Note that this has nothing to do with your claim that stamina is the most important attribute for fullbacks. You remind me of those insufferable 3rd worlders living in slums under despots who look at the George Floyd debacle and reiterate with a mischievous grin 'See, I told you America is collapsing!'. Expand
😂😂. Most important? I never said that. If you have to tell lies, whilst spewing out this other crap, it shows how badly you handle any criticism and how desperate you are to be loved by strangers online. I said it was more important than several other attributes you'd listed and hadn't mentioned stamina. You replied saying it wasn't. Now you've discovered it's important overall? We knew this years ago. Show me where I did l said it was the most important you liar.
Your replies are hilarious. Attributes are speed, jumping each, dribbling and then stamina. Again we knew the years ago. Then you have anticipation. You can't be seriously working this out in 2026 when we knew this in 2023.
If you were any good at this you'd be working out which attributes were more important by position, rather than just which attributes are important. The tests you did on players was funny as well. Goncalo Ramos?? Honestly concentrate on your school work. You've probably got your exams next year.
Ps I also don't remember dribbling being hard to find. It's one of the best attacking attributes, after speed of course if you were thinking about telling more lies saying I said it's the most important.
So it turns out the GK does matter quite a bit. The most surprising finding is that technique 13 > 8 results in going from 6th to relegation, though that is with my knife-edge 15 pace/acc roster of outfield players. Both pace & acc also turn out to be fairly important.
A fair number of the attributes result in 1-2 places position drop if you go from 13/14 > 8, so I think in general you want the GK to be reasonably well-rounded.
Behold, the ultimate goalkeeper:
With this GK, the team finished 3rd, 5th, 4th, 1st.
BTW, I don't keep track of this, but I know that I've simulated at least over 10,000 real Premier Leagues matches in full detail now with these 15 pace/acc templates and coming ~4th-5th ~80-90%+ of the time.
Now I know some genuinely care about the accuracy question rather than just looking for any god-of-the-gaps excuse for SI's lies and imbecility. For these people, I have two things to say:
1) Yes, the points total even for a full season varies greatly, but the final position is much more stable. So my 15 pace/acc team might get 57 points or 81 points, but its position ~8 times out of 10 will be 3th-6th. Occasionally it will be 2nd or 8th or 10th. Rarely it will be 1st or 12th say.
2) Think about it deductively. If the RNG was so powerful that you couldn't tell reliably whether a team would come 1st or 10th in one season of samples, then you would have a fair chance every season of Liverpool coming 10th and not even qualifying for a cup spot. Ok, sometimes this does happen in the game, but let's be real, it's pretty rare.
I have a hypothesis as to why position is more stable than points. Rather than RNG causing the difference between the two, I would suspect it could be weather. Or some factor(s) other than just RNG, because the strange thing is that it must effect most or all teams equally, since the positions remain pretty stable, and I highly doubt that the game is looking at one team's 1-0 result and determining that the other game must end 2-0 to line the positions up at the end of the season.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: So it turns out the GK does matter quite a bit. The most surprising finding is that technique 13 > 8 results in going from 6th to relegation, though that is with my knife-edge 15 pace/acc roster of outfield players. Both pace & acc also turn out to be fairly important.
A fair number of the attributes result in 1-2 places position drop if you go from 13/14 > 8, so I think in general you want the GK to be reasonably well-rounded.
Behold, the ultimate goalkeeper:
With this GK, the team finished 3rd, 5th, 4th, 1st.
BTW, I don't keep track of this, but I know that I've simulated at least over 10,000 real Premier Leagues matches in full detail now with these 15 pace/acc templates and coming ~4th-5th ~80-90%+ of the time.
Now I know some genuinely care about the accuracy question rather than just looking for any god-of-the-gaps excuse for SI's lies and imbecility. For these people, I have two things to say:
1) Yes, the points total even for a full season varies greatly, but the final position is much more stable. So my 15 pace/acc team might get 57 points or 81 points, but its position ~8 times out of 10 will be 3th-6th. Occasionally it will be 2nd or 8th or 10th. Rarely it will be 1st or 12th say.
2) Think about it deductively. If the RNG was so powerful that you couldn't tell reliably whether a team would come 1st or 10th in one season of samples, then you would have a fair chance every season of Liverpool coming 10th and not even qualifying for a cup spot. Ok, sometimes this does happen in the game, but let's be real, it's pretty rare.
