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.
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 Did an EBFM test of that schedule just now, negligible difference to Quickness + 2xAttacking + Match Practice + Quickness (Agility for GK) focus, which I would go for given the lower intensity.
The main difference I noticed was that dribbling was a bit less on most positions, but lower decisions and slight boosts in other areas probably offset this
lucailvotto said: 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. Expand Go to training > rest, set the two green hearts to double intensity
BulldozerJokic said: 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. Expand
You used the "meta" first team schedule for your u18 and not the "full rest" schedule and it still got you excellent physical growth?
Robbo84FM said: You used the "meta" first team schedule for your u18 and not the "full rest" schedule and it still got you excellent physical growth? Expand
Yes, and I had the experience of doing full rest, so can compare.
How do you get 18x recovery? Do You paste a schedule with recovery unitson to already planned recovery? By the way - Stupid AI tries to change your training from time to time but quite often - do You have any way to deal with it?
That's interesting and it still got some of your players excellent physical growth just like the full rest schedule does but not decreasing other attributes? did you also have additional focus quickness and double intensity? Also how do you do the hack to get the extra recovery sessions i remember i did it on FM24 but i can't remember how to do it? thanks.
I'll post more detailed results sometime later, but basically in EBFM test league using the following schedule I found was roughly ~10% better than meta:
Chance creation + Attacking + Aerial Defense + Handling + Defending from the front + Quickness + Quickness focus (Agility & Balance for GK)
You'll note the lack of match practice. I didn't just select different combos to test randomly. This combo is based on HarvestGreen22's training result data. Initially I had used EBFM's data, which I thought would be better to use because it was broken down by position precisely and every training option was listed, but I've found that it can't be applied to FM24.
I found in training meta vs full rest, that the technical/mental losses are difficult to recover, so really you just want to grow everything as much as possible, ideally while limiting the worst useless CA growth such as 'decisions'.
If you look at the different options for pace/acc boosts, whether it's the physical modules or simply using rest, they give a lot of -1 to technicals/mentals. So I figure pace/acc boost should be the priority in assessing the various other training modules. Basically between a module that gives +13 CA and +4.9 pace/acc, and one that gives +8 CA and +5.1 pace/acc, I'm going to choose the latter one.
For reasons I'm yet to understand, 'quickness' and 'attacking' remain an essential part of the recipe, and so they've been kept in after failing without them. Yes, even if you have quickness individual focus, it doesn't work.
If you look at HarvestGreen22's data you'll see things modules don't simply add or multiply together in the way one would intuit, so I just worked off what we do know (thankfully HarvestGreen actually tested several actual combos not just individual modules, this turned out to be crucial information) and tried a few theoretically promising combinations.
So I thought I had come up with the winning combination, but when I tested this in my realistic Luton save, I got unexpectedly poor results compared to meta.
It seemed to me it must probably be because of the lower professionalism, and surprisingly that turned out to be true. It is surprising because although one would expect somewhat lower professionalism might slow progress generally, it shouldn't stunt progress entirely or haphazardly. One strange thing about it was that acc was better than meta, but pace was a lot worse, whereas in the EBFM league test both acc & pace were better. Even stranger, meta results were not hampered for some unknown reason.
But the data indeed says lower professionalism is the underlying cause (probably in concert with certain other factors no doubt):
Meta (Quickness + 2 x Attacking + Match Practice + Quickness focus) test:
Agility & balance focus is used for goalkeepers, not quickness.
I suspected maybe low CA-PA gap was the problem rather than low professionalism, but I checked and there's typically about 20-30 CA-PA gap left after the 4 years, so it's not that. And when I checked low professionalism players individually, it seemed to line up with professionalism being the problem - the low professionalism players were the ones with the largest differences such as 16 vs 20 pace.
I haven't measured attributes on the finer scale of 1-100, and there I may have even skipped over a player or two. Some variables were also not properly controlled. Margin of error is probably around -/+ 0.2 for each attribute. Overall it's definitely good enough in my opinion, and the reality is that there is a random element in player progress anyway - the player might get injured for example.
An advantage of my training regime isn't just the increased pace/acc, but the lower decisions growth. In my view, you should count this as equal to pace/acc in the inverse, because it occupies a lot of CA but is useless. I found quite a few combos that matched meta, except that they had significantly higher decisions growth, which made me discount them. Also some regimes had poor GK growth, a lesser consideration, whereas in this regime GK growth is excellent and slightly better than meta.
