tl;dr 'Youth Facilities' have no effect on newgen PA in any way. The 'club reputation' of OTHER clubs in your nation has a small effect on newgen PA. 'Corporate facilities' may also have a minor effect on newgen PA, but this could be just statistical noise.
----------------------------
I did testing before in FM19 and found that youth facilities affect newgen CA but not PA.
I have done a decent amount of testing with FM24 and have found the same, and that median PA continues to be the most reliable measure of newgen quality, with peak PA having much more of a randomness factor.
What I found in my previous testing was roughly the following:
Junior coaching ~40% PA effect Nation youth rating ~25% PA effect Youth recruitment ~25% PA effect Club reputation acts as tie breaker for youth recruitment Either unique nation or division ID ~25% (or perhaps even more) PA effect (a hidden, unchangeable factor - it may be 'Nation attribute template' that is listed as an inaccessible debug option in the editor, which sounds like it would be similar to the 'Nation personality template' before it was removed in recent versions) All other factors no effect
But I wanted to test a few new theories I had this time as well.
First, the data:
Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams normal: 141.5 median, 170 peak Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams YF1: 138.1 median, 161.4 peak Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams YF20: 143.7 median, 171.4 peak Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams JC1: 143 median, 163 peak Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams ClubRep/Train/YouthImp/Corp 1: 124.3 median, 176.3 peak Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams Train/YouthImp/Corp 1: 137.25 median, 165.5 peak Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams YouthImp/Corp 1: 136 median, 171.6 peak Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams YouthImp 20/Corp 1: 135.6 median, 164.9 peak Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams ClubRep1: 130.6 median, 177 peak Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams ClubRep1/YF1: 142 median, 174 peak Man City normal (no affiliates), premier league normal, all other England teams ClubRep1/YF1/corp1: 138 median, 163.5 peak Man City normal (no affiliates), premier league ClubRep/YF1/Corp1, all other clubs normal: 138.8 median, 177.4 peak Man City normal (no affiliates), north-west local region normal, all other clubs ClubRep1/YF1: 138.4 median, 176 peak Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams ClubRep/Corp 1: 133.9 median, 167.3 peak
Margin of error I'd guesstimate at ~3-5 median PA. This isn't up to EBFM's standards, but it's 'good enough' in my opinion. I've always been of the view that if you can't replicate it reliably in a few seasons of FM, then its not significant enough of a result to include anyway.
In case you're wondering, keeping the affiliates for Man City reduces median PA by ~15-20, and I deliberately removed them because I know affiliates mess with the newgen intake results as they can replace one or more of them with one from an affiliate club. I wanted to get a pure English club result.
I noticed that Man City often gets some purely Scotland/Ireland only players, and that once their top player (194 PA) was Ireland only. This is notable because Ireland has low enough of a nation youth rating that a 194 PA Ireland player is pretty highly unlikely. It gave credence to the idea that newgens are tied to local region in some way, so I thought I'd re-examine that aspect too (I'd previously tested 'local region' and found it had zero effect on CA/PA).
Hypothesis: Youth facilities have insignificant effect at a single club, but a nations or divisions teams YF contributes cumulatively to a pool of PA that clubs then draw upon. Conclusion: False.
Hypothesis: Youth facilities don't effect median PA, but they effect peak PA or the skew. Conclusion: False.
Although YF1 always eventually produced a high peak PA, I did notice that YF1 alone had a long run of ~155-160 peak PA. This wasn't the case in other YF1 tests, and YF20 produced peak PAs all over the place from 159 to 194. Skew is difficult to definitively conclude on, but I didn't get the impression looking through the results that youth facilities effected the skew.
Hypothesis: Youth facilities contribute to a division pool only. Conclusion: False.
Hypothesis: Youth facilities contribute to a 'local region' pool only. Conclusion: False.
Hypothesis: Junior coaching/Training Facilities/Youth Importance of other clubs has an effect somehow. Conclusion: False.
Hypothesis: Club reputation of other clubs has an effect somehow. Conclusion: Tentatively, yes.
This was a somewhat surprising finding. From memory, I did find before that club rep had a ~10% CA effect, but not on PA. In this case, we can see that ClubRep1 reduced median PA by ~7.7% alone, and ~12.2% when combined with other low club attributes. I took extra samples to be sure and got the same result.