I have a hypothesis as to why position is more stable than points. Rather than RNG causing the difference between the two, I would suspect it could be weather. Or some factor(s) other than just RNG, because the strange thing is that it must effect most or all teams equally, since the positions remain pretty stable, and I highly doubt that the game is looking at one team's 1-0 result and determining that the other game must end 2-0 to line the positions up at the end of the season. Expand
Based on this are you going to be changing GK weights drastically or mostly just technique?
Rain said: Based on this are you going to be changing GK weights drastically or mostly just technique? Expand Drastic changes I reckon
You can use chatgpt to calculate the new weights already. Important hiddens are same as outfield: Consistency, Important Matches, Professionalism, Pressure 13.
I haven't done it myself yet because I haven't finished completely yet. I haven't actually tested Agility & Reflexes individually yet for example, but I think there's probably only some minor changes to go.
I thought it would be amusing to give a jarring illustration of something that is possible that I learned from my 1 CA testing
Unfortunately I couldn't quite finish the season before getting sacked, but here you can see I was 8th with 4 games to go (Man City):
The conditions were:
All fullbacks - 1 stamina All wingers - 1 pace All strikers - 1 finishing All defensive midfielders - 1 passing All centrebacks - 1 tackling All goalkeepers - 1 handling
All players - No other changes from my 15 pace/acc template
Example player (AML/AMR):
There's something useful in this. For some attributes you only need 1 or 2 guys to do the job (i.e. finishing, jumping reach), whereas others need to be on everyone (i.e. pace, acc). However there also seems to be some built-in leeway for at least 1 missing player, even for pace/acc. My guess is that this is to cope with the red card system. The takeaway here is that the 15 pace/acc template will be brittle, yes, but even if you skirt it fine you can still afford to have one player that has say 13 instead of 15 pace, and another who has 5 stamina instead of 13.
Keepers are the least important position in FM24 over a season. However in a single game they can make the difference. Once you reach a certain level with your team, challenging for the biggest trophies, your keeper can be the difference in a semi or final for example. Maybe this is also true in relegation scrap, but I don't have any experience of those.
Let's say Haaland is 99.99%(he should be) using genie scout and your team was 80%. You don't want any positions to be too far behind. Having ten players at 80% and then one at 70% is going to hold you back. Sometimes that 70% player might have a stellar season, but they won't repeat it every year. They will need to be upgraded. The same goes for keeper. But if you had the choice between a 85% outfield player or 85% keeper, and you keeper was already the same as your outfield players, you choose the outfield player every time. Caveat being maybe if he had high important matches and pressure he could win you a final. Even more if your keeper is lacking that and you're trying to win the biggest competitions. Overall you'd still be better off with the 85% outfield player.
The game isn't that complicated and although a lot of people make the mistake of applying real life logic, in some cases, such as you should try to upgrade your worst position are true. Although teams irl will probably still buy a top DM over a full back. But full backs can be really strong in FM, so that's where the real life logic goes out the window a bit.
Anyway I'm sure Lockjaw will disagree with most of that.
Not sure I agree with that broad statement that GK is the least important position. Issue is mostly with the way these attribute tests are done. For outfield players it's usually the whole team change and for goalkeepers it's a single player. To put it another way outfield you are testing the change on 10 players at once vs goalkeeper only 1 player.
keithb said: Keepers are the least important position in FM24 over a season. Expand It's one thing for you to have incorrectly assumed that stamina on fullbacks is crucial for success. Since you never did any testing yourself, it was a fair and widely held assumption to bet your dignity on. You couldn't have known my finding in advance that both DL/DR with 1 stamina (along with a bunch of serious shortfalls in other positions) results in coming 8th (instead of 4th-5th).
But this time you're making an assertion after it's shown to be wrong. In a team where both wingers have 1 pace, and fullbacks have 1 stamina, the team finishes 8th. In a team where just the goalkeeper has technique '8' instead of '13', the team goes from 6th to relegated. And although I did not mention this, I actually switched from aerial reach to handling for my reduced team attribute, because aerial reach 13 > 1 resulted in 15th.
I have more data to pull from. When the 15 pace/acc team was normal, and the GK lacked 4 key stats (that weren't the big three of aer/ref/agil), the result was 12th. When just the single attribute of GK acceleration was low ('8' ), the result was 9th - and that was with boosts to many other GK attributes that I later deemed superfluous.