Because I can only demonstrate it works with 20 professionalism players so far, I recommend sticking with the meta for now unless you just buy very high professionalism players (which isn't a bad idea anyway). I think it won't take long to solve this though. I'm not sure what the reason is that meta works with lower professionalism players, the only idea I have right now is that maybe match practice is treated like a match rather than a training session and that you don't need professionalism for match gains but you need it for training module gains. Expand
BulldozerJokic said: 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. Expand
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
The data in this table is presented more intuitively. I conducted this test under different conditions (There are notes in excel). If necessary, I can also upload the test save. The test data is included in the Excel file. I haven't finished this test completely yet, but I think it's okay to have a general look at it.
among them, “97” is "[Chance Creation][Attacking][Aerial Defense][Handling][Defending from the Front][Quickness]" (As you mentioned)
among them, “99” is the "3 Def + 2 Att + 3 Phy + 2 MP + 1 GD" from "Evidence Based Football Manager"
The table is divided into "non-goalkeeper" and "goalkeeper", and they are respectively located on pages 1 and 2 (I had ignored the goalkeeper in the previous tests).
If you have time, I suggest you directly go to the Excel file and look for the column related to this attribute. It's quite easy to find the exact information you need.
tam1236 said: How do you get 18x recovery? Do You paste a schedule with recovery unitson to already planned recovery? By the way - Stupid AI tries to change your training from time to time but quite often - do You have any way to deal with it? Expand
Robbo84FM said: That's interesting and it still got some of your players excellent physical growth just like the full rest schedule does but not decreasing other attributes? did you also have additional focus quickness and double intensity? Also how do you do the hack to get the extra recovery sessions i remember i did it on FM24 but i can't remember how to do it? thanks. Expand
The general process is as follows:
First, select "Match Day" in the schedule. Then it will automatically generate a "recovery" on the next day.
This "recovery" will not exceed the "maximum 7" limit of the "normal restrictions".
So, move this generated "recovery" to another cell. Continue to schedule the "Match Day", generate sufficient unrestricted "recovery" , and finally fill the remaining spaces with normal "recovery" .
Then, if the weekly schedule is altered due to an accident, the AI will randomly arrange your schedule. I haven't found a way to solve this problem either. The only solution is to manually re-arrange it when it occurs.
Bradjc94 said: Hi guys, what's the best training schedule for FM26? Expand
The majority of the powerful attributes in FM24 remain powerful in FM26. Meanwhile, Some of the attributes in FM26 have become more effective. -- Therefore, theoretically, we need to make some adjustments to the training schedule of FM24 to accommodate the "new and more effective attributes" introduced in FM26.
I only conducted a preliminary attribute test on the beta version of FM26 and then refund. You can see the FM26 test results in my another post.
If you don't want to spend time, using the training schedule of FM24 is fine.
If you want to spend time, you might need to make your own estimated adjustments by referring to the excel file I just uploaded and the attribute table of FM26.
harvestgreen22 said: The majority of the powerful attributes in FM24 remain powerful in FM26. Meanwhile, Some of the attributes in FM26 have become more effective. -- Therefore, theoretically, we need to make some adjustments to the training schedule of FM24 to accommodate the "new and more effective attributes" introduced in FM26.
I only conducted a preliminary attribute test on the beta version of FM26 and then refund. You can see the FM26 test results in my another post.
If you don't want to spend time, using the training schedule of FM24 is fine.
If you want to spend time, you might need to make your own estimated adjustments by referring to the excel file I just uploaded and the attribute table of FM26. Expand
First, select "Match Day" in the schedule. Then it will automatically generate a "recovery" on the next day.
This "recovery" will not exceed the "maximum 7" limit of the "normal restrictions".
So, move this generated "recovery" to another cell. Continue to schedule the "Match Day", generate sufficient unrestricted "recovery" , and finally fill the remaining spaces with normal "recovery" .
Then, if the weekly schedule is altered due to an accident, the AI will randomly arrange your schedule. I haven't found a way to solve this problem either. The only solution is to manually re-arrange it when it occurs. Expand
Was it correct it's better not to use recovery sessions for youth players and just use rest or does it not really matter?
Robbo84FM said: That's interesting and it still got some of your players excellent physical growth just like the full rest schedule does but not decreasing other attributes? did you also have additional focus quickness and double intensity? Also how do you do the hack to get the extra recovery sessions i remember i did it on FM24 but i can't remember how to do it? thanks. Expand
It is not better than full rest for physical growth obviously, since full rest lowers players CA, and then that CA gets redistributed into physicals. The training schedule is preserving attributes and as players grow, they mainly gain physical attributes. It takes longer for them to get to the top speed, but I don't mind this in my saves since I play youth only most of the time and players have plenty of time to grow.
