harvestgreen22 said: They are exactly the same in combat effectiveness. Because only this "3 Pace" is valid. the "20" is "useless". Of course, this is an ideal assumption, and the value of "23-3=20" will also have a small effect. Expand
I think the mistake is to think the other seventeen attributes of the table are useless, and only three are important at all. If you pick the attributes isolated, then you are probably right. By the table, pace, acceleration, jumping reach, and dribbling, are by far the most important. However, each of those other attributes have some small influence, and when combined they seem to make quite a difference. Dribbling alone increases expected points by almost 10, while balance, concentration, and anticipation increases almost 5 expected points each. Then you have all other attributes that increase by 1 or 3, and it is important to remember that those tests are not definitive, and only considered 2.4k matches each.
What I mean is you are focusing on the three attributes that are possibly responsible for 50%-60% of the performance of players, and ignoring the other seventeen that might just form the remaining 40-50%. It would be awesome if you were creating players with 20 in pace, acceleration, jumping, and dribbling, to then complete training for their other attributes, but by the table you showed, most the players were barely 17 in each. That is nothing impressive, and you can easily achieve that by hiring some quick youngsters with 13 or 14 starting pace and acceleration, without the need to sacrifice dribbling and other skills.
Again, you can win all championships with players at 70% of maximum performance, since most players in the game might be using only 50%-60% (because of low speed). However, you can do even better with players at 80%-100% of performance.
A lot has been written in this thread, so what is the best training schedule for maximum increase in CA if you don't mind which attributes are increased?
ZaZ said: I think the mistake is to think the other seventeen attributes of the table are useless, and only three are important at all. If you pick the attributes isolated, then you are probably right. By the table, pace, acceleration, jumping reach, and dribbling, are by far the most important. However, each of those other attributes have some small influence, and when combined they seem to make quite a difference. Dribbling alone increases expected points by almost 10, while balance, concentration, and anticipation increases almost 5 expected points each. Then you have all other attributes that increase by 1 or 3, and it is important to remember that those tests are not definitive, and only considered 2.4k matches each.
What I mean is you are focusing on the three attributes that are possibly responsible for 50%-60% of the performance of players, and ignoring the other seventeen that might just form the remaining 40-50%. It would be awesome if you were creating players with 20 in pace, acceleration, jumping, and dribbling, to then complete training for their other attributes, but by the table you showed, most the players were barely 17 in each. That is nothing impressive, and you can easily achieve that by hiring some quick youngsters with 13 or 14 starting pace and acceleration, without the need to sacrifice dribbling and other skills.
Again, you can win all championships with players at 70% of maximum performance, since most players in the game might be using only 50%-60% (because of low speed). However, you can do even better with players at 80%-100% of performance. Expand
This is why I would like the spreadsheet data itself to be accessible to see what attributes are being increased so that I personally can find which training schedule/combination of training schedules achieve the goals I want for my players.
alexej said: A lot has been written in this thread, so what is the best training schedule for maximum increase in CA if you don't mind which attributes are increased? Expand
Routines doesn't matter, it's game time that make your kid grow or not.
I am checking with in-game players, no dummies 10/10 and 200 PA which imo is totaly useless thing to do, since the game will go spaghetti and you will get some mutant in-return.
It's feels like a lotto and the game distribuite those stats,focus or no focus.
Checked with everything up to AM/this one and now checking ZAZ. Point is from your routine you want to keep good condition/sharpness and some team cohesion.
Having analysed this post and related posts and discussions on training schedules, I think I agree with one of ZaZ's comments that you can use the physical attribute maximisation schedule in the youth team and then use the D6 schedule for the first team.
The most interesting finding to me is that you can "cheat" a player's CA-PA ratio if you have the time for it. The schedules show that you can increase a player's CA by around 5-6 per year, all of these points distributed across paca-acc-jump (e.g +2 in each). The main advantage is that you retain the player's PA, because you don't "waste" it on other, less important attributes (which is sad but true in current engine). If you do this from ages 15-18, you can add +6 to pace-acc-jump which is a lot, and then shift towards the schedules that focus on CA growth when the player goes to first team.
Practical example: let's say player has 80 CA and 150 PA, which means that 70 CA can still be attributed in development. If you use the D6 schedule, the player will grow 25 CA per year, of which 5 goes into pace-acc-jump and 20 into other attributes. This means that after 3 years the player will have reached their potential and the distribution of attributes will be on a ratio 1/4 physical/other.
For the same example, if you use the physical attribute maximising schedule, after 3 years the player will have gone from 70 CA to around 85 CA with all increases in attributes in pace-acc-jump (around +5 each). The difference is that the player still has a lot of their potential to be fulfilled, and then you can switch to the D6 schedule once the desired physical attributes are reached. The 85 CA player still has 65 CA to fill in, meaning that another 2-3 years of using D6 schedule can be used to maximise CA growth whilst still developing the physicals.
If you use the physical schedule for 5 years, the player should have around +10 in pace-acc-jump and then have 40 CA left to distribute across mental/technicals, which is still a lot if you can pick the attributes to be developed.
In other words, if you have the time, you can finetune a player's development by first allowing their physicals to be developed greatly and then shifting to other attributes whilst not neglecting physicals.
Im aware that overall, playing matches is most important and that the player's hidden attributes are a decisive factor. I'm also well aware that a lot more discussions can be had on this matter and that further finetuning of these findings is necessary (e.g. the impact of coaching staff, the negative impact on team cohesion or tactical familiarity of the schedules).
Flashedmind said: Having analysed this post and related posts and discussions on training schedules, I think I agree with one of ZaZ's comments that you can use the physical attribute maximisation schedule in the youth team and then use the D6 schedule for the first team.