The strange thing is that ClubRep1 result is normal when combined with YF1. I think there's a clue as to what's going on in the fact that the low median PA results only happened when *all* other England teams had low club rep. But that still doesn't make sense of it.
Hypothesis: Corporate facilities of other clubs has an effect somehow. Conclusion: Unclear.
Corp 1 did produce lower median PAs consistently, but the difference of ~3-7 may not be statistically significant. Consider that the typical variance of a club each year is ~5 median PA, even after stripping away the outliers.
Hypothesis: Starting CA affects PA, say that +20 CA due to factor contributes +20 PA as well. Conclusion: False.
Thanks for this! I think I read somewhere else recently (probably Reddit) that Youth Facilities don't impact the PA of newly generated players at all. This is really good to know.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: In case you're wondering, keeping the affiliates for Man City reduces median PA by ~15-20, and I deliberately removed them because I know affiliates mess with the newgen intake results as they can replace one or more of them with one from an affiliate club. I wanted to get a pure English club result. Expand
Great test, man. Thoughts about the affiliate clubs thing:
There are 7 countries with a higher Youth Rating than England(136), highest being Brazil with 163. If my top English club gets an affiliate in Brazil, wouldn't that be a good thing? Seems like swapping an English newgen for a Brazilian should be an upgrade most of the time.
The question is, I guess, how the game makes the Brazilian kid: does he get generated in my youth intake with my own 20/20 JC and YR? or is he made at his own club, with their stats (probably lower than mine), and just moved to my team?
If it's the first option then its a win. If not, then its a gamble. Any ideas?
EvensenFM said: Thanks for this! I think I read somewhere else recently (probably Reddit) that Youth Facilities don't impact the PA of newly generated players at all. This is really good to know. Expand
I actually posted a comment on your youtube recently, that was it.
You do pretty good videos, enjoying watching them alongside doing things, even though I wouldn't have thought football history would be my thing.
kvasir said: Great test, man. Thoughts about the affiliate clubs thing:
There are 7 countries with a higher Youth Rating than England(136), highest being Brazil with 163. If my top English club gets an affiliate in Brazil, wouldn't that be a good thing? Seems like swapping an English newgen for a Brazilian should be an upgrade most of the time.
The question is, I guess, how the game makes the Brazilian kid: does he get generated in my youth intake with my own 20/20 JC and YR? or is he made at his own club, with their stats (probably lower than mine), and just moved to my team?
If it's the first option then its a win. If not, then its a gamble. Any ideas? Expand
Yes, you are entirely correct in your first hypothesis. I just removed the affiliates from Man City because I'm trying to work out the newgen mechanics accurately.
To the question, a few days ago I would have said to you that its just Brazil's youth rating + it must be your own facilities, because in some testing I did before on it I found that it only takes the youth rating, not any of the affiliate club attributes.
But recently I was watching EBFM's video on affiliate clubs, and his data shows that while nation youth rating is still the most important factor, affiliate club attributes do in fact influence the quality of the newgen. So now I'm not sure, but I'd say believe what EBFM says on this because it's likely I only took like 5 samples or something in my test, because intake from affiliate clubs isn't really a part of the formula for newgen mechanics that I've been testing for.
You do pretty good videos, enjoying watching them alongside doing things, even though I wouldn't have thought football history would be my thing. Expand
Aha! Yeah, it must have been you. Apologies - I have a hard time keeping track...
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: Junior coaching ~40% PA effect Nation youth rating ~25% PA effect Youth recruitment ~25% PA effect Club reputation acts as tie breaker for youth recruitment Either unique nation or division ID ~25% (or perhaps even more) PA effect (a hidden, unchangeable factor Expand Sorry for digging up old posts, but good estimation - lately made some tests with nation rating. Having clearly best reputation, coaching 20, recruitment 20, youth rating 200 , best swiss newgen was always (~15 times) >150-<160 - not very much randomness, I would even say PA of best five boys was quite regular (btw with rating 1 dropped to >70-<75). I don't suppose this hidden factor is mysterious "football's popularity", which effects no one knows, but rather other more hidden factor.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: tl;dr 'Youth Facilities' have no effect on newgen PA in any way. The 'club reputation' of OTHER clubs in your nation has a small effect on newgen PA. 'Corporate facilities' may also have a minor effect on newgen PA, but this could be just statistical noise. Expand
Sorry for bringing up old topics. Has anyone tested the impact of the first team's training facility on player development?