Yes, additional focus quickness, but I generally don't like double intensity, so normal intensity for the best condition, the rest is no pitch or gym work.
To exploit, just add match days to training schdeule and move recovery slots, then remove and add more match days, like harvestgreen has already explained.
First, select "Match Day" in the schedule. Then it will automatically generate a "recovery" on the next day.
This "recovery" will not exceed the "maximum 7" limit of the "normal restrictions".
So, move this generated "recovery" to another cell. Continue to schedule the "Match Day", generate sufficient unrestricted "recovery" , and finally fill the remaining spaces with normal "recovery" .
Then, if the weekly schedule is altered due to an accident, the AI will randomly arrange your schedule. I haven't found a way to solve this problem either. The only solution is to manually re-arrange it when it occurs. Expand
This doesn't seem to work in FM26, when i create a new training schedule i select Match day and nothing else appears in the schedule, no generated recovery session.
Robbo84FM said: This doesn't seem to work in FM26, when i create a new training schedule i select Match day and nothing else appears in the schedule, no generated recovery session. Expand
I don't have FM26 nor plan to purchase it, so can't help there. FYI, I edited my previous response for better clarification
BulldozerJokic said: I don't have FM26 nor plan to purchase it, so can't help there. FYI, I edited my previous response for better clarification Expand
harvestgreen22 said: The majority of the powerful attributes in FM24 remain powerful in FM26. Meanwhile, Some of the attributes in FM26 have become more effective. -- Therefore, theoretically, we need to make some adjustments to the training schedule of FM24 to accommodate the "new and more effective attributes" introduced in FM26.
I only conducted a preliminary attribute test on the beta version of FM26 and then refund. You can see the FM26 test results in my another post.
If you don't want to spend time, using the training schedule of FM24 is fine.
If you want to spend time, you might need to make your own estimated adjustments by referring to the excel file I just uploaded and the attribute table of FM26. Expand
When you did these tests in FM26 how many sessions did you have in a week for each schedule, example when testing the "Attacking" schedule how many attacking sessions in a week? when testing "Attacking direct" how many sessions in a week? when testing "Chance creation" how many sessions in a week ect ect?
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.
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!!!
Did an EBFM test of that schedule just now, negligible difference to Quickness + 2xAttacking + Match Practice + Quickness (Agility for GK) focus, which I would go for given the lower intensity.
The main difference I noticed was that dribbling was a bit less on most positions, but lower decisions and slight boosts in other areas probably offset this
lucailvotto said: 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.
Go to training > rest, set the two green hearts to double intensity
This is for FM24 though
BulldozerJokic said: 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.
You used the "meta" first team schedule for your u18 and not the "full rest" schedule and it still got you excellent physical growth?
Hi guys, what's the best training schedule for FM26?
Robbo84FM said: You used the "meta" first team schedule for your u18 and not the "full rest" schedule and it still got you excellent physical growth?
Yes, and I had the experience of doing full rest, so can compare.
BulldozerJokic said: Yes, and I had the experience of doing full rest, so can compare.
What do you think was the better schedule for your youth players?
Robbo84FM said: What do you think was the better schedule for your youth players?
1x attacking, match practice, physical, 18x recovery
How do you get 18x recovery? Do You paste a schedule with recovery unitson to already planned recovery?
By the way - Stupid AI tries to change your training from time to time but quite often - do You have any way to deal with it?
BulldozerJokic said: 1x attacking, match practice, physical, 18x recovery
That's interesting and it still got some of your players excellent physical growth just like the full rest schedule does but not decreasing other attributes? did you also have additional focus quickness and double intensity? Also how do you do the hack to get the extra recovery sessions i remember i did it on FM24 but i can't remember how to do it? thanks.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: Setting professionalism to 20 (and injury proneness to 1) did solve the anomaly.
I'll post more detailed results sometime later, but basically in EBFM test league using the following schedule I found was roughly ~10% better than meta:
Chance creation + Attacking + Aerial Defense + Handling + Defending from the front + Quickness + Quickness focus (Agility & Balance for GK)
You'll note the lack of match practice. I didn't just select different combos to test randomly. This combo is based on HarvestGreen22's training result data. Initially I had used EBFM's data, which I thought would be better to use because it was broken down by position precisely and every training option was listed, but I've found that it can't be applied to FM24.
