Hey, and what about florin133's test from FM 24? Do his findings still apply to FM 26?
The most contradictory and counterintuitive finding is that putting your young players on after the 70th minute of the second half is useless for their development. That's rubbish if true, because that's exactly what I've been doing and many professional teams do with their young players to "give them playing time".
The other findings are obvious and certainly hold true, such as the fact that depending on age, keeping the player in the youth academy is important, the importance of matches, and the relevance of the league.
Eddie said: Hey, and what about florin133's test from FM 24? Do his findings still apply to FM 26?
The most contradictory and counterintuitive finding is that putting your young players on after the 70th minute of the second half is useless for their development. That's rubbish if true, because that's exactly what I've been doing and many professional teams do with their young players to "give them playing time".
The other findings are obvious and certainly hold true, such as the fact that depending on age, keeping the player in the youth academy is important, the importance of matches, and the relevance of the league.
As far as 70th minute goes. It's really hard to test precisely so EBFM set some brackets. The 70+ also contains all those who only got 3 minutes of play. Additionally in older versions you didn't get a match rating unless you entered the pitch before 75th minute - strangely similar to 70 min cutoff. With new training schedules and "super rest" I don't think there is any downside from substituting players on at 70+ minutes. Even SI said that every minute counts. However take into account that giving them 18 sub appearances of 5 min each barely adds up to 1 full match, so not exactly a lot. There also seems to be an additional benefit to starting the game compared to coming on as sub even with equal minutes played.
Other findings are far from obvious. In fact I find that promoting a 16 year old that is ready to play to the senior team really speeds up his development. League relevance effect is overestimated, not in the graph but interpretation from others. It can be detrimental if a player is playing way below his level, but otherwise not a huge effect.
Overall though I don't think there have been any major changes in player development between 24 and 26.
Mark said: If you look at the training detail and split. Here are Aerial Defence, Chance Completion and GK Handling breakups:
There main focus is 60% with the secondary and tertiary 40% and all individual focus. Expand
I initially thought that, but there were far more than 6 training modules with those aspects, so I thought that can't be what you're referring to.
So that doesn't progress my understanding, though I suppose it is worthwhile to bring back into consideration again what the in-game words and figures are actually attempting to describe.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: In my testing I found that agility is most important, acceleration doesn't seem to matter at all, and pace matters only a little bit.
The key three for GKs are agility, aerial reach, reflexes, with agility I'd say being a little more important than the other two. Expand
Yeah makes sense, cheers mate.
Apart from the overarching "meta" attributes that are important fro everyone is their any specific "meta" attributes per positions?
Apart from the overarching "meta" attributes that are important fro everyone is their any specific "meta" attributes per positions? Expand
Concentration for DC and DL/DR is the most notable case I found for this
You've happened to also ask for a concentration-focused module. I've been trying to do this, and I would advise you that it's not so simple as picking and adding in modules with high concentration, but you can see this data in HarvestGreen's excel sheets. You'll find high concentration growth often goes hand-in-hand with high decisions growth, which is bad, but there are certain ones that don't have high decisions growth.
There are other attributes that are position specific/favored, but it would be difficult to list them off the top of my head. I have it all written down, it just needs to be collated properly. My templates and 1 CA premier league winning players will give you a good idea. But here's some more precise specifics I can tell you based off memory, because the picture is more true and clear in my head than in those templates:
HarvestGreen found having just 1 high decisions player is probably beneficial, and I believe he tested each position. I think DC was the best position to have high decisions on, but GK and DM are probably also good choices, and regardless, the overall advantage was still relatively small.
Aggression seems pretty good in all positions, but you will need low dirtiness to go with it. High dirtiness is worse than injury proneness when you do the math on it, in my opinion, that's how bad it is.
Positioning on forwards/attackers seems beneficial in a similar way to how concentration is on defenders, but I would say this is only about 80% clear, whereas I proved concentration definitively.
Anticipation seemed more important on forwards than defenders to me. And something I noted down was that I've read from an official source that when running with ball (dribbling), anticipation makes up for lack of speed. This is obviously not 100% true, but I suspect it's partially true.
Off the ball seems favorable for DL/DR in particular. This is possibly for the knap tactic specifically. But I'm 50/50 on whether off the ball matters to a mild extent or hardly at all.
Based on what I've read, I've surmised:
off the ball (attacking) <> positioning (defensive) balance (defensive) <> strength (attacking)
And so the performance data suggests that positions should take on their inverse roles, i.e. forwards become defenders, defenders become forwards. My hypothesis is that the benefit here is twofold - the game isn't expecting certain things out of certain positions so it fails to balance them, and it has lower CA cost as well.