Antal said: Sorry for bringing up old topics. Has anyone tested the impact of the first team's training facility on player development? Expand
This is an old video, but from what i understand the mechanics of the game haven't really changed. The conclusion was it does have an impact.
From anecdote though, it mostly has an impact on players with lesser personalities, i've found that if the personality is good the development is good. I could be spouting nonsense, but that's what i've noticed at least.
juliius said: This is an old video, but from what i understand the mechanics of the game haven't really changed. The conclusion was it does have an impact.
From anecdote though, it mostly has an impact on players with lesser personalities, i've found that if the personality is good the development is good. I could be spouting nonsense, but that's what i've noticed at least. Expand
tam1236 said: Sorry for digging up old posts, but good estimation - lately made some tests with nation rating. Having clearly best reputation, coaching 20, recruitment 20, youth rating 200 , best swiss newgen was always (~15 times) >150-<160 - not very much randomness, I would even say PA of best five boys was quite regular (btw with rating 1 dropped to >70-<75). I don't suppose this hidden factor is mysterious "football's popularity", which effects no one knows, but rather other more hidden factor. Expand The quote you are referring to is really a misunderstanding created by looking at a single team. If you make all the other clubs have terrible reputation then you create a situation where your club’s recruitment gets worse because lots of mediocre players now don’t want to go to those other clubs and clutter up your picks. Your team isn’t picking with perfect knowledge so having a much larger pool that want your club dilutes the quality of your choices. The only team attributes that matter for PA of your intake are your club reputation first, followed by youth recruitment second. The youth rating of the country applies to all players recruited in that country, regardless of their nationality. But the number of higher PA players each year also depends on the players that have left the database of active players since the game tries to maintain stable levels of good players in each country. (This is why there tends to be a noticeable jump in high PA recruits in the first year of a save or when you add playable leagues).
Finally affiliates can have a negative effect if they are from countries with low youth ratings but this is both rare and of limited effect. The affiliates give you additional intake players and aren’t replacing high PA players from your own country. Yes they can lower the median but that is like saying that getting 5 200 PA players and a 150 PA player is worse than getting only 5 200 PA players. The negative impact only comes if you have enough affiliates that you hit the maximum limit of the intake (around 16-20) and if lower PA recruits could push out better players from other affiliates or from your local recruited but foreign nationality players.
MeanOnSunday said: The number of higher PA players each year also depends on the players that have left the database of active players since the game tries to maintain stable levels of good players in each country. (This is why there tends to be a noticeable jump in high PA recruits in the first year of a save or when you add playable leagues). Expand Would be interesting but do you have any proof? This hypothesis doesn't perfectly fit to the situation because what bothered me, was nearly the same max PA in every probe, nearly the same number of players with high PA>=150, but always PA<160 (though youth rating was set at 200). So if it is generated in such a way as you write, newgens' PA should be also connected with retired players' PA from country X, what I doubt, because lowering youth rating to 1 I got newgens of PA~70 with highest club reputation in a country.
BTW I didnt change any clubs' reputation, but I doubt recruitment works in "your" way (When high-rep, You collect bad players from bad-reputation clubs).
MeanOnSunday said: The quote you are referring to is really a misunderstanding created by looking at a single team. If you make all the other clubs have terrible reputation then you create a situation where your club’s recruitment gets worse because lots of mediocre players now don’t want to go to those other clubs and clutter up your picks. Your team isn’t picking with perfect knowledge so having a much larger pool that want your club dilutes the quality of your choices. The only team attributes that matter for PA of your intake are your club reputation first, followed by youth recruitment second. The youth rating of the country applies to all players recruited in that country, regardless of their nationality. But the number of higher PA players each year also depends on the players that have left the database of active players since the game tries to maintain stable levels of good players in each country. (This is why there tends to be a noticeable jump in high PA recruits in the first year of a save or when you add playable leagues).