I found in training meta vs full rest, that the technical/mental losses are difficult to recover, so really you just want to grow everything as much as possible, ideally while limiting the worst useless CA growth such as 'decisions'.
If you look at the different options for pace/acc boosts, whether it's the physical modules or simply using rest, they give a lot of -1 to technicals/mentals. So I figure pace/acc boost should be the priority in assessing the various other training modules. Basically between a module that gives +13 CA and +4.9 pace/acc, and one that gives +8 CA and +5.1 pace/acc, I'm going to choose the latter one.
For reasons I'm yet to understand, 'quickness' and 'attacking' remain an essential part of the recipe, and so they've been kept in after failing without them. Yes, even if you have quickness individual focus, it doesn't work.
If you look at HarvestGreen22's data you'll see things modules don't simply add or multiply together in the way one would intuit, so I just worked off what we do know (thankfully HarvestGreen actually tested several actual combos not just individual modules, this turned out to be crucial information) and tried a few theoretically promising combinations.
So I thought I had come up with the winning combination, but when I tested this in my realistic Luton save, I got unexpectedly poor results compared to meta.
It seemed to me it must probably be because of the lower professionalism, and surprisingly that turned out to be true. It is surprising because although one would expect somewhat lower professionalism might slow progress generally, it shouldn't stunt progress entirely or haphazardly. One strange thing about it was that acc was better than meta, but pace was a lot worse, whereas in the EBFM league test both acc & pace were better. Even stranger, meta results were not hampered for some unknown reason.
But the data indeed says lower professionalism is the underlying cause (probably in concert with certain other factors no doubt):
Meta (Quickness + 2 x Attacking + Match Practice + Quickness focus) test:
ST:
acc - 1, 0, 1, 2, 2, 1, 3, 1, 1, 1, 2, 4 = 1.58
pace - 2, 2, 2, 4, 4, 2, 5, 2, 4, 4, 4, 4 = 3.25
DL/DR:
drib - 0, -2, 4, 0, 2, 0, 0, -2, 1, -1, 1, 0, -1, 0, -1 = 0.07
GK:
agil - 3, 5, 5, 6 = 4.75
aer - 0, 1, 2, 2 = 1.25
ref - 0, 0, 0, -1 = -0.25
Chance creation + Attacking + Aerial Defense + Handling + Defending from the front + Quickness + Quickness focus:
ST:
acc - -1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4, 3, 3, 1, 3 = 1.87
pace - 0, 2, 1, 1, 3, 1, 3, 1, 3, 2, 3, 3, 1, 3, 3 = 2.2
Meta 20 pro + 1 injury prone (4 years):
ST:
acc - 1, 1, 0, 3, 0, 2, 4, 2, 3, 1, 3, 3, 3, 3, 1 = 2
pace - 1, 4, 1, 4, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 4, 4, 4, 5 = 3.27
dec - 5, 1, -1, -1, -1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 2, 1, -1, 0, -1 = 0.267
DL/DR:
drib - 2, -1, 2, 1, 1, -1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 1, -1, 2, 1, 1, 2 = 1
GK:
agil - 7, 5, 7, 5, 4 = 5.6
aer - 3, 2, 0, 1, 1 = 1.4
ref - 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 = 0
8 players with 18/18 or equivalent
Chance creation + Attacking + Aerial Defense + Handling + Defending from the front + Quickness + Quickness focus (20 pro, 1 injury prone, 4 years):
ST:
acc - 3, 0, 3, 0, 3, 2, 3, 1, 2, 0, 3, 5, 4, 4, 3 = 2.4
pace - 4, 1, 3, 1, 5, 2, 3, 3, 5, 3, 6, 7, 4, 6, 6 = 3.93
dec - 0, 0, 1, -1, -1, 0, 0, -2, 0, -1, 1, 0, -1, 0, -1 = -0.333
DL/DR:
drib - 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, -1, 1, 0, -1, 1, 0, 2, 2, 2, 2 = 0.529
GK:
agil - 7, 6, 5, 5, 4 = 5.4
aer - 5, 2, 1, 1, 1 = 2
ref - 1, 0, 0, 0, 0 = 0.2
15 players with 18/18 or equivalent
Chance creation + Attacking + Aerial Defense + Handling + Defending from the front + Quickness + Quickness focus (20 pro, 1 injury prone, 3 years):
ST:
acc - 3, 1, 3, 0, 2, 2, 3, 1, 2, 0, 4, 4, 4, 3, 3 = 2.33
pace - 4, 1, 3, 1, 5, 2, 3, 2, 4, 2, 6, 6, 3, 5, 5 = 3.47
dec - 0, 0, 1, -1, -1, 0, 0, -1, 0, -1, 1, 0, -1, 0, -1 = -0.267
DL/DR:
drib - 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 2, 1, 0, 2, 1, 2 = 0.6875
GK:
agil - 7, 4, 5, 4, 4 = 4.8
aer - 5, 1, 2, 1, 1 = 2
ref - 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 = 0
11 players with 18/18 or equivalent
Extra notes:
Agility & balance focus is used for goalkeepers, not quickness.
