If we take the default league settings when the players in the human controller teams and AI controlled teams have 10,000 for the Condition attribute then the tactic scores 79 Points.
But if we decrease the the Condition attribute value of the players in the human controller team to 8,800 and 7,800 then we’ll get the following results:
As you can see, if we decrease the Condition attributes of the players in human controlled teams from 10,000 to 7,800 then the result drops by 31 Points from 79 Points to 48 Points.
What is the "Natural Fitness" attribute? "Natural Fitness" is a visible player’s attribute. It can take values from 0 to 20.
It affect the rate at which a player recovers Condition between matches.
What is the Energy(Jadedness) attribute? Energy(Jadedness) is a hidden attribute.
It can take values from "-500" to "+500".
A high negative value - is good. A high positive value - is bad.
It affects the rate at which a player gains the Condition between matches.
Usually, a player gets about 50-70 points of Jadedness after a match.
One day of full rest decreases the Jadedness attribute by 20 points so it requires about three days of full rest to "remove" the jadedness from one match.
What is the Match Sharpness attribute? Match Sharpness is a hidden attribute.
It can take values from "0" to "10,000".
It affects the rate at which players lose the Condition during match and the rate at which they recover the Condition between matches.
What is the best way to recover the Condition attribute? Resting is the best way to restore the condition.
What is the highest amount of Condition that can be recovered per day? The rate at which the Condition is recovered depends on the Condition initial level.
If we take one day of full rest then the amount recovered would look like this for different initial level:
The numbers above are true for "0" Jadedness and "10,000" Matches Sharpness.
A higher level of Jadedness and a lower level of Matches Sharpness will decrease the amount of Condition recovered.
Should you always try to bring the Condition level of your player at 10,000 before every match? No, a task to achieve 10,000 value for the Condition is almost impossible because the rate at which the Condition attribute is restored after 9,000 level is very low.
So you should look for 9,000 - 9,300 range.
How much does the Condition attribute decrease after a match? It depends on many factors. The rate differs for positions and roles. Also, the Intensity of a tactic greatly affects the rate at which the Conditions are consumed.
Zippo said: One of its purposes is to limit how low the value of the "Condition" attribute can drop.
For example, if a player has "20" for Natural Fitness attribute then his Condition attribute can NOT drop lower than "7,800" value. Expand This simply isn't true. I just played a game with my 1 CA 20 NAT players to confirm, my ST went down to 61% in-match, 67% post-match. Perhaps it is true if match sharpness is also 100%. And if memory serves me correctly, natural fitness does not even affect condition fall rate, it is stamina that does.
Zippo said: No, a task to achieve 10,000 value for the Condition is almost impossible because the rate at which the Condition attribute is restored after 9,000 level is very low.
So you should look for 9,000 - 9,300 range. Expand As your stats show, the performance loss would be significant. It's not impossible to maintain ~100% condition, it's quite easy. Another reason is that you will also otherwise suffer exponentially greater injuries, as EBFM found injury rates of:
And those injuries create a vicious cycle of low match fitness & condition leading to more injuries. I would guesstimate injuries double overall if starting at 90-93% condition.
Zippo said: How much does the Condition attribute decrease after a match? It depends on many factors. The rate differs for positions and roles. Also, the Intensity of a tactic greatly affects the rate at which the Conditions are consumed. Expand Is that really so? According to EBFM's data, the difference between the most intense and least intense settings were 1-2% condition difference by end of match.
Zippo said: Also, the Team Cohesion and Match Sharpness drops a bit when players are "Resting" but it isn’t a big issue. Expand Match sharpness is very important, more important than condition. It's performance impact is greater, and it's harder to maintain. So using rest is usually a bad idea, from my analysis of it.
These results might not be directly comparable, but you say that starting at 88% condition results in 16% worse performance. EBFM found that match sharpness 100% > 90% reduces win rate by 33.3% and injuries increased by ~25%.
I know I come across as a bit of a knob here with all of this, but it's partly that I can't resist knocking down falsehoods, and partly that I wrote a post on here about this very topic recently so I'm a bit of a zealot about it. I know I state a lot of things that turn out to be erroneous myself. This is just part of the process of discovery.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: This simply isn't true. I just played a game with my 1 CA 20 NAT players to confirm, my ST went down to 61% in-match, 67% post-match. Perhaps it is true if match sharpness is also 100%. And if memory serves me correctly, natural fitness does not even affect condition fall rate, it is stamina that does.