Finally affiliates can have a negative effect if they are from countries with low youth ratings but this is both rare and of limited effect. The affiliates give you additional intake players and aren’t replacing high PA players from your own country. Yes they can lower the median but that is like saying that getting 5 200 PA players and a 150 PA player is worse than getting only 5 200 PA players. The negative impact only comes if you have enough affiliates that you hit the maximum limit of the intake (around 16-20) and if lower PA recruits could push out better players from other affiliates or from your local recruited but foreign nationality players. Expand I suppose you are referring to me only using Man City, but that is for this FM24 test. In FM19, I tested every playable club, and that is what my factor % approximations are derived from (by examining the differences between the clubs).
It is not true that only club rep followed by youth recruitment matter. If you doubt my own claims, you can see EBFM finding the same results (junior coaching is the most important for newgen PA).
The affiliate player does replace one of the 16 of your intake, and high PA newgens do not squeeze out low PA newgens in the intake. Rather there is a fairly predictable median that is the peak probability of a distribution curve, and the shape of the curve (bunched up or large tails) is affected by a few factors, but essentially the peak PAs you'll see are random (i.e. Man City might get 170 PA peak one year, 190 PA peak the next). The peak PAs are only predictable in one regard, that Man City is going to produce a player somewhere in the range of ~160-200 PA every year, but Brackley Town almost never will. The best indicator of both overall quality and chance of high PA newgens is median PA.
If your theory about how recruitment works was correct, then ClubRep1/YF1 would not produce results equal to default, which it did.
EBFM found that youth facilities of affiliate clubs is inversely correlated with intake PA. He also found that club rep of affiliate affects PA, but not for self-intake. I figure this might be a clue.
We can infer that if other clubs have YF20, their release of high PA newgens to other clubs is dampened. If they have YF1, it would be unrestricted. Since YF does not affect newgen PA, the high PA newgen output of all other English clubs is not affected, it is simply that they are handing over the better players to Man City.
We see consistently that ClubRep1 of all other English clubs results in low median PA, but not if *some* other English clubs are normal (whether same division or not).
Some logical deductions:
1. It is not that there are not enough high PA players being generated, as YF1 alleviates it entirely, even when all other clubs are ClubRep1.
2. Club rep has little effect on self-intake, therefore the boost to PA that high club rep of *other* clubs provide isn't coming from their intake quality being raised, but that the standard high PA players are more likely to be poached if the team is high rep. My guess is that this is meant to represent high rep teams being more likely to be scouted, while the reality is that good youths can come from anywhere but many simply go unnoticed.
3. So the low PA of ClubRep1 actually represents a scouting failure, rather than an actual drop in available youth quality.
4. YF1 must negate the scouting failure. Perhaps it is because these players seek out the better club to join, instead of waiting to be scouted.
Another way of thinking about it is that youth facilities represent your defense against poaching, while club rep is what makes you 'visible' to poachers.
In theory, this should mean a YF1 high rep club should have slightly lower median PA intakes.
I suppose that 'youth recruitment' is what the aforementioned scouting would be. An interesting question is if there is a real hidden pool of pre-newgens, where does the new 16th player come from when one get poached, and who is the replaced player and where does he get dropped to.
We know that youth recruitment is also a pecking order rather than absolute, i.e. YR 19 is no good if every other team is YR20. But it doesn't sound right that if one team is YR 2 and everyone is YR 1, then there would be no difference between YR 2 and YR 20 for that club. Having YR 20 overcome high YF and low clubrep barriers makes more sense.
This is all difficult to test, but I have noticed the following suggestive oddity: The Jamaican Premier League starts with 8 teams with 20 youth recruitment. Turkey on the other hand has 16 1st div clubs with 6 or less YR. Without diving into this too deeply, obviously something is going on here beyond just YR 2 beats YR 1, and it seems to me that YR is being adjusted to produce desired results when club rep and expected player quality is set in stone first. Pete Sottrel (SI staff) claimed 'The Youth Recruitment rating tells us how wide the club’s catchment area is' but this has to be a bullshit story because clubs in the microstate of San Marino have mostly YR of 2, while Luxembourg have several YR 14-20, Seattle has 12, and Sugar Boys and two others in the British Virgin Islands have 18.
tl;dr 'Youth Facilities' have no effect on newgen PA in any way. The 'club reputation' of OTHER clubs in your nation has a small effect on newgen PA. 'Corporate facilities' may also have a minor effect on newgen PA, but this could be just statistical noise.