I suspected maybe low CA-PA gap was the problem rather than low professionalism, but I checked and there's typically about 20-30 CA-PA gap left after the 4 years, so it's not that. And when I checked low professionalism players individually, it seemed to line up with professionalism being the problem - the low professionalism players were the ones with the largest differences such as 16 vs 20 pace.
I haven't measured attributes on the finer scale of 1-100, and there I may have even skipped over a player or two. Some variables were also not properly controlled. Margin of error is probably around -/+ 0.2 for each attribute. Overall it's definitely good enough in my opinion, and the reality is that there is a random element in player progress anyway - the player might get injured for example.
An advantage of my training regime isn't just the increased pace/acc, but the lower decisions growth. In my view, you should count this as equal to pace/acc in the inverse, because it occupies a lot of CA but is useless. I found quite a few combos that matched meta, except that they had significantly higher decisions growth, which made me discount them. Also some regimes had poor GK growth, a lesser consideration, whereas in this regime GK growth is excellent and slightly better than meta.
Because I can only demonstrate it works with 20 professionalism players so far, I recommend sticking with the meta for now unless you just buy very high professionalism players (which isn't a bad idea anyway). I think it won't take long to solve this though. I'm not sure what the reason is that meta works with lower professionalism players, the only idea I have right now is that maybe match practice is treated like a match rather than a training session and that you don't need professionalism for match gains but you need it for training module gains.
BulldozerJokic said: 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.
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.
new Excel：
https://pixeldrain.com/u/pcRwnxi8
This new Excel file might be helpful to you.
The data in this table is presented more intuitively. I conducted this test under different conditions (There are notes in excel). If necessary, I can also upload the test save.
The test data is included in the Excel file. I haven't finished this test completely yet, but I think it's okay to have a general look at it.
among them,
“97” is "[Chance Creation][Attacking][Aerial Defense][Handling][Defending from the Front][Quickness]" (As you mentioned)
among them,
“99” is the "3 Def + 2 Att + 3 Phy + 2 MP + 1 GD" from "Evidence Based Football Manager"
The table is divided into "non-goalkeeper" and "goalkeeper", and they are respectively located on pages 1 and 2 (I had ignored the goalkeeper in the previous tests).
Robbo84FM said: I was also wondering do we know which specific training session has the best improvement for concentration?
new Excel：
https://pixeldrain.com/u/pcRwnxi8
It's [Tactical]
If you have time, I suggest you directly go to the Excel file and look for the column related to this attribute.
It's quite easy to find the exact information you need.
tam1236 said: How do you get 18x recovery? Do You paste a schedule with recovery unitson to already planned recovery?
By the way - Stupid AI tries to change your training from time to time but quite often - do You have any way to deal with it?
Robbo84FM said: That's interesting and it still got some of your players excellent physical growth just like the full rest schedule does but not decreasing other attributes? did you also have additional focus quickness and double intensity? Also how do you do the hack to get the extra recovery sessions i remember i did it on FM24 but i can't remember how to do it? thanks.
The general process is as follows:
First, select "Match Day" in the schedule.
Then it will automatically generate a "recovery" on the next day.
This "recovery" will not exceed the "maximum 7" limit of the "normal restrictions".
So, move this generated "recovery" to another cell.
Continue to schedule the "Match Day", generate sufficient unrestricted "recovery" , and finally fill the remaining spaces with normal "recovery" .
Then, if the weekly schedule is altered due to an accident, the AI will randomly arrange your schedule. I haven't found a way to solve this problem either. The only solution is to manually re-arrange it when it occurs.
Bradjc94 said: Hi guys, what's the best training schedule for FM26?
The majority of the powerful attributes in FM24 remain powerful in FM26.
Meanwhile,
Some of the attributes in FM26 have become more effective.
-- Therefore, theoretically, we need to make some adjustments to the training schedule of FM24 to accommodate the "new and more effective attributes" introduced in FM26.