As your stats show, the performance loss would be significant. It's not impossible to maintain ~100% condition, it's quite easy. Another reason is that you will also otherwise suffer exponentially greater injuries, as EBFM found injury rates of:
And those injuries create a vicious cycle of low match fitness & condition leading to more injuries. I would guesstimate injuries double overall if starting at 90-93% condition.
Is that really so? According to EBFM's data, the difference between the most intense and least intense settings were 1-2% condition difference by end of match.
Match sharpness is very important, more important than condition. It's performance impact is greater, and it's harder to maintain. So using rest is usually a bad idea, from my analysis of it.
These results might not be directly comparable, but you say that starting at 88% condition results in 16% worse performance. EBFM found that match sharpness 100% > 90% reduces win rate by 33.3% and injuries increased by ~25%.
I know I come across as a bit of a knob here with all of this, but it's partly that I can't resist knocking down falsehoods, and partly that I wrote a post on here about this very topic recently so I'm a bit of a zealot about it. I know I state a lot of things that turn out to be erroneous myself. This is just part of the process of discovery. Expand
keithb said: Come across as? Bit? Expand I guess a better way of putting it is that I don't want to come across as being snide, as I'm not driven by putting other people down and I also think there's a lot of great info being posted by this Zippo fellow (does he run the joint as well? I don't know).
The obvious retort is, well don't be snide. But how else are you meant to point out contradictions? It's not like I'm calling him an idiot. I'm just saying, look I think you're mistaken on this matter and here's my reasoning why. My name is a reference to this problem. A lot of people will read it and get their knickers in a knot. But it's just a factual claim. Even if it's not true, the real point of contention here for me is apparently we can't debate the facts out in the open on certain matters because it is tantamount to humiliation for people. I don't want to humiliate people, I just want to have a sober discussion about the facts as I see them. And aside from that, what's wrong with getting some enjoyment out of saying 'ackshally you're wrong' sometimes?
In my other thread you said you agreed with the comment that my name isn't appropriate for a FM forum. I chose it for an FM forum because my experience with SI staff has been that if you point out inconvenient truths about the game mechanics, you get hounded as ruining the game for people and banned for being 'insulting' or 'trolling'. Whereas here seems to be a forum where you can say such truths about the game openly. This is an pseudonymous forum, which lessens the need for decorum than in everyday human interaction, but I recognize that there's still a fellow egotist on the other side of the screen.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: I guess a better way of putting it is that I don't want to come across as being snide, as I'm not driven by putting other people down and I also think there's a lot of great info being posted by this Zippo fellow (does he run the joint as well? I don't know).
The obvious retort is, well don't be snide. But how else are you meant to point out contradictions? It's not like I'm calling him an idiot. I'm just saying, look I think you're mistaken on this matter and here's my reasoning why. My name is a reference to this problem. A lot of people will read it and get their knickers in a knot. But it's just a factual claim. Even if it's not true, the real point of contention here for me is apparently we can't debate the facts out in the open on certain matters because it is tantamount to humiliation for people. I don't want to humiliate people, I just want to have a sober discussion about the facts as I see them. And aside from that, what's wrong with getting some enjoyment out of saying 'ackshally you're wrong' sometimes?
In my other thread you said you agreed with the comment that my name isn't appropriate for a FM forum. I chose it for an FM forum because my experience with SI staff has been that if you point out inconvenient truths about the game mechanics, you get hounded as ruining the game for people and banned for being 'insulting' or 'trolling'. Whereas here seems to be a forum where you can say such truths about the game openly. This is an pseudonymous forum, which lessens the need for decorum than in everyday human interaction, but I recognize that there's still a fellow egotist on the other side of the screen. Expand
Good job trying to improve our knowledge of the game! And he did overdose!
Part 2 - https://fm-arena.com/thread/16417-part-2-conditions-management-one-of-the-core-fm26-mechanics/
What is the "Condition" attribute?
"Condition" is a hidden player's attribute.
You can think of it as a player's physical state.
It determines how well a player performs during matches.
It can take values from 0 to 10,000 but in practice, it never goes to "0" because its lowest level is limited by the "Natural Fitness" attribute.
A high intensity tactic "drains" more "Condition" than a low high intensity tactic.
How much does the "Condition" attribute affect the performance?
As an example, let's take the result of this tactic - https://fm-arena.com/thread/16086-zaz-winter-0-26/
If we take the default league settings when the players in the human controller teams and AI controlled teams have 10,000 for the Condition attribute then the tactic scores 79 Points.
But if we decrease the the Condition attribute value of the players in the human controller team to 8,800 and 7,800 then we’ll get the following results:
Condition 10,000 = 79 Points
Condition 8,800 = 66 Points
Condition 7,800 = 48 Points
As you can see, if we decrease the Condition attributes of the players in human controlled teams from 10,000 to 7,800 then the result drops by 31 Points from 79 Points to 48 Points.