So you may be able to apply this principle more generally, but there are limitations to this. A DC with 20 finishing & composure is still only going to score you 2 goals/season. Basically I think the player needs to be in the right position at the right time with the right set of skills, in that order of importance. A player with high pace/acc will always get to the right position, even if they don't have the right preparatory timing or the skillset to capitalize. A player with high anticipation, positioning or off the ball will be there at the right time insofar as his pace/acc allows him to be. A player with high finishing or tackling will capitalize on the moment only if he had the physical and mental ability to get himself into where the ball will be. Attributes such as concentration, determination and work rate would be where the player has the innate ability to get involved successfully, but may simply lack the motivation to do it. The game mechanics may in fact be more simplistic or have workarounds and therefore also some apparent contradictions, but I reckon they must be designed to try and emulate this narrative and it's probably works in line with this theory most of the time (even ~80% might have constituted 'good enough' for them).
lucailvotto said: In FM24, what do you think about this training routine that’s being described as an exploit on various Chinese websites?
Also, as of today, can you tell me what the real training setup is that “breaks” FM24? Sorry, but I don’t have time to re-read everything… Thanks!!! Expand
I can share my experience trying out different training schedules for different teams. I ended up with one physical, one match practice and one attacking per week, with the rest of the slots filled with recovery through an exploit. For every team including u-18. Most of my promising academy players (I usually play w/o knowing hidden attributes) reached 19-20 pace/acc without losing any technical attributes, but actually gaining in dribbling.
There’s one thing I still can’t understand: rest. To get the most out of speed training, you need to set double intensity. But where? On the general rest screen and then set each player’s individual training to automatic, or do you have to manually give each player the instruction to train at double intensity? Thanks.
Hey, and what about florin133's test from FM 24? Do his findings still apply to FM 26?
The most contradictory and counterintuitive finding is that putting your young players on after the 70th minute of the second half is useless for their development. That's rubbish if true, because that's exactly what I've been doing and many professional teams do with their young players to "give them playing time".
The other findings are obvious and certainly hold true, such as the fact that depending on age, keeping the player in the youth academy is important, the importance of matches, and the relevance of the league.
Full post: https://www.reddit.com/r/footballmanagergames/comments/1mdcrps/the_complete_guide_to_youth_intakes_training_and/
Eddie said: Hey, and what about florin133's test from FM 24? Do his findings still apply to FM 26?
The most contradictory and counterintuitive finding is that putting your young players on after the 70th minute of the second half is useless for their development. That's rubbish if true, because that's exactly what I've been doing and many professional teams do with their young players to "give them playing time".
The other findings are obvious and certainly hold true, such as the fact that depending on age, keeping the player in the youth academy is important, the importance of matches, and the relevance of the league.
Full post: https://www.reddit.com/r/footballmanagergames/comments/1mdcrps/the_complete_guide_to_youth_intakes_training_and/
Yeah he didn't test anything, that's all EBFM stuff. He maybe summarized the findings in one post, even though we've seen tons of similar posts as well.
As far as 70th minute goes. It's really hard to test precisely so EBFM set some brackets. The 70+ also contains all those who only got 3 minutes of play. Additionally in older versions you didn't get a match rating unless you entered the pitch before 75th minute - strangely similar to 70 min cutoff.
With new training schedules and "super rest" I don't think there is any downside from substituting players on at 70+ minutes. Even SI said that every minute counts. However take into account that giving them 18 sub appearances of 5 min each barely adds up to 1 full match, so not exactly a lot. There also seems to be an additional benefit to starting the game compared to coming on as sub even with equal minutes played.
Other findings are far from obvious. In fact I find that promoting a 16 year old that is ready to play to the senior team really speeds up his development. League relevance effect is overestimated, not in the graph but interpretation from others. It can be detrimental if a player is playing way below his level, but otherwise not a huge effect.
Overall though I don't think there have been any major changes in player development between 24 and 26.
Mark said: If you look at the training detail and split. Here are Aerial Defence, Chance Completion and GK Handling breakups:
There main focus is 60% with the secondary and tertiary 40% and all individual focus.
I initially thought that, but there were far more than 6 training modules with those aspects, so I thought that can't be what you're referring to.
So that doesn't progress my understanding, though I suppose it is worthwhile to bring back into consideration again what the in-game words and figures are actually attempting to describe.
Is pace/Accel still important for GKs or would Agility/Balance be more "meta" and important?
Robbo84FM said: Is pace/Accel still important for GKs or would Agility/Balance be more "meta" and important?
In my testing I found that agility is most important, acceleration doesn't seem to matter at all, and pace matters only a little bit.