I only conducted a preliminary attribute test on the beta version of FM26 and then refund. You can see the FM26 test results in my another post.
If you don't want to spend time, using the training schedule of FM24 is fine.
https://pixeldrain.com/u/pcRwnxi8
If you want to spend time, you might need to make your own estimated adjustments by referring to the excel file I just uploaded and the attribute table of FM26.
harvestgreen22 said: The majority of the powerful attributes in FM24 remain powerful in FM26.
Meanwhile,
Some of the attributes in FM26 have become more effective.
-- Therefore, theoretically, we need to make some adjustments to the training schedule of FM24 to accommodate the "new and more effective attributes" introduced in FM26.
I only conducted a preliminary attribute test on the beta version of FM26 and then refund. You can see the FM26 test results in my another post.
If you don't want to spend time, using the training schedule of FM24 is fine.
https://pixeldrain.com/u/pcRwnxi8
If you want to spend time, you might need to make your own estimated adjustments by referring to the excel file I just uploaded and the attribute table of FM26.
harvestgreen22 said: The general process is as follows:
First, select "Match Day" in the schedule.
Then it will automatically generate a "recovery" on the next day.
This "recovery" will not exceed the "maximum 7" limit of the "normal restrictions".
So, move this generated "recovery" to another cell.
Continue to schedule the "Match Day", generate sufficient unrestricted "recovery" , and finally fill the remaining spaces with normal "recovery" .
Then, if the weekly schedule is altered due to an accident, the AI will randomly arrange your schedule. I haven't found a way to solve this problem either. The only solution is to manually re-arrange it when it occurs.
Was it correct it's better not to use recovery sessions for youth players and just use rest or does it not really matter?
Robbo84FM said: That's interesting and it still got some of your players excellent physical growth just like the full rest schedule does but not decreasing other attributes? did you also have additional focus quickness and double intensity? Also how do you do the hack to get the extra recovery sessions i remember i did it on FM24 but i can't remember how to do it? thanks.
It is not better than full rest for physical growth obviously, since full rest lowers players CA, and then that CA gets redistributed into physicals. The training schedule is preserving attributes and as players grow, they mainly gain physical attributes. It takes longer for them to get to the top speed, but I don't mind this in my saves since I play youth only most of the time and players have plenty of time to grow.
Yes, additional focus quickness, but I generally don't like double intensity, so normal intensity for the best condition, the rest is no pitch or gym work.
To exploit, just add match days to training schdeule and move recovery slots, then remove and add more match days, like harvestgreen has already explained.
harvestgreen22 said: The general process is as follows:
First, select "Match Day" in the schedule.
Then it will automatically generate a "recovery" on the next day.
This "recovery" will not exceed the "maximum 7" limit of the "normal restrictions".
So, move this generated "recovery" to another cell.
Continue to schedule the "Match Day", generate sufficient unrestricted "recovery" , and finally fill the remaining spaces with normal "recovery" .
Then, if the weekly schedule is altered due to an accident, the AI will randomly arrange your schedule. I haven't found a way to solve this problem either. The only solution is to manually re-arrange it when it occurs.
This doesn't seem to work in FM26, when i create a new training schedule i select Match day and nothing else appears in the schedule, no generated recovery session.
Robbo84FM said: This doesn't seem to work in FM26, when i create a new training schedule i select Match day and nothing else appears in the schedule, no generated recovery session.
I don't have FM26 nor plan to purchase it, so can't help there. FYI, I edited my previous response for better clarification
BulldozerJokic said: I don't have FM26 nor plan to purchase it, so can't help there. FYI, I edited my previous response for better clarification
Fair enough mate, thanks.
harvestgreen22 said: The majority of the powerful attributes in FM24 remain powerful in FM26.
Meanwhile,
Some of the attributes in FM26 have become more effective.
-- Therefore, theoretically, we need to make some adjustments to the training schedule of FM24 to accommodate the "new and more effective attributes" introduced in FM26.
I only conducted a preliminary attribute test on the beta version of FM26 and then refund. You can see the FM26 test results in my another post.
If you don't want to spend time, using the training schedule of FM24 is fine.
https://pixeldrain.com/u/pcRwnxi8
If you want to spend time, you might need to make your own estimated adjustments by referring to the excel file I just uploaded and the attribute table of FM26.
When you did these tests in FM26 how many sessions did you have in a week for each schedule, example when testing the "Attacking" schedule how many attacking sessions in a week? when testing "Attacking direct" how many sessions in a week? when testing "Chance creation" how many sessions in a week ect ect?