Yarema said: Not sure I agree with that broad statement that GK is the least important position. Issue is mostly with the way these attribute tests are done. For outfield players it's usually the whole team change and for goalkeepers it's a single player. To put it another way outfield you are testing the change on 10 players at once vs goalkeeper only 1 player. Expand
People can have a different view that's fine. It's not an exact thing and I tried to include some nuance. FM is mainly about scoring goals rather than keeping clean sheets. But some have won the league with a lot of 1-0's or 2-1's so if that's your play style then maybe keepers are more important. I've won champions league finals because my keeper has been my best player. But overall I'd still rather a better ten outfield players.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: It's one thing for you to have incorrectly assumed that stamina on fullbacks is crucial for success. Since you never did any testing yourself, it was a fair and widely held assumption to bet your dignity on. You couldn't have known my finding in advance that both DL/DR with 1 stamina (along with a bunch of serious shortfalls in other positions) results in coming 8th (instead of 4th-5th).
But this time you're making an assertion after it's shown to be wrong. In a team where both wingers have 1 pace, and fullbacks have 1 stamina, the team finishes 8th. In a team where just the goalkeeper has technique '8' instead of '13', the team goes from 6th to relegated. And although I did not mention this, I actually switched from aerial reach to handling for my reduced team attribute, because aerial reach 13 > 1 resulted in 15th.
I have more data to pull from. When the 15 pace/acc team was normal, and the GK lacked 4 key stats (that weren't the big three of aer/ref/agil), the result was 12th. When just the single attribute of GK acceleration was low ('8' ), the result was 9th - and that was with boosts to many other GK attributes that I later deemed superfluous. Expand
Oh Lockjaw. You haven't shown anything to make me wrong. Your methodology is crap. There's nothing useful in those tests. You are someone who didn't even have Haaland as the best striker at one point? How can your testing be taken seriously. The 1ca tests are interesting but they aren't conclusive. We can now run teams and wingers can have 1 pace?
Weeks ago you said stamina didn't matter, or words to that affect, and then more recently you said it did. Which is it? It's also obvious why stamina is useful, what happens if your team has low stamina and why certain positions need it more than others. You running some half baked tests isn't conclusive. As I've said multiple times already you aren't a good tester. Most of your work is just other people's you've redone. Bravo.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: There's something useful in this. For some attributes you only need 1 or 2 guys to do the job (i.e. finishing, jumping reach), whereas others need to be on everyone (i.e. pace, acc). Expand
Surely this is bait?? You cant seriously be coming to these conclusions now? You reckon some positions need certain attributes more than others? And that speed is every player? Im in the Matrix.
keithb said: Surely this is bait?? You cant seriously be coming to these conclusions now? You reckon some positions need certain attributes more than others? And that speed is every player? Im in the Matrix. Expand
Instead of b*tching why don't you post your own testing results?
Rain said: Instead of b*tching why don't you post your own testing results? Expand
Hi and many thanks for your interaction. I don't need to do my own testing when others have done it for me. Harvest green and the testing done by FM arena is good and reliable. It won't be 100% accurate but it seems as close as we might get. Having played FM24 too much and using their results to shape my ratings for genie scout, it's not hard to work out they are highly accurate. To make the game harder I would use a tactic that was rated approximately 10 points lower than the highest one by knapp. The game was still too easy. I can offer you some tips: dribbling is important for wingers, the sun is hot, anticipation is an attribute that is useful all over the pitch but slightly more so strikers, the sea is wet, your defenders should prioritise pace over acceleration slightly, you need to breath air to live, people still undervalue jumping reach it's the third highest point scorer on fm arena testing.
Lockjaw a page or two back claimed tactics are more important than attributes. Another howler. But not a surprise. This is the same person who didn't have Haaland as the best player in the game. How is that possible??? There's something very wrong there. But if you wish to follow this you are free to do so.
Again many thanks for your interaction and I looked forward to the next one.
keithb said: Hi and many thanks for your interaction. I don't need to do my own testing when others have done it for me. Harvest green and the testing done by FM arena is good and reliable. It won't be 100% accurate but it seems as close as we might get. Having played FM24 too much and using their results to shape my ratings for genie scout, it's not hard to work out they are highly accurate. To make the game harder I would use a tactic that was rated approximately 10 points lower than the highest one by knapp. The game was still too easy. I can offer you some tips: dribbling is important for wingers, the sun is hot, anticipation is an attribute that is useful all over the pitch but slightly more so strikers, the sea is wet, your defenders should prioritise pace over acceleration slightly, you need to breath air to live, people still undervalue jumping reach it's the third highest point scorer on fm arena testing.