The key three for GKs are agility, aerial reach, reflexes, with agility I'd say being a little more important than the other two.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: In my testing I found that agility is most important, acceleration doesn't seem to matter at all, and pace matters only a little bit.
The key three for GKs are agility, aerial reach, reflexes, with agility I'd say being a little more important than the other two.
Yeah makes sense, cheers mate.
Apart from the overarching "meta" attributes that are important fro everyone is their any specific "meta" attributes per positions?
I was also wondering do we know which specific training session has the best improvement for concentration?
Robbo84FM said: Yeah makes sense, cheers mate.
Apart from the overarching "meta" attributes that are important fro everyone is their any specific "meta" attributes per positions?
Concentration for DC and DL/DR is the most notable case I found for this
You've happened to also ask for a concentration-focused module. I've been trying to do this, and I would advise you that it's not so simple as picking and adding in modules with high concentration, but you can see this data in HarvestGreen's excel sheets. You'll find high concentration growth often goes hand-in-hand with high decisions growth, which is bad, but there are certain ones that don't have high decisions growth.
There are other attributes that are position specific/favored, but it would be difficult to list them off the top of my head. I have it all written down, it just needs to be collated properly. My templates and 1 CA premier league winning players will give you a good idea. But here's some more precise specifics I can tell you based off memory, because the picture is more true and clear in my head than in those templates:
HarvestGreen found having just 1 high decisions player is probably beneficial, and I believe he tested each position. I think DC was the best position to have high decisions on, but GK and DM are probably also good choices, and regardless, the overall advantage was still relatively small.
Aggression seems pretty good in all positions, but you will need low dirtiness to go with it. High dirtiness is worse than injury proneness when you do the math on it, in my opinion, that's how bad it is.
Positioning on forwards/attackers seems beneficial in a similar way to how concentration is on defenders, but I would say this is only about 80% clear, whereas I proved concentration definitively.
Anticipation seemed more important on forwards than defenders to me. And something I noted down was that I've read from an official source that when running with ball (dribbling), anticipation makes up for lack of speed. This is obviously not 100% true, but I suspect it's partially true.
Off the ball seems favorable for DL/DR in particular. This is possibly for the knap tactic specifically. But I'm 50/50 on whether off the ball matters to a mild extent or hardly at all.
Based on what I've read, I've surmised:
off the ball (attacking) <> positioning (defensive)
balance (defensive) <> strength (attacking)
And so the performance data suggests that positions should take on their inverse roles, i.e. forwards become defenders, defenders become forwards. My hypothesis is that the benefit here is twofold - the game isn't expecting certain things out of certain positions so it fails to balance them, and it has lower CA cost as well.
So you may be able to apply this principle more generally, but there are limitations to this. A DC with 20 finishing & composure is still only going to score you 2 goals/season. Basically I think the player needs to be in the right position at the right time with the right set of skills, in that order of importance. A player with high pace/acc will always get to the right position, even if they don't have the right preparatory timing or the skillset to capitalize. A player with high anticipation, positioning or off the ball will be there at the right time insofar as his pace/acc allows him to be. A player with high finishing or tackling will capitalize on the moment only if he had the physical and mental ability to get himself into where the ball will be. Attributes such as concentration, determination and work rate would be where the player has the innate ability to get involved successfully, but may simply lack the motivation to do it. The game mechanics may in fact be more simplistic or have workarounds and therefore also some apparent contradictions, but I reckon they must be designed to try and emulate this narrative and it's probably works in line with this theory most of the time (even ~80% might have constituted 'good enough' for them).
In FM24, what do you think about this training routine that’s being described as an exploit on various Chinese websites?
Also, as of today, can you tell me what the real training setup is that “breaks” FM24? Sorry, but I don’t have time to re-read everything… Thanks!!!
lucailvotto said: In FM24, what do you think about this training routine that’s being described as an exploit on various Chinese websites?
Also, as of today, can you tell me what the real training setup is that “breaks” FM24? Sorry, but I don’t have time to re-read everything… Thanks!!!
I can share my experience trying out different training schedules for different teams. I ended up with one physical, one match practice and one attacking per week, with the rest of the slots filled with recovery through an exploit. For every team including u-18. Most of my promising academy players (I usually play w/o knowing hidden attributes) reached 19-20 pace/acc without losing any technical attributes, but actually gaining in dribbling.
There’s one thing I still can’t understand: rest. To get the most out of speed training, you need to set double intensity. But where? On the general rest screen and then set each player’s individual training to automatic, or do you have to manually give each player the instruction to train at double intensity? Thanks.