----------------------------
I did testing before in FM19 and found that youth facilities affect newgen CA but not PA.
I have done a decent amount of testing with FM24 and have found the same, and that median PA continues to be the most reliable measure of newgen quality, with peak PA having much more of a randomness factor.
What I found in my previous testing was roughly the following:
Junior coaching ~40% PA effect
Nation youth rating ~25% PA effect
Youth recruitment ~25% PA effect
Club reputation acts as tie breaker for youth recruitment
Either unique nation or division ID ~25% (or perhaps even more) PA effect (a hidden, unchangeable factor - it may be 'Nation attribute template' that is listed as an inaccessible debug option in the editor, which sounds like it would be similar to the 'Nation personality template' before it was removed in recent versions)
All other factors no effect
But I wanted to test a few new theories I had this time as well.
First, the data:
Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams normal: 141.5 median, 170 peak
Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams YF1: 138.1 median, 161.4 peak
Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams YF20: 143.7 median, 171.4 peak
Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams JC1: 143 median, 163 peak
Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams ClubRep/Train/YouthImp/Corp 1: 124.3 median, 176.3 peak
Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams Train/YouthImp/Corp 1: 137.25 median, 165.5 peak
Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams YouthImp/Corp 1: 136 median, 171.6 peak
Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams YouthImp 20/Corp 1: 135.6 median, 164.9 peak
Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams ClubRep1: 130.6 median, 177 peak
Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams ClubRep1/YF1: 142 median, 174 peak
Man City normal (no affiliates), premier league normal, all other England teams ClubRep1/YF1/corp1: 138 median, 163.5 peak
Man City normal (no affiliates), premier league ClubRep/YF1/Corp1, all other clubs normal: 138.8 median, 177.4 peak
Man City normal (no affiliates), north-west local region normal, all other clubs ClubRep1/YF1: 138.4 median, 176 peak
Man City normal (no affiliates), all other England teams ClubRep/Corp 1: 133.9 median, 167.3 peak
Margin of error I'd guesstimate at ~3-5 median PA. This isn't up to EBFM's standards, but it's 'good enough' in my opinion. I've always been of the view that if you can't replicate it reliably in a few seasons of FM, then its not significant enough of a result to include anyway.
In case you're wondering, keeping the affiliates for Man City reduces median PA by ~15-20, and I deliberately removed them because I know affiliates mess with the newgen intake results as they can replace one or more of them with one from an affiliate club. I wanted to get a pure English club result.
I noticed that Man City often gets some purely Scotland/Ireland only players, and that once their top player (194 PA) was Ireland only. This is notable because Ireland has low enough of a nation youth rating that a 194 PA Ireland player is pretty highly unlikely. It gave credence to the idea that newgens are tied to local region in some way, so I thought I'd re-examine that aspect too (I'd previously tested 'local region' and found it had zero effect on CA/PA).
Hypothesis: Youth facilities have insignificant effect at a single club, but a nations or divisions teams YF contributes cumulatively to a pool of PA that clubs then draw upon.
Conclusion: False.
Hypothesis: Youth facilities don't effect median PA, but they effect peak PA or the skew.
Conclusion: False.
Although YF1 always eventually produced a high peak PA, I did notice that YF1 alone had a long run of ~155-160 peak PA. This wasn't the case in other YF1 tests, and YF20 produced peak PAs all over the place from 159 to 194. Skew is difficult to definitively conclude on, but I didn't get the impression looking through the results that youth facilities effected the skew.
Hypothesis: Youth facilities contribute to a division pool only.
Conclusion: False.
Hypothesis: Youth facilities contribute to a 'local region' pool only.
Conclusion: False.
Hypothesis: Junior coaching/Training Facilities/Youth Importance of other clubs has an effect somehow.
Conclusion: False.
Hypothesis: Club reputation of other clubs has an effect somehow.
Conclusion: Tentatively, yes.
This was a somewhat surprising finding. From memory, I did find before that club rep had a ~10% CA effect, but not on PA. In this case, we can see that ClubRep1 reduced median PA by ~7.7% alone, and ~12.2% when combined with other low club attributes. I took extra samples to be sure and got the same result.