The most interesting finding to me is that you can "cheat" a player's CA-PA ratio if you have the time for it. The schedules show that you can increase a player's CA by around 5-6 per year, all of these points distributed across paca-acc-jump (e.g +2 in each). The main advantage is that you retain the player's PA, because you don't "waste" it on other, less important attributes (which is sad but true in current engine). If you do this from ages 15-18, you can add +6 to pace-acc-jump which is a lot, and then shift towards the schedules that focus on CA growth when the player goes to first team.
Practical example: let's say player has 80 CA and 150 PA, which means that 70 CA can still be attributed in development. If you use the D6 schedule, the player will grow 25 CA per year, of which 5 goes into pace-acc-jump and 20 into other attributes. This means that after 3 years the player will have reached their potential and the distribution of attributes will be on a ratio 1/4 physical/other.
For the same example, if you use the physical attribute maximising schedule, after 3 years the player will have gone from 70 CA to around 85 CA with all increases in attributes in pace-acc-jump (around +5 each). The difference is that the player still has a lot of their potential to be fulfilled, and then you can switch to the D6 schedule once the desired physical attributes are reached. The 85 CA player still has 65 CA to fill in, meaning that another 2-3 years of using D6 schedule can be used to maximise CA growth whilst still developing the physicals.
If you use the physical schedule for 5 years, the player should have around +10 in pace-acc-jump and then have 40 CA left to distribute across mental/technicals, which is still a lot if you can pick the attributes to be developed.
In other words, if you have the time, you can finetune a player's development by first allowing their physicals to be developed greatly and then shifting to other attributes whilst not neglecting physicals.
Im aware that overall, playing matches is most important and that the player's hidden attributes are a decisive factor. I'm also well aware that a lot more discussions can be had on this matter and that further finetuning of these findings is necessary (e.g. the impact of coaching staff, the negative impact on team cohesion or tactical familiarity of the schedules).
Thoughts? Expand
You are misunderstanding what training does in FM and those test.
If you create a player with all stats 1 and your put a PA 200 after that your player stats distribuiting will go totaly nuts.
You guys should check with in-game players in order to understand how this works.
I took 3 traning routines :
One is all up to your Assistant manager, one is this super rest and Zaz updated.
Since it tooks ages to track every player progession i took a portion of those that plays more and check things out, to how those stats were distribuited.
i did run x3 Runs for every schedule, isn't much but literally took me 3 hours. Point is CA distribuition is the almost the same and literally feels like "RNG" is involved in there or it's basically some stats ain't getting +1 cuz they didn't reach 0.50 etc that's how the "color of those arrow should work".
Now we saying that super rest only cares about pace acceleration and jumping reach in-growth
It's not true, since now taking an example Sylla :
With AM's routines :
With Super Rest :
With Zaz :
It's full of those example, for me training in FM is just about to keep your players condition/sharpness and team cohesion up.
This is how it works in-game, i am doing a pentagon and before this post i was even just giving manual rest 1 or 2 days to my players after the game.
One of my pentagon kids as example, literally i was on individual with AM and didn't even touch it for like 2 years in-game.
Conclusion is there are many factors that make your wonderkids grow, like personality, hiddens etc.
I don't know how you people came to the conclusion that you can create a 20 pace or 20 acceleration player if he ain't supposed to go to that.
So, play your kids or loan them out and check if they dev or not.
About routines i am using a tweak version of super rest and it feels like i am literally cheating since my players are always full condition and ready to play.
here is the live, where i literally used that kind of approach, that's pretty similar with the rest and destroy i was using before (tweak of cadoni's routine on FM23).
Flashedmind said: Having analysed this post and related posts and discussions on training schedules, I think I agree with one of ZaZ's comments that you can use the physical attribute maximisation schedule in the youth team and then use the D6 schedule for the first team.
The most interesting finding to me is that you can "cheat" a player's CA-PA ratio if you have the time for it. The schedules show that you can increase a player's CA by around 5-6 per year, all of these points distributed across paca-acc-jump (e.g +2 in each). The main advantage is that you retain the player's PA, because you don't "waste" it on other, less important attributes (which is sad but true in current engine). If you do this from ages 15-18, you can add +6 to pace-acc-jump which is a lot, and then shift towards the schedules that focus on CA growth when the player goes to first team.
Practical example: let's say player has 80 CA and 150 PA, which means that 70 CA can still be attributed in development. If you use the D6 schedule, the player will grow 25 CA per year, of which 5 goes into pace-acc-jump and 20 into other attributes. This means that after 3 years the player will have reached their potential and the distribution of attributes will be on a ratio 1/4 physical/other.
For the same example, if you use the physical attribute maximising schedule, after 3 years the player will have gone from 70 CA to around 85 CA with all increases in attributes in pace-acc-jump (around +5 each). The difference is that the player still has a lot of their potential to be fulfilled, and then you can switch to the D6 schedule once the desired physical attributes are reached. The 85 CA player still has 65 CA to fill in, meaning that another 2-3 years of using D6 schedule can be used to maximise CA growth whilst still developing the physicals.
If you use the physical schedule for 5 years, the player should have around +10 in pace-acc-jump and then have 40 CA left to distribute across mental/technicals, which is still a lot if you can pick the attributes to be developed.
In other words, if you have the time, you can finetune a player's development by first allowing their physicals to be developed greatly and then shifting to other attributes whilst not neglecting physicals.
Im aware that overall, playing matches is most important and that the player's hidden attributes are a decisive factor. I'm also well aware that a lot more discussions can be had on this matter and that further finetuning of these findings is necessary (e.g. the impact of coaching staff, the negative impact on team cohesion or tactical familiarity of the schedules).
Thoughts? Expand
Assuming it actually works in this ideal way. The issue is you are taking numbers from a perfect player. A 150 PA player with less than ideal professionalism will not grow in this way. Anyone who has been tracking development of players will tell you that yes maybe 25 CA per season is sometimes possible, it's very improbable even with the best of prospects and certainly not year after year.