Lockjaw a page or two back claimed tactics are more important than attributes. Another howler. But not a surprise. This is the same person who didn't have Haaland as the best player in the game. How is that possible??? There's something very wrong there. But if you wish to follow this you are free to do so.
Again many thanks for your interaction and I looked forward to the next one. Expand
It's not that deep man you're on a forum trying to find better ways to cheat an already easy single player game like you said. If you don't agree just move on don't waste your time.
If I run the same tactic five times with Burnley, sometimes it will end 3rd place, sometimes 12th, and sometimes it will have awful results that make me even check if I loaded the right tactic before the test. What I mean is that a single league test is definitely not enough to prove anything, and even two or three would still not be reliable enough to draw any conclusions.
Other than that, the fact that table position have less variance than points in the table do not mean much. The table goes from 1st to 20th, while points go from 0 to 114. Realistically, the same experiment ran multiple times could variate position between 6 different positions, while points in the table would naturally variate 30 or so. They are simply different ranges, but the position in table depends much more from performance of other teams against each other, while points in the table depends mostly of your performance against each of them.
Rain said: It's not that deep man you're on a forum trying to find better ways to cheat an already easy single player game like you said. If you don't agree just move on don't waste your time. Expand
It's a single player game and anyone can play it in any way they like. Sometimes I wanted to see how badly I could "cheat the game" and others I was happier to play slowly with my own tactics and only buying players recommended from my scouts. I also used python which I thought was far superior to genie scout. Setting a level 7 for speed.
If I feel someone is misleading others then I will say something. Or like a few years ago when someone was clearly bullying others on the forum I spoke up. Lockjaw probably loves free speech and he loves people sticking it to people and organisations. So I'm just joining in.
Anyone not finding Haaland isn't by far the best player in the game and declaring "Tactic is actually somewhat more important than attributes." Needs to really ask themselves how they got it so wrong. It shows unreliable testing methods and a poor understanding of methodology, or just testing in general. If that person also has a fragile personality they will just crack on regardless and take no notice, as they couldn't possibly be wrong. As we endlessly see.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said:
Note that this has nothing to do with your claim that stamina is the most important attribute for fullbacks. You remind me of those insufferable 3rd worlders living in slums under despots who look at the George Floyd debacle and reiterate with a mischievous grin 'See, I told you America is collapsing!'.
😂😂. Most important? I never said that. If you have to tell lies, whilst spewing out this other crap, it shows how badly you handle any criticism and how desperate you are to be loved by strangers online. I said it was more important than several other attributes you'd listed and hadn't mentioned stamina. You replied saying it wasn't. Now you've discovered it's important overall? We knew this years ago. Show me where I did l said it was the most important you liar.
Your replies are hilarious. Attributes are speed, jumping each, dribbling and then stamina. Again we knew the years ago. Then you have anticipation. You can't be seriously working this out in 2026 when we knew this in 2023.
If you were any good at this you'd be working out which attributes were more important by position, rather than just which attributes are important. The tests you did on players was funny as well. Goncalo Ramos?? Honestly concentrate on your school work. You've probably got your exams next year.
Ps I also don't remember dribbling being hard to find. It's one of the best attacking attributes, after speed of course if you were thinking about telling more lies saying I said it's the most important.
So it turns out the GK does matter quite a bit. The most surprising finding is that technique 13 > 8 results in going from 6th to relegation, though that is with my knife-edge 15 pace/acc roster of outfield players. Both pace & acc also turn out to be fairly important.
A fair number of the attributes result in 1-2 places position drop if you go from 13/14 > 8, so I think in general you want the GK to be reasonably well-rounded.
Behold, the ultimate goalkeeper:
With this GK, the team finished 3rd, 5th, 4th, 1st.
BTW, I don't keep track of this, but I know that I've simulated at least over 10,000 real Premier Leagues matches in full detail now with these 15 pace/acc templates and coming ~4th-5th ~80-90%+ of the time.
Now I know some genuinely care about the accuracy question rather than just looking for any god-of-the-gaps excuse for SI's lies and imbecility. For these people, I have two things to say:
1) Yes, the points total even for a full season varies greatly, but the final position is much more stable. So my 15 pace/acc team might get 57 points or 81 points, but its position ~8 times out of 10 will be 3th-6th. Occasionally it will be 2nd or 8th or 10th. Rarely it will be 1st or 12th say.