The strange thing is that ClubRep1 result is normal when combined with YF1. I think there's a clue as to what's going on in the fact that the low median PA results only happened when *all* other England teams had low club rep. But that still doesn't make sense of it.
Hypothesis: Corporate facilities of other clubs has an effect somehow.
Conclusion: Unclear.
Corp 1 did produce lower median PAs consistently, but the difference of ~3-7 may not be statistically significant. Consider that the typical variance of a club each year is ~5 median PA, even after stripping away the outliers.
Hypothesis: Starting CA affects PA, say that +20 CA due to factor contributes +20 PA as well.
Conclusion: False.
Thanks for this! I think I read somewhere else recently (probably Reddit) that Youth Facilities don't impact the PA of newly generated players at all. This is really good to know.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: In case you're wondering, keeping the affiliates for Man City reduces median PA by ~15-20, and I deliberately removed them because I know affiliates mess with the newgen intake results as they can replace one or more of them with one from an affiliate club. I wanted to get a pure English club result.
Great test, man. Thoughts about the affiliate clubs thing:
There are 7 countries with a higher Youth Rating than England(136), highest being Brazil with 163. If my top English club gets an affiliate in Brazil, wouldn't that be a good thing? Seems like swapping an English newgen for a Brazilian should be an upgrade most of the time.
The question is, I guess, how the game makes the Brazilian kid: does he get generated in my youth intake with my own 20/20 JC and YR? or is he made at his own club, with their stats (probably lower than mine), and just moved to my team?
If it's the first option then its a win. If not, then its a gamble. Any ideas?
EvensenFM said: Thanks for this! I think I read somewhere else recently (probably Reddit) that Youth Facilities don't impact the PA of newly generated players at all. This is really good to know.
I actually posted a comment on your youtube recently, that was it.
You do pretty good videos, enjoying watching them alongside doing things, even though I wouldn't have thought football history would be my thing.
kvasir said: Great test, man. Thoughts about the affiliate clubs thing:
There are 7 countries with a higher Youth Rating than England(136), highest being Brazil with 163. If my top English club gets an affiliate in Brazil, wouldn't that be a good thing? Seems like swapping an English newgen for a Brazilian should be an upgrade most of the time.
The question is, I guess, how the game makes the Brazilian kid: does he get generated in my youth intake with my own 20/20 JC and YR? or is he made at his own club, with their stats (probably lower than mine), and just moved to my team?
If it's the first option then its a win. If not, then its a gamble. Any ideas?
Yes, you are entirely correct in your first hypothesis. I just removed the affiliates from Man City because I'm trying to work out the newgen mechanics accurately.
To the question, a few days ago I would have said to you that its just Brazil's youth rating + it must be your own facilities, because in some testing I did before on it I found that it only takes the youth rating, not any of the affiliate club attributes.
But recently I was watching EBFM's video on affiliate clubs, and his data shows that while nation youth rating is still the most important factor, affiliate club attributes do in fact influence the quality of the newgen. So now I'm not sure, but I'd say believe what EBFM says on this because it's likely I only took like 5 samples or something in my test, because intake from affiliate clubs isn't really a part of the formula for newgen mechanics that I've been testing for.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: I actually posted a comment on your youtube recently, that was it.
You do pretty good videos, enjoying watching them alongside doing things, even though I wouldn't have thought football history would be my thing.
Aha! Yeah, it must have been you. Apologies - I have a hard time keeping track...
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: Junior coaching ~40% PA effect
Nation youth rating ~25% PA effect
Youth recruitment ~25% PA effect
Club reputation acts as tie breaker for youth recruitment
Either unique nation or division ID ~25% (or perhaps even more) PA effect (a hidden, unchangeable factor
Sorry for digging up old posts, but good estimation - lately made some tests with nation rating. Having clearly best reputation, coaching 20, recruitment 20, youth rating 200 , best swiss newgen was always (~15 times) >150-<160 - not very much randomness, I would even say PA of best five boys was quite regular (btw with rating 1 dropped to >70-<75). I don't suppose this hidden factor is mysterious "football's popularity", which effects no one knows, but rather other more hidden factor.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: tl;dr 'Youth Facilities' have no effect on newgen PA in any way. The 'club reputation' of OTHER clubs in your nation has a small effect on newgen PA. 'Corporate facilities' may also have a minor effect on newgen PA, but this could be just statistical noise.
