Panneton0 said: Anyone managed to find how position rating influences the game in FM26? We've known for a while that having players playing their "natural" position (20) already leads to great gain w/r to playing them in an "accomplished" position (17). However, in FM26, players might play in 2 different positions IP/OOP.
As far as I've seen to this point, IP's position rating can get better solely by playing a player at this position. But OOP's position rating seems to stall. That appears to be true either by assigning training to "playing position" to IP and specifically putting their OOP position in their OOP individual position training. So that seems to point toward the OOP position being mostly irrelevant - even maybe ignored (in term of ability - not tactically).
Another thing about player position proficiency and how it should affect Genie Scout's ratings.
My understanding is that, according to the rating filter, each player gets a score for each position. This is the "general rating", when looking at one player's profil in GS. Then, the general rating is adjusted as a "positional rating" according to the player's position proficiency.
When chosing which player to play at a given position, "positional rating" is thus more relevant since it takes into consideration the position's proficiency. However, this can't seem to be configurable and only a GS inner calculation. We've seen somewhere that 1 point of proficiency has the similar impact on a player's performance than 1 point of pace "lost". E.g. A player with 17 speed and natural (20) is similar in performance than a player with 20 speed and accomplished (17). It's probably more complex than that, but it is the simplest way to compare.
Now, I'm not sure that this translates well into GS "positinal rating". For instance, let's look at 2 players in my team, contenders for playing WBL (for the sake of the discussion). I'm using the GS file in the OG post (zhf2yl)
Player A: General Rating = 45.0 WBL proficiency = 10 Positional Rating = 42.91 (So being only 10 proficient made him drop 2.09 pts) He is 45.0 positional rating for DR
Player B: General Rating = 42.6 WBL proficiency = 15 Positional Rating = 41.74 (So having 5 less than 20 proficiency made him drop 0.86 pts) He is 42.6 positional rating for DL
I feel like, even if GS shows player A as a better WBL, player B might be a better option. It seems to me that GS does not weight positional proficiency enough. My personal impression is that we should remove another 0.5 pt per proficiency below 20 to actually represent the player's efficiency.
That would make the "adjusted positional rating" like so: Player A: 37.91 Player B: 40.24 (He's now the best WBL between the two)
For reference, I have a player C with 1 in WBL proficiency: Player C: General Rating = 53.3 WBL proficiency = 1 Positional Rating = 42.7 (Just 10.6 pts less, even being totally ineffectual) Making him "theoretically" (without the adujsted positional rating) the best WBL even with 1 proficiency.
I'd like thoughts of smarter people than me on this.
Some visual (with another player) to complement my point. This guy is proficient as a DC, and can play somewhat as DR, DM and, to a lesser extent, WBR
Hi general rating (purely calculated through the attributes weighting) is similar everywhere (the weights are similar everywhere, except DC and ST where jumping reach has higher value in general)
Pretty much 41 across the board, and 42/43 DC/ST (the dude is huge)
Now, if we look at the actual position rating (the ones that appear if you set position ratings in your columns - it never shows the general rating), we see that the difference between his positional score as DC and as AMR is less than 10 points appart, which feels off. He should be very very low AMR, having 1 proficiency at that position.
Final thing, I never use the actual "role" rating since GS seem to add a layer of its own calculations on top of the user-defined weights. So I don't know how those relate to truly tested attributes.
been using Premier League 1.0 GS ratings... and this guy...
being rated at 64, seems unfair. He's a beast, only downside I see is his determination. If I follow these ratings, he won't make the bench in the Portuguese league, where I'm still dominating by far with a team with avg rating way lower than the best in the league.
Can someone clarify this Premier League 1.0 ratings? I was using Orion's and Bafici's rating's a while back, what is everyone's opinion on theese ratings?
being rated at 64, seems unfair. He's a beast, only downside I see is his determination. If I follow these ratings, he won't make the bench in the Portuguese league, where I'm still dominating by far with a team with avg rating way lower than the best in the league.
Can someone clarify this Premier League 1.0 ratings? I was using Orion's and Bafici's rating's a while back, what is everyone's opinion on theese ratings? Expand
It seems you have already realised the answer....... If a ratings system doesn't put Mbappe in the top 20 players or strikers, something is wrong? Ngolo Kante is a better right winger than Yamal(at his peak)? I dont think so.
btw the player you posted is ok. He'd tear up tier two leagues and do well in some top leagues. But he's not a champions league player for me. Yes he would while you're still building a team, but he's not top class.
being rated at 64, seems unfair. He's a beast, only downside I see is his determination. If I follow these ratings, he won't make the bench in the Portuguese league, where I'm still dominating by far with a team with avg rating way lower than the best in the league.
Can someone clarify this Premier League 1.0 ratings? I was using Orion's and Bafici's rating's a while back, what is everyone's opinion on theese ratings? Expand I'll have a look into it a bit later, but two things are obvious to me here:
1) That is a near perfect player, if you compare his attributes to what I've found to be the ideal set of attributes. The only thing lacking is jumping reach, which is quite important.