So instead of 5 points in physicals and 5 CA growth it'll be more like 1-2. Additionally since his growth will be so slow it'll take a long time before you are able to offer him game time. Also no other team will want to take him on loan because his CA will be so low, doesn't matter if his distribution is super meta.
I think the tests are valid, but in a real game once you factor in that PA isn't 200, that facilities aren't always 20/20, coaches not ideal, professionalism rarely 20, you can't really offer them enough game time ... everything put together means that the redistribution into physical attributes is probably way too slow. Unless you want to waste 5 seasons for each player in the hopes that some of them work out and that you can catch up on CA growth afterwards (also very questionable as growth slows down with age).
I think this training method is probably best at growing physical attributes in the shortest amount of time because its double intensity with a lower risk of injury due to less training schedules.
There's probably a schedule where its double intensity: Quick+match practisex2+ 1xattack+defense + maybe something else per week. Attacking and defending training max out efficiency at 4 but it's not really focused, you can just run 1 per week to stop the attribute decay.
The biggest problem I see with the data collected on CA/PA growth is:
1. Its simply counting CA growth per season but doesn't correctly discount how much decision cost in CA which inflate a players CA without meaningfully improve a players ability (I could be wrong since I didn't see the weighting, same thing with aggression which is a negative stat)
2. A lot of the technical training/attacking/defending training yeilded 0 growth for attacking unit or defensive unit. Is it because the tester have not moved players into the unit that's being focused trained? That skew the efficiency toward the training that train outfield players as a whole.
Flashedmind said: If you use the physical schedule for 5 years, the player should have around +10 in pace-acc-jump and then have 40 CA left to distribute across mental/technicals, which is still a lot if you can pick the attributes to be developed. Expand
Just a small correction. If you do that and then change to normal training, it will not train only technical and mental, but it will also continue training physical. That means you would not need to wait until pace and acceleration are at 20, since they would continue growing.
Can I do the same thing with the technical attributes, or this only works with the pace, accel, and jumping reach? Like, some kind of technical training only in a week with additional focus on certain technicals and double intensity, and also replacing quickness with certain technicals training. Because, I think Technicals are also very important in matches, not just physique (Adama Traore).
Surtant said: Can I do the same thing with the technical attributes, or this only works with the pace, accel, and jumping reach? Like, some kind of technical training only in a week with additional focus on certain technicals and double intensity, and also replacing quickness with certain technicals training. Because, I think Technicals are also very important in matches, not just physique (Adama Traore). Expand
You probably cannot do this for technicals. The game designed the way that with no training all attributes decline and then naturally get redistributed into physical attributes
Delicious said: You are misunderstanding what training does in FM and those test.
Conclusion is there are many factors that make your wonderkids grow, like personality, hiddens etc.
I don't know how you people came to the conclusion that you can create a 20 pace or 20 acceleration player if he ain't supposed to go to that. Expand
Not sure why you presume that everyone else is misunderstanding training when the purpose of this forum is discussing game mechanics and many of the commenters here have contributed to this discussion in a positive way. As for me personally, I'm pretty sure I understand training in FM. My comment was meant to discuss some concepts of harvestgreen22 finding's in a more abstract or theoretical manner. Of course there are other factors in play, I recognise this in the last paragraph of my comment.
If a player "ain't supposed to do that" then I suppose you mean he doesn't have the right combination of hidden attributes, personality and PA to acquire high numbers in a sufficient number of attributes. Isn't it precisely the goal of research like this to contribute to us discovering under what circumstances and what types of players "are supposed to do that" ?
As Yarema touched upon, ultimately what we want to have is a generalisable training schedule which allows for optimal development of players of different levels of PA, hidden attributes and personalities. It's not hard to see that a player with 180+ PA and 20 professionalism will be able to develop crazy attributes with the current training schedules. It's more about, as you yourself say, taking into account the realism of the game and making sure that the training schedules contribute to both the development aspect (e.g. increasing attributes and avoiding injuries) as well as the 'team' aspect (e.g. team cohesion, tactical familiarity, sharpness).
Me personally, I'd like to have more insight into how much agency we ourselves have in targeting specific attributes to develop through training, or if it's all just a meme by FM to give the illusion of making a meaningful impact with training. For example (again abstract), imagine you have a team full of central defenders and you only target marking, heading and tackling with training, how much of the attribute growth do you actually control with training? Will the physicals remain the same (or deteriorate) or are they hardcoded to improve no matter what training you use?
I've read through some other training posts and will experiment with the following schedules, which try to combine some of the insights from different contributors (I haven't decided on training intensity but I now use no pitch - no pitch - no pitch - half - double):
After testing it a bit and based on the testing so far by Harvestgreen22, Most efficient ones that not just maximize physical attributes but delaying decay appeared to be K5 (3 training per week), L5 (4 training per week), I6 (4 Training per week), H6 (5 Training per week).
Imo L5 seems like the best since it has slight better growth than I6, Keeping in mind more training sessions = more chance of injuries. Whether L5 is worth it over K5 would be up to your personal preference.
I would do this training schedule and combine with the glitch of "super rest" and sprinkle in some match focus. To me, it would produce the best players ability wise in accordance to Acc/Pace/JR over performance even it doesn't produce the most well rounded players. You would look at more 18/16/10 instead of 16/16/14 guys in terms of Acc/pace/dribbling.
Footballenjoyer said: After testing it a bit and based on the testing so far by Harvestgreen22, Most efficient ones that not just maximize physical attributes but delaying decay appeared to be K5 (3 training per week), L5 (4 training per week), I6 (4 Training per week), H6 (5 Training per week).