2) Think about it deductively. If the RNG was so powerful that you couldn't tell reliably whether a team would come 1st or 10th in one season of samples, then you would have a fair chance every season of Liverpool coming 10th and not even qualifying for a cup spot. Ok, sometimes this does happen in the game, but let's be real, it's pretty rare.
I have a hypothesis as to why position is more stable than points. Rather than RNG causing the difference between the two, I would suspect it could be weather. Or some factor(s) other than just RNG, because the strange thing is that it must effect most or all teams equally, since the positions remain pretty stable, and I highly doubt that the game is looking at one team's 1-0 result and determining that the other game must end 2-0 to line the positions up at the end of the season.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: So it turns out the GK does matter quite a bit. The most surprising finding is that technique 13 > 8 results in going from 6th to relegation, though that is with my knife-edge 15 pace/acc roster of outfield players. Both pace & acc also turn out to be fairly important.
A fair number of the attributes result in 1-2 places position drop if you go from 13/14 > 8, so I think in general you want the GK to be reasonably well-rounded.
Behold, the ultimate goalkeeper:
With this GK, the team finished 3rd, 5th, 4th, 1st.
BTW, I don't keep track of this, but I know that I've simulated at least over 10,000 real Premier Leagues matches in full detail now with these 15 pace/acc templates and coming ~4th-5th ~80-90%+ of the time.
Now I know some genuinely care about the accuracy question rather than just looking for any god-of-the-gaps excuse for SI's lies and imbecility. For these people, I have two things to say:
1) Yes, the points total even for a full season varies greatly, but the final position is much more stable. So my 15 pace/acc team might get 57 points or 81 points, but its position ~8 times out of 10 will be 3th-6th. Occasionally it will be 2nd or 8th or 10th. Rarely it will be 1st or 12th say.
2) Think about it deductively. If the RNG was so powerful that you couldn't tell reliably whether a team would come 1st or 10th in one season of samples, then you would have a fair chance every season of Liverpool coming 10th and not even qualifying for a cup spot. Ok, sometimes this does happen in the game, but let's be real, it's pretty rare.
I have a hypothesis as to why position is more stable than points. Rather than RNG causing the difference between the two, I would suspect it could be weather. Or some factor(s) other than just RNG, because the strange thing is that it must effect most or all teams equally, since the positions remain pretty stable, and I highly doubt that the game is looking at one team's 1-0 result and determining that the other game must end 2-0 to line the positions up at the end of the season.
Based on this are you going to be changing GK weights drastically or mostly just technique?
Rain said: Based on this are you going to be changing GK weights drastically or mostly just technique?
Drastic changes I reckon
You can use chatgpt to calculate the new weights already. Important hiddens are same as outfield: Consistency, Important Matches, Professionalism, Pressure 13.
I haven't done it myself yet because I haven't finished completely yet. I haven't actually tested Agility & Reflexes individually yet for example, but I think there's probably only some minor changes to go.
I thought it would be amusing to give a jarring illustration of something that is possible that I learned from my 1 CA testing
Unfortunately I couldn't quite finish the season before getting sacked, but here you can see I was 8th with 4 games to go (Man City):
The conditions were:
All fullbacks - 1 stamina
All wingers - 1 pace
All strikers - 1 finishing
All defensive midfielders - 1 passing
All centrebacks - 1 tackling
All goalkeepers - 1 handling
All players - No other changes from my 15 pace/acc template
Example player (AML/AMR):
There's something useful in this. For some attributes you only need 1 or 2 guys to do the job (i.e. finishing, jumping reach), whereas others need to be on everyone (i.e. pace, acc). However there also seems to be some built-in leeway for at least 1 missing player, even for pace/acc. My guess is that this is to cope with the red card system. The takeaway here is that the 15 pace/acc template will be brittle, yes, but even if you skirt it fine you can still afford to have one player that has say 13 instead of 15 pace, and another who has 5 stamina instead of 13.
Keepers are the least important position in FM24 over a season. However in a single game they can make the difference. Once you reach a certain level with your team, challenging for the biggest trophies, your keeper can be the difference in a semi or final for example. Maybe this is also true in relegation scrap, but I don't have any experience of those.