Sorry for bringing up old topics. Has anyone tested the impact of the first team's training facility on player development?
Antal said: Sorry for bringing up old topics. Has anyone tested the impact of the first team's training facility on player development?
This is an old video, but from what i understand the mechanics of the game haven't really changed. The conclusion was it does have an impact.
From anecdote though, it mostly has an impact on players with lesser personalities, i've found that if the personality is good the development is good. I could be spouting nonsense, but that's what i've noticed at least.
juliius said:
This is an old video, but from what i understand the mechanics of the game haven't really changed. The conclusion was it does have an impact.
From anecdote though, it mostly has an impact on players with lesser personalities, i've found that if the personality is good the development is good. I could be spouting nonsense, but that's what i've noticed at least.
Thanks my friend, this is a great video.
tam1236 said: Sorry for digging up old posts, but good estimation - lately made some tests with nation rating. Having clearly best reputation, coaching 20, recruitment 20, youth rating 200 , best swiss newgen was always (~15 times) >150-<160 - not very much randomness, I would even say PA of best five boys was quite regular (btw with rating 1 dropped to >70-<75). I don't suppose this hidden factor is mysterious "football's popularity", which effects no one knows, but rather other more hidden factor.
The quote you are referring to is really a misunderstanding created by looking at a single team. If you make all the other clubs have terrible reputation then you create a situation where your club’s recruitment gets worse because lots of mediocre players now don’t want to go to those other clubs and clutter up your picks. Your team isn’t picking with perfect knowledge so having a much larger pool that want your club dilutes the quality of your choices. The only team attributes that matter for PA of your intake are your club reputation first, followed by youth recruitment second. The youth rating of the country applies to all players recruited in that country, regardless of their nationality. But the number of higher PA players each year also depends on the players that have left the database of active players since the game tries to maintain stable levels of good players in each country. (This is why there tends to be a noticeable jump in high PA recruits in the first year of a save or when you add playable leagues).
Finally affiliates can have a negative effect if they are from countries with low youth ratings but this is both rare and of limited effect. The affiliates give you additional intake players and aren’t replacing high PA players from your own country. Yes they can lower the median but that is like saying that getting 5 200 PA players and a 150 PA player is worse than getting only 5 200 PA players. The negative impact only comes if you have enough affiliates that you hit the maximum limit of the intake (around 16-20) and if lower PA recruits could push out better players from other affiliates or from your local recruited but foreign nationality players.
MeanOnSunday said: The number of higher PA players each year also depends on the players that have left the database of active players since the game tries to maintain stable levels of good players in each country. (This is why there tends to be a noticeable jump in high PA recruits in the first year of a save or when you add playable leagues).
Would be interesting but do you have any proof?
This hypothesis doesn't perfectly fit to the situation because what bothered me, was nearly the same max PA in every probe, nearly the same number of players with high PA>=150, but always PA<160 (though youth rating was set at 200). So if it is generated in such a way as you write, newgens' PA should be also connected with retired players' PA from country X, what I doubt, because lowering youth rating to 1 I got newgens of PA~70 with highest club reputation in a country.
BTW I didnt change any clubs' reputation, but I doubt recruitment works in "your" way (When high-rep, You collect bad players from bad-reputation clubs).
MeanOnSunday said: The quote you are referring to is really a misunderstanding created by looking at a single team. If you make all the other clubs have terrible reputation then you create a situation where your club’s recruitment gets worse because lots of mediocre players now don’t want to go to those other clubs and clutter up your picks. Your team isn’t picking with perfect knowledge so having a much larger pool that want your club dilutes the quality of your choices. The only team attributes that matter for PA of your intake are your club reputation first, followed by youth recruitment second. The youth rating of the country applies to all players recruited in that country, regardless of their nationality. But the number of higher PA players each year also depends on the players that have left the database of active players since the game tries to maintain stable levels of good players in each country. (This is why there tends to be a noticeable jump in high PA recruits in the first year of a save or when you add playable leagues).