Imo L5 seems like the best since it has slight better growth than I6, Keeping in mind more training sessions = more chance of injuries. Whether L5 is worth it over K5 would be up to your personal preference.
I would do this training schedule and combine with the glitch of "super rest" and sprinkle in some match focus. To me, it would produce the best players ability wise in accordance to Acc/Pace/JR over performance even it doesn't produce the most well rounded players. You would look at more 18/16/10 instead of 16/16/14 guys in terms of Acc/pace/dribbling. Expand
I am currently trying the schedule below. The goal is to use double intensity to allow me to focus on sessions that really matter, aiming to maximize CA growth while having good emphasis on physical attributes.
@ZaZ The schedule you showed is H6 but with 2xPhysical instead of 1x Quickness. It's probably slightly better in term of overall attribute gains since it does train a significant attribute - balance which quickness doesn't cover.
Big 2 is Acc/Pace. A tier below - JR, Dribbling, AGI (defenders), Balance (attackers). The non tier S attributes (Acc/Pace) does significant reduce the performance of the players if they are too far below the league based on experience.
There's probably some balance to be found that's optimal once more and more people start trying this method. Since more training session per week probably lead to more injuries in theory, All we know is - you need double intensity, 2x match practice, Quickness x 1 (2x physical might be better, unsure). Then It's either 1x overall or 1xattack+defend or blank.
I will leave this https://www.playgm.cc/thread-970401-1-1.html for those who can read Chinese, Harvestgreen posted a bunch of test results on there. I think I tend to lean on just 1x Quickness per week.
Footballenjoyer said: @ZaZ The schedule you showed is H6 but with 2xPhysical instead of 1x Quickness. It's probably slightly better in term of overall attribute gains since it does train a significant attribute - balance which quickness doesn't cover.
Big 2 is Acc/Pace. A tier below - JR, Dribbling, AGI (defenders), Balance (attackers). The non tier S attributes (Acc/Pace) does significant reduce the performance of the players if they are too far below the league based on experience.
There's probably some balance to be found that's optimal once more and more people start trying this method. Since more training session per week probably lead to more injuries in theory, All we know is - you need double intensity, 2x match practice, Quickness x 1 (2x physical might be better, unsure). Then It's either 1x overall or 1xattack+defend or blank.
I will leave this https://www.playgm.cc/thread-970401-1-1.html for those who can read Chinese, Harvestgreen posted a bunch of test results on there. I think I tend to lean on just 1x Quickness per week. Expand
The idea to use double intensity to focus on the most efficient sessions is good, since match practice can only be used twice a week. However, like I said before, I think it is naive to focus only on three attributes that will represent half of the performance, and ignore the remaining half. That's why I prefer physical instead of quickness.
ZaZ said: The idea to use double intensity to focus on the most efficient sessions is good, since match practice can only be used twice a week. However, like I said before, I think it is naive to focus only on three attributes that will represent half of the performance, and ignore the remaining half. That's why I prefer physical instead of quickness. Expand
I don't think it's that naive in situations you have no access to good PA players. I won multiple CL in a row with 90-100 CA youngsters just buy redistributing their attributes into physicals by not training (!) them at all.
BulldozerJokic said: I don't think it's that naive in situations you have no access to good PA players. I won multiple CL in a row with 90-100 CA youngsters just buy redistributing their attributes into physicals by not training (!) them at all. Expand
I would say it is fair to do that in the lowest divisions when your training facilities are bad, but the game is usually not very challenging in that level, and you can often get fast players for free to win those leagues.
ZaZ said: I am currently trying the schedule below. The goal is to use double intensity to allow me to focus on sessions that really matter, aiming to maximize CA growth while having good emphasis on physical attributes. Expand
@animatron The original machine learning piece that I based the ratings on also didn't have Jumping Reach for strikers. Of Course this was for Zaz's top tactic in FM 2021, so some might have to be made. Like for example wingers are inside forwards and fullbacks are the ones providing width, so did try to weight the 2 classes. But, you can change the ratings to fit your team as well.
Add full rest after the match, and remove one Physical, Attack, and Defend. You can also keep Physical and remove a Match Practice instead, if you want to focus more on physical attributes.
ZaZ said: I am currently trying the schedule below. The goal is to use double intensity to allow me to focus on sessions that really matter, aiming to maximize CA growth while having good emphasis on physical attributes. Expand
Results will not be very different than what they got here with some tactics. I am checking stuff like injuries, and use of the "empty" training in youth teams.
ZaZ said: I am currently trying the schedule below. The goal is to use double intensity to allow me to focus on sessions that really matter, aiming to maximize CA growth while having good emphasis on physical attributes. Expand
@ZaZ How would you adapt the schedule for weeks when theres travel? If travel after the Saturday game, I'm doing full rest with manual rest on monday and moving match practice to wednesday and moving defending to tuesday just to make the load for each day a bit less (not sure if that matters). What training would you put on the previous sunday, the day after the game?
Middleweight165 said: @ZaZ How would you adapt the schedule for weeks when theres travel? If travel after the Saturday game, I'm doing full rest with manual rest on monday and moving match practice to wednesday and moving defending to tuesday just to make the load for each day a bit less (not sure if that matters). What training would you put on the previous sunday, the day after the game? Expand
You can copy any of the days and repeat it on that travel sunday. Physical, Attack + Defend, or Match Practice if available.
No need to divide the attack and defending to reduce the load, since the load was already thought to minimize injuries.
harvestgreen22 said: They are exactly the same in combat effectiveness. Because only this "3 Pace" is valid. the "20" is "useless".
Of course, this is an ideal assumption, and the value of "23-3=20" will also have a small effect.