Let's say Haaland is 99.99%(he should be) using genie scout and your team was 80%. You don't want any positions to be too far behind. Having ten players at 80% and then one at 70% is going to hold you back. Sometimes that 70% player might have a stellar season, but they won't repeat it every year. They will need to be upgraded. The same goes for keeper. But if you had the choice between a 85% outfield player or 85% keeper, and you keeper was already the same as your outfield players, you choose the outfield player every time. Caveat being maybe if he had high important matches and pressure he could win you a final. Even more if your keeper is lacking that and you're trying to win the biggest competitions. Overall you'd still be better off with the 85% outfield player.
The game isn't that complicated and although a lot of people make the mistake of applying real life logic, in some cases, such as you should try to upgrade your worst position are true. Although teams irl will probably still buy a top DM over a full back. But full backs can be really strong in FM, so that's where the real life logic goes out the window a bit.
Anyway I'm sure Lockjaw will disagree with most of that.
Not sure I agree with that broad statement that GK is the least important position. Issue is mostly with the way these attribute tests are done. For outfield players it's usually the whole team change and for goalkeepers it's a single player. To put it another way outfield you are testing the change on 10 players at once vs goalkeeper only 1 player.
keithb said: Keepers are the least important position in FM24 over a season.
It's one thing for you to have incorrectly assumed that stamina on fullbacks is crucial for success. Since you never did any testing yourself, it was a fair and widely held assumption to bet your dignity on. You couldn't have known my finding in advance that both DL/DR with 1 stamina (along with a bunch of serious shortfalls in other positions) results in coming 8th (instead of 4th-5th).
But this time you're making an assertion after it's shown to be wrong. In a team where both wingers have 1 pace, and fullbacks have 1 stamina, the team finishes 8th. In a team where just the goalkeeper has technique '8' instead of '13', the team goes from 6th to relegated. And although I did not mention this, I actually switched from aerial reach to handling for my reduced team attribute, because aerial reach 13 > 1 resulted in 15th.
I have more data to pull from. When the 15 pace/acc team was normal, and the GK lacked 4 key stats (that weren't the big three of aer/ref/agil), the result was 12th. When just the single attribute of GK acceleration was low ('8' ), the result was 9th - and that was with boosts to many other GK attributes that I later deemed superfluous.
Yarema said: Not sure I agree with that broad statement that GK is the least important position. Issue is mostly with the way these attribute tests are done. For outfield players it's usually the whole team change and for goalkeepers it's a single player. To put it another way outfield you are testing the change on 10 players at once vs goalkeeper only 1 player.
People can have a different view that's fine. It's not an exact thing and I tried to include some nuance. FM is mainly about scoring goals rather than keeping clean sheets. But some have won the league with a lot of 1-0's or 2-1's so if that's your play style then maybe keepers are more important. I've won champions league finals because my keeper has been my best player. But overall I'd still rather a better ten outfield players.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: It's one thing for you to have incorrectly assumed that stamina on fullbacks is crucial for success. Since you never did any testing yourself, it was a fair and widely held assumption to bet your dignity on. You couldn't have known my finding in advance that both DL/DR with 1 stamina (along with a bunch of serious shortfalls in other positions) results in coming 8th (instead of 4th-5th).
But this time you're making an assertion after it's shown to be wrong. In a team where both wingers have 1 pace, and fullbacks have 1 stamina, the team finishes 8th. In a team where just the goalkeeper has technique '8' instead of '13', the team goes from 6th to relegated. And although I did not mention this, I actually switched from aerial reach to handling for my reduced team attribute, because aerial reach 13 > 1 resulted in 15th.
I have more data to pull from. When the 15 pace/acc team was normal, and the GK lacked 4 key stats (that weren't the big three of aer/ref/agil), the result was 12th. When just the single attribute of GK acceleration was low ('8' ), the result was 9th - and that was with boosts to many other GK attributes that I later deemed superfluous.
Oh Lockjaw. You haven't shown anything to make me wrong. Your methodology is crap. There's nothing useful in those tests. You are someone who didn't even have Haaland as the best striker at one point? How can your testing be taken seriously. The 1ca tests are interesting but they aren't conclusive. We can now run teams and wingers can have 1 pace?
Weeks ago you said stamina didn't matter, or words to that affect, and then more recently you said it did. Which is it? It's also obvious why stamina is useful, what happens if your team has low stamina and why certain positions need it more than others. You running some half baked tests isn't conclusive. As I've said multiple times already you aren't a good tester. Most of your work is just other people's you've redone. Bravo.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: There's something useful in this. For some attributes you only need 1 or 2 guys to do the job (i.e. finishing, jumping reach), whereas others need to be on everyone (i.e. pace, acc).