Finally affiliates can have a negative effect if they are from countries with low youth ratings but this is both rare and of limited effect. The affiliates give you additional intake players and aren’t replacing high PA players from your own country. Yes they can lower the median but that is like saying that getting 5 200 PA players and a 150 PA player is worse than getting only 5 200 PA players. The negative impact only comes if you have enough affiliates that you hit the maximum limit of the intake (around 16-20) and if lower PA recruits could push out better players from other affiliates or from your local recruited but foreign nationality players.
I suppose you are referring to me only using Man City, but that is for this FM24 test. In FM19, I tested every playable club, and that is what my factor % approximations are derived from (by examining the differences between the clubs).
It is not true that only club rep followed by youth recruitment matter. If you doubt my own claims, you can see EBFM finding the same results (junior coaching is the most important for newgen PA).
The affiliate player does replace one of the 16 of your intake, and high PA newgens do not squeeze out low PA newgens in the intake. Rather there is a fairly predictable median that is the peak probability of a distribution curve, and the shape of the curve (bunched up or large tails) is affected by a few factors, but essentially the peak PAs you'll see are random (i.e. Man City might get 170 PA peak one year, 190 PA peak the next). The peak PAs are only predictable in one regard, that Man City is going to produce a player somewhere in the range of ~160-200 PA every year, but Brackley Town almost never will. The best indicator of both overall quality and chance of high PA newgens is median PA.
If your theory about how recruitment works was correct, then ClubRep1/YF1 would not produce results equal to default, which it did.
EBFM found that youth facilities of affiliate clubs is inversely correlated with intake PA. He also found that club rep of affiliate affects PA, but not for self-intake. I figure this might be a clue.
We can infer that if other clubs have YF20, their release of high PA newgens to other clubs is dampened. If they have YF1, it would be unrestricted. Since YF does not affect newgen PA, the high PA newgen output of all other English clubs is not affected, it is simply that they are handing over the better players to Man City.
We see consistently that ClubRep1 of all other English clubs results in low median PA, but not if *some* other English clubs are normal (whether same division or not).
Some logical deductions:
1. It is not that there are not enough high PA players being generated, as YF1 alleviates it entirely, even when all other clubs are ClubRep1.
2. Club rep has little effect on self-intake, therefore the boost to PA that high club rep of *other* clubs provide isn't coming from their intake quality being raised, but that the standard high PA players are more likely to be poached if the team is high rep. My guess is that this is meant to represent high rep teams being more likely to be scouted, while the reality is that good youths can come from anywhere but many simply go unnoticed.
3. So the low PA of ClubRep1 actually represents a scouting failure, rather than an actual drop in available youth quality.
4. YF1 must negate the scouting failure. Perhaps it is because these players seek out the better club to join, instead of waiting to be scouted.
Another way of thinking about it is that youth facilities represent your defense against poaching, while club rep is what makes you 'visible' to poachers.
In theory, this should mean a YF1 high rep club should have slightly lower median PA intakes.
I suppose that 'youth recruitment' is what the aforementioned scouting would be. An interesting question is if there is a real hidden pool of pre-newgens, where does the new 16th player come from when one get poached, and who is the replaced player and where does he get dropped to.
We know that youth recruitment is also a pecking order rather than absolute, i.e. YR 19 is no good if every other team is YR20. But it doesn't sound right that if one team is YR 2 and everyone is YR 1, then there would be no difference between YR 2 and YR 20 for that club. Having YR 20 overcome high YF and low clubrep barriers makes more sense.
This is all difficult to test, but I have noticed the following suggestive oddity: The Jamaican Premier League starts with 8 teams with 20 youth recruitment. Turkey on the other hand has 16 1st div clubs with 6 or less YR. Without diving into this too deeply, obviously something is going on here beyond just YR 2 beats YR 1, and it seems to me that YR is being adjusted to produce desired results when club rep and expected player quality is set in stone first. Pete Sottrel (SI staff) claimed 'The Youth Recruitment rating tells us how wide the club’s catchment area is' but this has to be a bullshit story because clubs in the microstate of San Marino have mostly YR of 2, while Luxembourg have several YR 14-20, Seattle has 12, and Sugar Boys and two others in the British Virgin Islands have 18.