I think the mistake is to think the other seventeen attributes of the table are useless, and only three are important at all. If you pick the attributes isolated, then you are probably right. By the table, pace, acceleration, jumping reach, and dribbling, are by far the most important. However, each of those other attributes have some small influence, and when combined they seem to make quite a difference. Dribbling alone increases expected points by almost 10, while balance, concentration, and anticipation increases almost 5 expected points each. Then you have all other attributes that increase by 1 or 3, and it is important to remember that those tests are not definitive, and only considered 2.4k matches each.
What I mean is you are focusing on the three attributes that are possibly responsible for 50%-60% of the performance of players, and ignoring the other seventeen that might just form the remaining 40-50%. It would be awesome if you were creating players with 20 in pace, acceleration, jumping, and dribbling, to then complete training for their other attributes, but by the table you showed, most the players were barely 17 in each. That is nothing impressive, and you can easily achieve that by hiring some quick youngsters with 13 or 14 starting pace and acceleration, without the need to sacrifice dribbling and other skills.
Again, you can win all championships with players at 70% of maximum performance, since most players in the game might be using only 50%-60% (because of low speed). However, you can do even better with players at 80%-100% of performance.
A lot has been written in this thread, so what is the best training schedule for maximum increase in CA if you don't mind which attributes are increased?
ZaZ said: I think the mistake is to think the other seventeen attributes of the table are useless, and only three are important at all. If you pick the attributes isolated, then you are probably right. By the table, pace, acceleration, jumping reach, and dribbling, are by far the most important. However, each of those other attributes have some small influence, and when combined they seem to make quite a difference. Dribbling alone increases expected points by almost 10, while balance, concentration, and anticipation increases almost 5 expected points each. Then you have all other attributes that increase by 1 or 3, and it is important to remember that those tests are not definitive, and only considered 2.4k matches each.
What I mean is you are focusing on the three attributes that are possibly responsible for 50%-60% of the performance of players, and ignoring the other seventeen that might just form the remaining 40-50%. It would be awesome if you were creating players with 20 in pace, acceleration, jumping, and dribbling, to then complete training for their other attributes, but by the table you showed, most the players were barely 17 in each. That is nothing impressive, and you can easily achieve that by hiring some quick youngsters with 13 or 14 starting pace and acceleration, without the need to sacrifice dribbling and other skills.
Again, you can win all championships with players at 70% of maximum performance, since most players in the game might be using only 50%-60% (because of low speed). However, you can do even better with players at 80%-100% of performance.
This is why I would like the spreadsheet data itself to be accessible to see what attributes are being increased so that I personally can find which training schedule/combination of training schedules achieve the goals I want for my players.
alexej said: A lot has been written in this thread, so what is the best training schedule for maximum increase in CA if you don't mind which attributes are increased?
Routines doesn't matter, it's game time that make your kid grow or not.
I am checking with in-game players, no dummies 10/10 and 200 PA which imo is totaly useless thing to do, since the game will go spaghetti and you will get some mutant in-return.
It's feels like a lotto and the game distribuite those stats,focus or no focus.
Checked with everything up to AM/this one and now checking ZAZ. Point is from your routine you want to keep good condition/sharpness and some team cohesion.
Manual rest is the key.
Having analysed this post and related posts and discussions on training schedules, I think I agree with one of ZaZ's comments that you can use the physical attribute maximisation schedule in the youth team and then use the D6 schedule for the first team.
The most interesting finding to me is that you can "cheat" a player's CA-PA ratio if you have the time for it. The schedules show that you can increase a player's CA by around 5-6 per year, all of these points distributed across paca-acc-jump (e.g +2 in each). The main advantage is that you retain the player's PA, because you don't "waste" it on other, less important attributes (which is sad but true in current engine). If you do this from ages 15-18, you can add +6 to pace-acc-jump which is a lot, and then shift towards the schedules that focus on CA growth when the player goes to first team.
Practical example: let's say player has 80 CA and 150 PA, which means that 70 CA can still be attributed in development. If you use the D6 schedule, the player will grow 25 CA per year, of which 5 goes into pace-acc-jump and 20 into other attributes. This means that after 3 years the player will have reached their potential and the distribution of attributes will be on a ratio 1/4 physical/other.
For the same example, if you use the physical attribute maximising schedule, after 3 years the player will have gone from 70 CA to around 85 CA with all increases in attributes in pace-acc-jump (around +5 each). The difference is that the player still has a lot of their potential to be fulfilled, and then you can switch to the D6 schedule once the desired physical attributes are reached. The 85 CA player still has 65 CA to fill in, meaning that another 2-3 years of using D6 schedule can be used to maximise CA growth whilst still developing the physicals.
If you use the physical schedule for 5 years, the player should have around +10 in pace-acc-jump and then have 40 CA left to distribute across mental/technicals, which is still a lot if you can pick the attributes to be developed.
In other words, if you have the time, you can finetune a player's development by first allowing their physicals to be developed greatly and then shifting to other attributes whilst not neglecting physicals.
Im aware that overall, playing matches is most important and that the player's hidden attributes are a decisive factor. I'm also well aware that a lot more discussions can be had on this matter and that further finetuning of these findings is necessary (e.g. the impact of coaching staff, the negative impact on team cohesion or tactical familiarity of the schedules).
Thoughts?
Ok so whats the best balanced training to use between physical en allround grow?
Flashedmind said: Having analysed this post and related posts and discussions on training schedules, I think I agree with one of ZaZ's comments that you can use the physical attribute maximisation schedule in the youth team and then use the D6 schedule for the first team.
The most interesting finding to me is that you can "cheat" a player's CA-PA ratio if you have the time for it. The schedules show that you can increase a player's CA by around 5-6 per year, all of these points distributed across paca-acc-jump (e.g +2 in each). The main advantage is that you retain the player's PA, because you don't "waste" it on other, less important attributes (which is sad but true in current engine). If you do this from ages 15-18, you can add +6 to pace-acc-jump which is a lot, and then shift towards the schedules that focus on CA growth when the player goes to first team.
