meta attributes.
Zippo said: As you can see there's a lot of players in the top clubs that have the meta attributes at 17-20 level so when you play in the top leagues and even if you manage to bring in your club players that have the meta attributes at 17-18 level then still you won't be dominate the league because there're many clubs that also have a lot of player with maximized meta attributes.
That's why I always wonder when I see people ask "is 15 Acceleration enough for a player?"
15 Acceleration might be enough if your opponents have 10 Acceleration but what if your opponents have 20 Acceleration? So would be 15 Acceleration enough in this case?
People must understand that your players might be great but you still lose if your opponent have greater players.
In my career as a player with a +400k database, there are only so many players who are pace-acc-jumping-dribbling, attributes +15, and 3 of them are in my own team (Samsunspor, in 2047).
Again, in the same game, there is only 1 player with pace-acc-dribbling attributes +17.
Again, in the same game, there is only 1 player with pace-acc attributes +18.
Solaris said: That's why I always wonder when I see people ask "is 15 Acceleration enough for a player?"
15 Acceleration might be enough if your opponents have 10 Acceleration but what if your opponents have 20 Acceleration? So would be 15 Acceleration enough in this case?
People must understand that your players might be great but you still lose if your opponent have greater players.
There is when meta tactics comes into play they make the game easier cause you outplay them in tactics, AI tactics are a meme most play with wing play so 10-20 rated here and ofc easy to win with Torino first season, if AI played meta overachieving would be absolutely impossible because you will face 5-10 teams in the league who play attacking high tempo attacking roles and high press but hey the game is also for the non meta players who with an AI who is smarter in tactcis would suffer alot.
pixar said: In my career as a player with a +400k database, there are only so many players who are pace-acc-jumping-dribbling, attributes +15, and 3 of them are in my own team (Samsunspor, in 2047).
Again, in the same game, there is only 1 player with pace-acc-dribbling attributes +17.
Again, in the same game, there is only 1 player with pace-acc attributes +18.
can u share with us this shortlist?
Doing my save with de zerbi : none wanna join, so i do literally went for ... :
What can i say? Let's pray
letsgo9 said: can u share with us this shortlist?
You can search them through FM PreGame Editor
dzek said: You can search them through FM PreGame Editor
I ll keep with squirrell algorithm then; just won the trebe on spain on the 5th season with Valladolid
letsgo9 said: can u share with us this shortlist?
I am in the year 2047. Most of the players on this list are regen. If you still want, I can share
Hey Zippo,
Cheers for those tests, very interesting results! I've seen quite a few hefty discussions about the implications of your tests, but I haven't been able to find some relevant info that would be required to actually understand what they mean.
In your test above, you simply "hard set" and froze the attributes, so the game does not distribute a few more attributes to get back to the CA, is that correct? Can you confirm that you did the same thing in the "Player Attribute Testing", e.g. setting +5 Pace does not decrease other attributes so the CA stays the same?
Because depending on that, the meaning of results changes quite a bit.
If +5 for an attribute means its plain +5 and everything else stays the same, this wouldn't account for the fact that some attributes affect CA more than others. On the other hand, this would also mean that it's very odd to see barely any changes for most attributes compared to the "default" test, as the actual CA would be increased.
If +5 for an attribute means its increased by +5 and the game scales the other attributes so that the CA stays the same, this would mean that the increased "meta" attributes in that specific scenario provide the most benefit. This would also mean, if there's no change to the overall CA, it would be expected that we don't see any changes in the end result for most attributes, as it should roughly balance out. I was hoping that this was the case, as this would mean that most attributes would be farely balanced.
------
Irregardless of this, I think your statement:
Zippo said: Also, there's one important thing to understand when in our tactic testing league we set Acceleration attribute of a player to "20" then his Accelerating attribute will be 5-6 points higher than the Acceleration attribute any other player in the league.
Cannot be stressed enough. The current meta tactics all use very high tempo and lots of dribbling, so setting some attribute like passing or overview +5 is maybe relevant to the DMs and AMs, but mostly irrelevant for most other players. Changing the physical attibutes, however, affects each and every position by quite a lot, as their direct counterpart will ALWAYS be inferior in a direct comparsion (ceteris paribus). The only "odd one out" is the dribbling attribute, but all meta tactics use "more dribbling" in general and for each individual role, so it would be interesting to see the results for some possession based tactic.
Have you tried these exact same tests with a "Clean Sheet" Tactic?
Thanks a lot for your work and Merry Christmas
Svonn
@Zippo Question regarding the lower ranked attributes.
I frequently see on several "attribute weighting" tests (squirrel_plays) or the weighting on the editor highly value "decisions" for multiple positions. However, testing on FM consistently ranks +5 decisions the same as base attributes.
What can we draw from this? I'm kind of stuck if these lower ranked attributes in the FM Arena tests do matter more than I think?
Xeno94 said: I frequently see on several "attribute weighting" tests (squirrel_plays)
Hi,
I have no idea what testing methodology was used to get those numbers so I can't say anything about it.
Xeno94 said: or the weighting on the editor highly value "decisions" for multiple positions.
If your are talking abut the official attribute weighting then it's been proven many times by our tests that they are far away from being "correct".
Zippo said: If your are talking abut the official attribute weighting then it's been proven many times by our tests that they are far away from being "correct".
Thanks. Really bugs me that it's the case, but glad to hear that it's been disproved.
so does this mean if you have a squad with players that have more pace/acc compared to other club in your league you will most certainly beat everyone?