What is the "Natural Fitness" attribute?
"Natural Fitness" is a visible player’s attribute. It can take values from 0 to 20.
It affect the rate at which a player recovers Condition between matches.
What is the Energy(Jadedness) attribute?
Energy(Jadedness) is a hidden attribute.
It can take values from "-500" to "+500".
A high negative value - is good. A high positive value - is bad.
It affects the rate at which a player gains the Condition between matches.
Usually, a player gets about 50-70 points of Jadedness after a match.
One day of full rest decreases the Jadedness attribute by 20 points so it requires about three days of full rest to "remove" the jadedness from one match.
What is the Match Sharpness attribute?
Match Sharpness is a hidden attribute.
It can take values from "0" to "10,000".
It affects the rate at which players lose the Condition during match and the rate at which they recover the Condition between matches.
What is the best way to recover the Condition attribute?
Resting is the best way to restore the condition.
What is the highest amount of Condition that can be recovered per day?
The rate at which the Condition is recovered depends on the Condition initial level.
If we take one day of full rest then the amount recovered would look like this for different initial level:
Initial Level 7,000 -> +1,240 = 8,240
Initial Level 8,000 -> +813 = 8,813
Initial Level 9,000 -> +275 = 9,275
The numbers above are true for "0" Jadedness and "10,000" Matches Sharpness.
A higher level of Jadedness and a lower level of Matches Sharpness will decrease the amount of Condition recovered.
Should you always try to bring the Condition level of your player at 10,000 before every match?
No, a task to achieve 10,000 value for the Condition is almost impossible because the rate at which the Condition attribute is restored after 9,000 level is very low.
So you should look for 9,000 - 9,300 range.
How much does the Condition attribute decrease after a match?
It depends on many factors. The rate differs for positions and roles. Also, the Intensity of a tactic greatly affects the rate at which the Conditions are consumed.
For example, if we take this tactic - https://fm-arena.com/thread/16086-zaz-winter-0-26/ then it reduces the Condition attributes about 3,700 after a match.
So if you play with this tactic then you need to recover about 2,700 Condition between matches.
Does "Resting" have any negative impact on players?
Yes, it does have negative impacts:
- Players doesn't develop when they are "resting" and even their attributes might start declining.
- Team Cohesion and Match Sharpness decrease.
Good stuff
I bet that many players overlook this important game mechanic, they don't understand that it's crucial for their success in the game.
What are the corresponding color icons of condition, sharpness and fatigue levels ?
Zippo said: One of its purposes is to limit how low the value of the "Condition" attribute can drop.
For example, if a player has "20" for Natural Fitness attribute then his Condition attribute can NOT drop lower than "7,800" value.
This simply isn't true. I just played a game with my 1 CA 20 NAT players to confirm, my ST went down to 61% in-match, 67% post-match. Perhaps it is true if match sharpness is also 100%. And if memory serves me correctly, natural fitness does not even affect condition fall rate, it is stamina that does.
Zippo said: No, a task to achieve 10,000 value for the Condition is almost impossible because the rate at which the Condition attribute is restored after 9,000 level is very low.
So you should look for 9,000 - 9,300 range.
As your stats show, the performance loss would be significant. It's not impossible to maintain ~100% condition, it's quite easy. Another reason is that you will also otherwise suffer exponentially greater injuries, as EBFM found injury rates of:
(starting) 100% condition = 8 in-match injuries
(starting) 80% condition = 20 in-match injuries
(starting) 60% condition = 87 in-match injuries
And those injuries create a vicious cycle of low match fitness & condition leading to more injuries. I would guesstimate injuries double overall if starting at 90-93% condition.
Zippo said: How much does the Condition attribute decrease after a match?
It depends on many factors. The rate differs for positions and roles. Also, the Intensity of a tactic greatly affects the rate at which the Conditions are consumed.
Is that really so? According to EBFM's data, the difference between the most intense and least intense settings were 1-2% condition difference by end of match.
Zippo said: Also, the Team Cohesion and Match Sharpness drops a bit when players are "Resting" but it isn’t a big issue.
Match sharpness is very important, more important than condition. It's performance impact is greater, and it's harder to maintain. So using rest is usually a bad idea, from my analysis of it.
These results might not be directly comparable, but you say that starting at 88% condition results in 16% worse performance. EBFM found that match sharpness 100% > 90% reduces win rate by 33.3% and injuries increased by ~25%.