Practical example: let's say player has 80 CA and 150 PA, which means that 70 CA can still be attributed in development. If you use the D6 schedule, the player will grow 25 CA per year, of which 5 goes into pace-acc-jump and 20 into other attributes. This means that after 3 years the player will have reached their potential and the distribution of attributes will be on a ratio 1/4 physical/other.
For the same example, if you use the physical attribute maximising schedule, after 3 years the player will have gone from 70 CA to around 85 CA with all increases in attributes in pace-acc-jump (around +5 each). The difference is that the player still has a lot of their potential to be fulfilled, and then you can switch to the D6 schedule once the desired physical attributes are reached. The 85 CA player still has 65 CA to fill in, meaning that another 2-3 years of using D6 schedule can be used to maximise CA growth whilst still developing the physicals.
If you use the physical schedule for 5 years, the player should have around +10 in pace-acc-jump and then have 40 CA left to distribute across mental/technicals, which is still a lot if you can pick the attributes to be developed.
In other words, if you have the time, you can finetune a player's development by first allowing their physicals to be developed greatly and then shifting to other attributes whilst not neglecting physicals.
Im aware that overall, playing matches is most important and that the player's hidden attributes are a decisive factor. I'm also well aware that a lot more discussions can be had on this matter and that further finetuning of these findings is necessary (e.g. the impact of coaching staff, the negative impact on team cohesion or tactical familiarity of the schedules).
Thoughts?
You are misunderstanding what training does in FM and those test.
If you create a player with all stats 1 and your put a PA 200 after that your player stats distribuiting will go totaly nuts.
You guys should check with in-game players in order to understand how this works.
I took 3 traning routines :
One is all up to your Assistant manager, one is this super rest and Zaz updated.
Since it tooks ages to track every player progession i took a portion of those that plays more and check things out, to how those stats were distribuited.
i did run x3 Runs for every schedule, isn't much but literally took me 3 hours. Point is CA distribuition is the almost the same and literally feels like "RNG" is involved in there or it's basically some stats ain't getting +1 cuz they didn't reach 0.50 etc that's how the "color of those arrow should work".
Now we saying that super rest only cares about pace acceleration and jumping reach in-growth
It's not true, since now taking an example Sylla :
With AM's routines :
With Super Rest :
With Zaz :
It's full of those example, for me training in FM is just about to keep your players condition/sharpness and team cohesion up.
This is how it works in-game, i am doing a pentagon and before this post i was even just giving manual rest 1 or 2 days to my players after the game.
One of my pentagon kids as example, literally i was on individual with AM and didn't even touch it for like 2 years in-game.
Conclusion is there are many factors that make your wonderkids grow, like personality, hiddens etc.
I don't know how you people came to the conclusion that you can create a 20 pace or 20 acceleration player if he ain't supposed to go to that.
So, play your kids or loan them out and check if they dev or not.
About routines i am using a tweak version of super rest and it feels like i am literally cheating since my players are always full condition and ready to play.
here is the live, where i literally used that kind of approach, that's pretty similar with the rest and destroy i was using before (tweak of cadoni's routine on FM23).
https://www.youtube.com/live/bCpq_4rXa2k?si=t_vs2AMKR7MLo9-p
Hopes it helps
Flashedmind said: Having analysed this post and related posts and discussions on training schedules, I think I agree with one of ZaZ's comments that you can use the physical attribute maximisation schedule in the youth team and then use the D6 schedule for the first team.
The most interesting finding to me is that you can "cheat" a player's CA-PA ratio if you have the time for it. The schedules show that you can increase a player's CA by around 5-6 per year, all of these points distributed across paca-acc-jump (e.g +2 in each). The main advantage is that you retain the player's PA, because you don't "waste" it on other, less important attributes (which is sad but true in current engine). If you do this from ages 15-18, you can add +6 to pace-acc-jump which is a lot, and then shift towards the schedules that focus on CA growth when the player goes to first team.
Practical example: let's say player has 80 CA and 150 PA, which means that 70 CA can still be attributed in development. If you use the D6 schedule, the player will grow 25 CA per year, of which 5 goes into pace-acc-jump and 20 into other attributes. This means that after 3 years the player will have reached their potential and the distribution of attributes will be on a ratio 1/4 physical/other.
For the same example, if you use the physical attribute maximising schedule, after 3 years the player will have gone from 70 CA to around 85 CA with all increases in attributes in pace-acc-jump (around +5 each). The difference is that the player still has a lot of their potential to be fulfilled, and then you can switch to the D6 schedule once the desired physical attributes are reached. The 85 CA player still has 65 CA to fill in, meaning that another 2-3 years of using D6 schedule can be used to maximise CA growth whilst still developing the physicals.
If you use the physical schedule for 5 years, the player should have around +10 in pace-acc-jump and then have 40 CA left to distribute across mental/technicals, which is still a lot if you can pick the attributes to be developed.
In other words, if you have the time, you can finetune a player's development by first allowing their physicals to be developed greatly and then shifting to other attributes whilst not neglecting physicals.
Im aware that overall, playing matches is most important and that the player's hidden attributes are a decisive factor. I'm also well aware that a lot more discussions can be had on this matter and that further finetuning of these findings is necessary (e.g. the impact of coaching staff, the negative impact on team cohesion or tactical familiarity of the schedules).
Thoughts?
Assuming it actually works in this ideal way. The issue is you are taking numbers from a perfect player. A 150 PA player with less than ideal professionalism will not grow in this way. Anyone who has been tracking development of players will tell you that yes maybe 25 CA per season is sometimes possible, it's very improbable even with the best of prospects and certainly not year after year.