I've been signing players with minimum 15 pace/acc and it's amazing how well they perform despite mediocre stats elsewhere.
What I take from that is you can safely ignore your scouts rating players only 2.5 stars as long as they have good physicals and can dribble.
Take this guy, 750K from Rangers. He's fast, agile and can dribble but that's about it. Even his poor mentals didn't stop him averaging a 7.0 rating over 20 games.
Here is another very strong physical player that cost only 2.8mil. He has poor marking and position stats (by Serie A standards) which is what you'd think should be important for playing DM but he averaged a 7.05 in 31 games.
I have the highest average acceleration, pace and agility in Serie A and won the league in my first season. 3rd best crossing and dribbling across all positions but most other attributes are average or above average.
My strikers have below the league average in finishing and off the ball but they are about 3 points higher in pace/acc than the league average, highest dribbling too so I guess they're just walking the ball into the net. My midfield also has below average passing but that doesn't seem to matter, as long as they have the best pace and acceleration - 2nd highest dribbling too which helps.
So, now I sold my slower expensive players, brought in some guys who run fast for cheap as well as potential wonderkids, and still have 50mil in transfer funds with 100k leftover p/w for wages.
Hi, @Zippo
i really like this test you do but after i see each players attributes i have one thought, are we using the players looks like wingers more,playing as a striker in the test?? how did it affect the test result??the first thing come to my head is in all these years good tactics use the same way cross the ball and never appears a target forward position (i know low crosses still work if you have strikers with good jumping reach, but if all of the strikers in your team have just 9 jumping reach, you wont let them to be the target forward, you wont make your wing player aim crosses at your target forward, and i think the only efficient way you cross the ball is low crosses )
once again, i want to say i show all my love and respect to you and @Droid &any other guys help to do all kind of tests. your work and other members tactic makes FMARENA such a a place i love, not only with my FM life you know, also affect in my real life. So i trying to do something become a small part of FMARENA, i mix good tactic together(dont have ability create my own one), and i find potential incoming improvement to the test league :separate striker with these winger position
here is some search i do in the FM24 editor, want to see how many real players can fufill the meta player attributes in game. its important to claim i strongly agree the TOP 3 attributes is PACE, ACCELERATION,JUMPING REACH, so thats the filter,i dont care about other things. in conclusion the search shows that strikers in real game seams have less pace&acc than the strikers in test league but with better jumping reach. because strikers in most time fight with opposites central defender i also doing the search of CDs
CDs attributes is 13 in PACE&ACC,15 IN JUMPING REACH, MR,ML,AMR,AML,ST is 15 in PACE&ACC,9 in Jumping Reach
Playing positions rating I use 18 cross all position & a single 16 in strikers
Players accomplished in MR&LR is rare, I make it not so clear to see and didnt compare with other position
From all these stats I think the average meta player attributes for a striker in test league should be close to 14 in pace&acc, 12 in jumping reach instead of the 15 15 9 same as wingers
It was something that I thought about too @hziz1 but not in this way.
So what I had thought about, although I don't know if it would be better or unnecessary in the end, was that each attribute of the testing league players would be an average per position from the 5 major leagues in the game. For example to look at the "Aerial Reach" attribute and all the other GK attributes and come up with an average for each. Do the same for DRL and for other positions etc. There may be a problem here in this method though because there may be players who have 0 value in some or all of their attributes.
That way we would have an average team - roughly - for the 5 leagues. Also increase the reputation of the test league to 200 so that it reflects the importance of the matches as it is for the CL in-game. Again this might have an impact in ME.
we should create filter to search players for each position with this results. That would help us very much in game.
Something like fm scout did year ago(or two).
Delicious said: Doing my save with de zerbi : none wanna join, so i do literally went for ... :
What can i say? Let's pray
How did your save go with those players? I would like to know the opinion of someone who has tried "only - meta attributes - players" in a real scenario.
Thank you very much!
Stuaret said: How did your save go with those players? I would like to know the opinion of someone who has tried "only - meta attributes - players" in a real scenario.
Thank you very much!
Won everything, i even made a run with all "maeda" and "zouma" physical attribute :
https://youtube.com/live/c386Ja8eWrA?feature=share
hziz1 said: TOP 3 attributes is PACE, ACCELERATION,JUMPING REACH
Don't forget Dribbling. Jumping Reach (71.6 points) and Dribbling (69.8 points) are pretty close together. And then comes Balance (65.3) which isn't negligible. And then comes Concentration (64.5
points) and then Anticipation (64.3 points) and so on.
https://fm-arena.com/table/26-player-attributes-testing/
Do you see the point? I can create a player which has e. g. lower Jumping Reach but higher Dribbling, Balance and Concentration and is therefore a better player. It is good that we have found Meta-Attributes but we should see these attributes in the right context and not in a "I don't care all other attributes" attitude because this is not adequate. Winning a league with only a few player attributes is spectacular, but it is not the optimal. Winning a league against AI managers isn't difficult. I can do this with any average team when I use the right tactic and improve team cohesion. That can't be the benchmark.
I noticed that the attribute testing is using a 4-2-3-1,
whereas the current meta is dominated by a 4-2-2-2.
I'm curious whether running a 4-2-2-2 or 4-4-2 would rank the meta attributes differently, perhaps around the mid-tier.
The thing that has me a bit puzzled, is a bit of a chicken & egg problem.
Do the tactics make pace & acceleration dominate,
or do pace & acceleration make the tactics dominate?
Without knowing that, I wouldn't know how to answer the question:
Is there a tactic in which Decision & Technique would dominate the way pace & acceleration dominate now?