Surely this is bait?? You cant seriously be coming to these conclusions now? You reckon some positions need certain attributes more than others? And that speed is every player? Im in the Matrix.
keithb said: Surely this is bait?? You cant seriously be coming to these conclusions now? You reckon some positions need certain attributes more than others? And that speed is every player? Im in the Matrix.
Instead of b*tching why don't you post your own testing results?
Rain said: Instead of b*tching why don't you post your own testing results?
Hi and many thanks for your interaction. I don't need to do my own testing when others have done it for me. Harvest green and the testing done by FM arena is good and reliable. It won't be 100% accurate but it seems as close as we might get. Having played FM24 too much and using their results to shape my ratings for genie scout, it's not hard to work out they are highly accurate. To make the game harder I would use a tactic that was rated approximately 10 points lower than the highest one by knapp. The game was still too easy. I can offer you some tips: dribbling is important for wingers, the sun is hot, anticipation is an attribute that is useful all over the pitch but slightly more so strikers, the sea is wet, your defenders should prioritise pace over acceleration slightly, you need to breath air to live, people still undervalue jumping reach it's the third highest point scorer on fm arena testing.
Lockjaw a page or two back claimed tactics are more important than attributes. Another howler. But not a surprise. This is the same person who didn't have Haaland as the best player in the game. How is that possible??? There's something very wrong there. But if you wish to follow this you are free to do so.
Again many thanks for your interaction and I looked forward to the next one.
keithb said: Hi and many thanks for your interaction. I don't need to do my own testing when others have done it for me. Harvest green and the testing done by FM arena is good and reliable. It won't be 100% accurate but it seems as close as we might get. Having played FM24 too much and using their results to shape my ratings for genie scout, it's not hard to work out they are highly accurate. To make the game harder I would use a tactic that was rated approximately 10 points lower than the highest one by knapp. The game was still too easy. I can offer you some tips: dribbling is important for wingers, the sun is hot, anticipation is an attribute that is useful all over the pitch but slightly more so strikers, the sea is wet, your defenders should prioritise pace over acceleration slightly, you need to breath air to live, people still undervalue jumping reach it's the third highest point scorer on fm arena testing.
Lockjaw a page or two back claimed tactics are more important than attributes. Another howler. But not a surprise. This is the same person who didn't have Haaland as the best player in the game. How is that possible??? There's something very wrong there. But if you wish to follow this you are free to do so.
Again many thanks for your interaction and I looked forward to the next one.
It's not that deep man you're on a forum trying to find better ways to cheat an already easy single player game like you said. If you don't agree just move on don't waste your time.
If I run the same tactic five times with Burnley, sometimes it will end 3rd place, sometimes 12th, and sometimes it will have awful results that make me even check if I loaded the right tactic before the test. What I mean is that a single league test is definitely not enough to prove anything, and even two or three would still not be reliable enough to draw any conclusions.
Other than that, the fact that table position have less variance than points in the table do not mean much. The table goes from 1st to 20th, while points go from 0 to 114. Realistically, the same experiment ran multiple times could variate position between 6 different positions, while points in the table would naturally variate 30 or so. They are simply different ranges, but the position in table depends much more from performance of other teams against each other, while points in the table depends mostly of your performance against each of them.
Rain said: It's not that deep man you're on a forum trying to find better ways to cheat an already easy single player game like you said. If you don't agree just move on don't waste your time.
It's a single player game and anyone can play it in any way they like. Sometimes I wanted to see how badly I could "cheat the game" and others I was happier to play slowly with my own tactics and only buying players recommended from my scouts. I also used python which I thought was far superior to genie scout. Setting a level 7 for speed.
If I feel someone is misleading others then I will say something. Or like a few years ago when someone was clearly bullying others on the forum I spoke up. Lockjaw probably loves free speech and he loves people sticking it to people and organisations. So I'm just joining in.
Anyone not finding Haaland isn't by far the best player in the game and declaring "Tactic is actually somewhat more important than attributes." Needs to really ask themselves how they got it so wrong. It shows unreliable testing methods and a poor understanding of methodology, or just testing in general. If that person also has a fragile personality they will just crack on regardless and take no notice, as they couldn't possibly be wrong. As we endlessly see.
Take it easy