So instead of 5 points in physicals and 5 CA growth it'll be more like 1-2. Additionally since his growth will be so slow it'll take a long time before you are able to offer him game time. Also no other team will want to take him on loan because his CA will be so low, doesn't matter if his distribution is super meta.
I think the tests are valid, but in a real game once you factor in that PA isn't 200, that facilities aren't always 20/20, coaches not ideal, professionalism rarely 20, you can't really offer them enough game time ... everything put together means that the redistribution into physical attributes is probably way too slow. Unless you want to waste 5 seasons for each player in the hopes that some of them work out and that you can catch up on CA growth afterwards (also very questionable as growth slows down with age).
I think this training method is probably best at growing physical attributes in the shortest amount of time because its double intensity with a lower risk of injury due to less training schedules.
There's probably a schedule where its double intensity: Quick+match practisex2+ 1xattack+defense + maybe something else per week. Attacking and defending training max out efficiency at 4 but it's not really focused, you can just run 1 per week to stop the attribute decay.
The biggest problem I see with the data collected on CA/PA growth is:
1. Its simply counting CA growth per season but doesn't correctly discount how much decision cost in CA which inflate a players CA without meaningfully improve a players ability (I could be wrong since I didn't see the weighting, same thing with aggression which is a negative stat)
2. A lot of the technical training/attacking/defending training yeilded 0 growth for attacking unit or defensive unit. Is it because the tester have not moved players into the unit that's being focused trained? That skew the efficiency toward the training that train outfield players as a whole.
Flashedmind said: If you use the physical schedule for 5 years, the player should have around +10 in pace-acc-jump and then have 40 CA left to distribute across mental/technicals, which is still a lot if you can pick the attributes to be developed.
Just a small correction. If you do that and then change to normal training, it will not train only technical and mental, but it will also continue training physical. That means you would not need to wait until pace and acceleration are at 20, since they would continue growing.
Can I do the same thing with the technical attributes, or this only works with the pace, accel, and jumping reach? Like, some kind of technical training only in a week with additional focus on certain technicals and double intensity, and also replacing quickness with certain technicals training. Because, I think Technicals are also very important in matches, not just physique (Adama Traore).
Surtant said: Can I do the same thing with the technical attributes, or this only works with the pace, accel, and jumping reach? Like, some kind of technical training only in a week with additional focus on certain technicals and double intensity, and also replacing quickness with certain technicals training. Because, I think Technicals are also very important in matches, not just physique (Adama Traore).
You probably cannot do this for technicals. The game designed the way that with no training all attributes decline and then naturally get redistributed into physical attributes
Delicious said: You are misunderstanding what training does in FM and those test.
Conclusion is there are many factors that make your wonderkids grow, like personality, hiddens etc.
I don't know how you people came to the conclusion that you can create a 20 pace or 20 acceleration player if he ain't supposed to go to that.
Not sure why you presume that everyone else is misunderstanding training when the purpose of this forum is discussing game mechanics and many of the commenters here have contributed to this discussion in a positive way. As for me personally, I'm pretty sure I understand training in FM. My comment was meant to discuss some concepts of harvestgreen22 finding's in a more abstract or theoretical manner. Of course there are other factors in play, I recognise this in the last paragraph of my comment.
If a player "ain't supposed to do that" then I suppose you mean he doesn't have the right combination of hidden attributes, personality and PA to acquire high numbers in a sufficient number of attributes. Isn't it precisely the goal of research like this to contribute to us discovering under what circumstances and what types of players "are supposed to do that" ?
As Yarema touched upon, ultimately what we want to have is a generalisable training schedule which allows for optimal development of players of different levels of PA, hidden attributes and personalities. It's not hard to see that a player with 180+ PA and 20 professionalism will be able to develop crazy attributes with the current training schedules. It's more about, as you yourself say, taking into account the realism of the game and making sure that the training schedules contribute to both the development aspect (e.g. increasing attributes and avoiding injuries) as well as the 'team' aspect (e.g. team cohesion, tactical familiarity, sharpness).
Me personally, I'd like to have more insight into how much agency we ourselves have in targeting specific attributes to develop through training, or if it's all just a meme by FM to give the illusion of making a meaningful impact with training. For example (again abstract), imagine you have a team full of central defenders and you only target marking, heading and tackling with training, how much of the attribute growth do you actually control with training? Will the physicals remain the same (or deteriorate) or are they hardcoded to improve no matter what training you use?
I've read through some other training posts and will experiment with the following schedules, which try to combine some of the insights from different contributors (I haven't decided on training intensity but I now use no pitch - no pitch - no pitch - half - double):
Feel free to share your thoughts and comments
After testing it a bit and based on the testing so far by Harvestgreen22, Most efficient ones that not just maximize physical attributes but delaying decay appeared to be K5 (3 training per week), L5 (4 training per week), I6 (4 Training per week), H6 (5 Training per week).
Imo L5 seems like the best since it has slight better growth than I6, Keeping in mind more training sessions = more chance of injuries. Whether L5 is worth it over K5 would be up to your personal preference.
I would do this training schedule and combine with the glitch of "super rest" and sprinkle in some match focus. To me, it would produce the best players ability wise in accordance to Acc/Pace/JR over performance even it doesn't produce the most well rounded players. You would look at more 18/16/10 instead of 16/16/14 guys in terms of Acc/pace/dribbling.
Footballenjoyer said: After testing it a bit and based on the testing so far by Harvestgreen22, Most efficient ones that not just maximize physical attributes but delaying decay appeared to be K5 (3 training per week), L5 (4 training per week), I6 (4 Training per week), H6 (5 Training per week).
Imo L5 seems like the best since it has slight better growth than I6, Keeping in mind more training sessions = more chance of injuries. Whether L5 is worth it over K5 would be up to your personal preference.