I know I come across as a bit of a knob here with all of this, but it's partly that I can't resist knocking down falsehoods, and partly that I wrote a post on here about this very topic recently so I'm a bit of a zealot about it. I know I state a lot of things that turn out to be erroneous myself. This is just part of the process of discovery.
Not sure the condition % ingame and the number 1-10000 are the same, or at least the visual representation is way off.
@Zippo, thank you!
I'm looking forward for more insights like this one.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: This simply isn't true. I just played a game with my 1 CA 20 NAT players to confirm, my ST went down to 61% in-match, 67% post-match. Perhaps it is true if match sharpness is also 100%. And if memory serves me correctly, natural fitness does not even affect condition fall rate, it is stamina that does.
As your stats show, the performance loss would be significant. It's not impossible to maintain ~100% condition, it's quite easy. Another reason is that you will also otherwise suffer exponentially greater injuries, as EBFM found injury rates of:
(starting) 100% condition = 8 in-match injuries
(starting) 80% condition = 20 in-match injuries
(starting) 60% condition = 87 in-match injuries
And those injuries create a vicious cycle of low match fitness & condition leading to more injuries. I would guesstimate injuries double overall if starting at 90-93% condition.
Is that really so? According to EBFM's data, the difference between the most intense and least intense settings were 1-2% condition difference by end of match.
Match sharpness is very important, more important than condition. It's performance impact is greater, and it's harder to maintain. So using rest is usually a bad idea, from my analysis of it.
These results might not be directly comparable, but you say that starting at 88% condition results in 16% worse performance. EBFM found that match sharpness 100% > 90% reduces win rate by 33.3% and injuries increased by ~25%.
I know I come across as a bit of a knob here with all of this, but it's partly that I can't resist knocking down falsehoods, and partly that I wrote a post on here about this very topic recently so I'm a bit of a zealot about it. I know I state a lot of things that turn out to be erroneous myself. This is just part of the process of discovery.
Come across as? Bit?
keithb said: Come across as? Bit?
I guess a better way of putting it is that I don't want to come across as being snide, as I'm not driven by putting other people down and I also think there's a lot of great info being posted by this Zippo fellow (does he run the joint as well? I don't know).
The obvious retort is, well don't be snide. But how else are you meant to point out contradictions? It's not like I'm calling him an idiot. I'm just saying, look I think you're mistaken on this matter and here's my reasoning why. My name is a reference to this problem. A lot of people will read it and get their knickers in a knot. But it's just a factual claim. Even if it's not true, the real point of contention here for me is apparently we can't debate the facts out in the open on certain matters because it is tantamount to humiliation for people. I don't want to humiliate people, I just want to have a sober discussion about the facts as I see them. And aside from that, what's wrong with getting some enjoyment out of saying 'ackshally you're wrong' sometimes?
In my other thread you said you agreed with the comment that my name isn't appropriate for a FM forum. I chose it for an FM forum because my experience with SI staff has been that if you point out inconvenient truths about the game mechanics, you get hounded as ruining the game for people and banned for being 'insulting' or 'trolling'. Whereas here seems to be a forum where you can say such truths about the game openly. This is an pseudonymous forum, which lessens the need for decorum than in everyday human interaction, but I recognize that there's still a fellow egotist on the other side of the screen.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: I guess a better way of putting it is that I don't want to come across as being snide, as I'm not driven by putting other people down and I also think there's a lot of great info being posted by this Zippo fellow (does he run the joint as well? I don't know).
The obvious retort is, well don't be snide. But how else are you meant to point out contradictions? It's not like I'm calling him an idiot. I'm just saying, look I think you're mistaken on this matter and here's my reasoning why. My name is a reference to this problem. A lot of people will read it and get their knickers in a knot. But it's just a factual claim. Even if it's not true, the real point of contention here for me is apparently we can't debate the facts out in the open on certain matters because it is tantamount to humiliation for people. I don't want to humiliate people, I just want to have a sober discussion about the facts as I see them. And aside from that, what's wrong with getting some enjoyment out of saying 'ackshally you're wrong' sometimes?
In my other thread you said you agreed with the comment that my name isn't appropriate for a FM forum. I chose it for an FM forum because my experience with SI staff has been that if you point out inconvenient truths about the game mechanics, you get hounded as ruining the game for people and banned for being 'insulting' or 'trolling'. Whereas here seems to be a forum where you can say such truths about the game openly. This is an pseudonymous forum, which lessens the need for decorum than in everyday human interaction, but I recognize that there's still a fellow egotist on the other side of the screen.
Good job trying to improve our knowledge of the game! And he did overdose!