I would do this training schedule and combine with the glitch of "super rest" and sprinkle in some match focus. To me, it would produce the best players ability wise in accordance to Acc/Pace/JR over performance even it doesn't produce the most well rounded players. You would look at more 18/16/10 instead of 16/16/14 guys in terms of Acc/pace/dribbling.
I am currently trying the schedule below. The goal is to use double intensity to allow me to focus on sessions that really matter, aiming to maximize CA growth while having good emphasis on physical attributes.
@ZaZ The schedule you showed is H6 but with 2xPhysical instead of 1x Quickness. It's probably slightly better in term of overall attribute gains since it does train a significant attribute - balance which quickness doesn't cover.
Big 2 is Acc/Pace. A tier below - JR, Dribbling, AGI (defenders), Balance (attackers). The non tier S attributes (Acc/Pace) does significant reduce the performance of the players if they are too far below the league based on experience.
There's probably some balance to be found that's optimal once more and more people start trying this method. Since more training session per week probably lead to more injuries in theory, All we know is - you need double intensity, 2x match practice, Quickness x 1 (2x physical might be better, unsure). Then It's either 1x overall or 1xattack+defend or blank.
I will leave this https://www.playgm.cc/thread-970401-1-1.html for those who can read Chinese, Harvestgreen posted a bunch of test results on there. I think I tend to lean on just 1x Quickness per week.
Currently using F6, pretty good result. Not that much injury also. Just need manual rest sometime and youngster develop like crazy :P
Footballenjoyer said: @ZaZ The schedule you showed is H6 but with 2xPhysical instead of 1x Quickness. It's probably slightly better in term of overall attribute gains since it does train a significant attribute - balance which quickness doesn't cover.
Big 2 is Acc/Pace. A tier below - JR, Dribbling, AGI (defenders), Balance (attackers). The non tier S attributes (Acc/Pace) does significant reduce the performance of the players if they are too far below the league based on experience.
There's probably some balance to be found that's optimal once more and more people start trying this method. Since more training session per week probably lead to more injuries in theory, All we know is - you need double intensity, 2x match practice, Quickness x 1 (2x physical might be better, unsure). Then It's either 1x overall or 1xattack+defend or blank.
I will leave this https://www.playgm.cc/thread-970401-1-1.html for those who can read Chinese, Harvestgreen posted a bunch of test results on there. I think I tend to lean on just 1x Quickness per week.
The idea to use double intensity to focus on the most efficient sessions is good, since match practice can only be used twice a week. However, like I said before, I think it is naive to focus only on three attributes that will represent half of the performance, and ignore the remaining half. That's why I prefer physical instead of quickness.
ZaZ said: The idea to use double intensity to focus on the most efficient sessions is good, since match practice can only be used twice a week. However, like I said before, I think it is naive to focus only on three attributes that will represent half of the performance, and ignore the remaining half. That's why I prefer physical instead of quickness.
I don't think it's that naive in situations you have no access to good PA players. I won multiple CL in a row with 90-100 CA youngsters just buy redistributing their attributes into physicals by not training (!) them at all.
BulldozerJokic said: I don't think it's that naive in situations you have no access to good PA players. I won multiple CL in a row with 90-100 CA youngsters just buy redistributing their attributes into physicals by not training (!) them at all.
I would say it is fair to do that in the lowest divisions when your training facilities are bad, but the game is usually not very challenging in that level, and you can often get fast players for free to win those leagues.
Han106 said: https://filebin.net/djzftkqyshm3tfwn @animatron Try again.
@harvestgreen22 I don't see a spreadsheet to click on, just pictures so I can't access player--development--Progress--Attributes
I've noticed that your target striker stats are empty, is it because you use advanced forward in your tactics?
Also the fast striker has 0 jumping reach which i find rather odd
ZaZ said: I am currently trying the schedule below. The goal is to use double intensity to allow me to focus on sessions that really matter, aiming to maximize CA growth while having good emphasis on physical attributes.
How would you adapt this for 2 matches per week?
@animatron The original machine learning piece that I based the ratings on also didn't have Jumping Reach for strikers. Of Course this was for Zaz's top tactic in FM 2021, so some might have to be made. Like for example wingers are inside forwards and fullbacks are the ones providing width, so did try to weight the 2 classes. But, you can change the ratings to fit your team as well.
3 seasons holidays of just looking at 3 attributes pace, acceleration, jumping
Middleweight165 said: How would you adapt this for 2 matches per week?
Add full rest after the match, and remove one Physical, Attack, and Defend. You can also keep Physical and remove a Match Practice instead, if you want to focus more on physical attributes.
ZaZ said: I am currently trying the schedule below. The goal is to use double intensity to allow me to focus on sessions that really matter, aiming to maximize CA growth while having good emphasis on physical attributes.
anything new so far?
animatron said: anything new so far?
Results will not be very different than what they got here with some tactics. I am checking stuff like injuries, and use of the "empty" training in youth teams.
ZaZ said: I am currently trying the schedule below. The goal is to use double intensity to allow me to focus on sessions that really matter, aiming to maximize CA growth while having good emphasis on physical attributes.
@ZaZ How would you adapt the schedule for weeks when theres travel? If travel after the Saturday game, I'm doing full rest with manual rest on monday and moving match practice to wednesday and moving defending to tuesday just to make the load for each day a bit less (not sure if that matters). What training would you put on the previous sunday, the day after the game?
Middleweight165 said: @ZaZ How would you adapt the schedule for weeks when theres travel? If travel after the Saturday game, I'm doing full rest with manual rest on monday and moving match practice to wednesday and moving defending to tuesday just to make the load for each day a bit less (not sure if that matters). What training would you put on the previous sunday, the day after the game?
You can copy any of the days and repeat it on that travel sunday. Physical, Attack + Defend, or Match Practice if available.
No need to divide the attack and defending to reduce the load, since the load was already thought to minimize injuries.