2) The Premier League 1.0 GS rating file does not weight hidden & personality attributes, because Genie Scout is too bugged to include them. I haven't given up on this forever, but at the moment there's no viable solution. Your player has ridiculously perfect hiddens & personality, even temperament is very close to its optimal of 10 rather than 20. I daresay this is actually this is the main reason the rating is inaccurate rather than the excellent distribution of visible attributes.
You could make the argument that hiddens & personality should be weighted at least somewhat, even if it messes the ratings up a bit, because a 4% error might be better than a 8% error say. But a player with those hiddens & personality is extremely atypical.. so if we did this it might end up that yes, your player becomes 4% more accurate rating, but 90% of players become ~1-2% less accurate say. I'm sure it could be tweaked a little, but I don't think it's obvious what that tweak would be.
This pretence that something is up with genie scout when the ratings severely undervalue speed is embarrassing. You could literally change speed to 100 for both and it would increase the players score a fair bit.
He's not even close to the near perfect player. He will do well for his CA because he's 18/18 speed. Near perfect would see a big increase in dribbling, anticipation and agility and balance. The player also doesn't need jumping reach. Some of the best 10's and wingers ive ever had were under 5 for jumping reach.
Not including his hidden attributes has nothing to do with the score and its deceitful to claim it is. Its also funny. You've still never answered why Mbappe scores so poorly using Premier league 1.0 ratings. But you always avoid questions and go full lockjaw.
keithb said: This pretence that something is up with genie scout when the ratings severely undervalue speed is embarrassing. You could literally change speed to 100 for both and it would increase the players score a fair bit.
He's not even close to the near perfect player. He will do well for his CA because he's 18/18 speed. Near perfect would see a big increase in dribbling, anticipation and agility and balance. The player also doesn't need jumping reach. Some of the best 10's and wingers ive ever had were under 5 for jumping reach.
Not including his hidden attributes has nothing to do with the score and its deceitful to claim it is. Its also funny. You've still never answered why Mbappe scores so poorly using Premier league 1.0 ratings. But you always avoid questions and go full lockjaw. Expand There are 14 players in the starting database that have 18 pace/18 acc/14 drib or higher.
I've done testing previously, and have posted about it, that jumping reach is not just necessary in high amounts for certain players - it is an important attribute for all players, and even going from say 8 to 12.
You are also wrong in your claim on the previous page that players age 18 or less benefit from loans. You seem to just reflexively claim the opposite of anything I say. Here is the data from EBFM on the matter:
We see here that for players age 18 or less:
Training with no matches = +17 CA Matches but no training = +13 CA Matches & training = +19 CA
By contrast for a player age 21:
Training with no matches = +1 CA Matches but no training = +4.5 CA Matches & training = +9 CA
Now factor in the following:
1) Your team (likely) has better training facilities, staff, and most importantly, uses a top training schedule 2) Your player age 18 or less is more likely to be inadequate to play in a decent division and either will be hard-capped by the low division rep, or simply not start games
And even if the planets did align, it would only be for ~10% extra growth. By contrast, a player age 21 simply doesn't grow without competitive matches. For a player age 20 it remains possible that keeping them at the club in the reserves is better than loaning them out (training no match vs. match no training).
keithb said: Any word on why Mbappe scores so low? Expand I've answered this before here, here, and here.
Someone else also tried to inform you here, to which you responded that the bottom line for you is your motivation to 'blame the person who made the file'.
This is why I will not be responding to any more Mbappe rubbish from you.
Someone else also tried to inform you here, to which you responded that the bottom line for you is your motivation to 'blame the person who made the file'.
This is why I will not be responding to any more Mbappe rubbish from you. Expand
hahaha. Classic Bozo. So no answer then. What I said is true. Your ratings are awful as some people are starting to realise.....
Maybe Im just very lucky to I can get Mbappe to be the best fast striker in GS and you cant?
Whats also funny is we know, at least you should, that someone pointed out the ratings were wrong using the old file you posted. But that was because you didn't understand how to use hidden attributes in GS. It has no relevance at all to your premier league garbage file. Does it?
Panneton0 said: Anyone managed to find how position rating influences the game in FM26? We've known for a while that having players playing their "natural" position (20) already leads to great gain w/r to playing them in an "accomplished" position (17). However, in FM26, players might play in 2 different positions IP/OOP.
As far as I've seen to this point, IP's position rating can get better solely by playing a player at this position. But OOP's position rating seems to stall. That appears to be true either by assigning training to "playing position" to IP and specifically putting their OOP position in their OOP individual position training. So that seems to point toward the OOP position being mostly irrelevant - even maybe ignored (in term of ability - not tactically).
This is based on global feeling, but haven't tested it thoroughly. If anyone already have an insight on the new system's position rating influence / how IP/OOP positions influence a player's position rating, I'd love to hear about it.
https://fm-arena.com/thread/18292-the-impact-of-oop-position-proficiency-on-the-result-fm26/
Yarema said: https://fm-arena.com/thread/18292-the-impact-of-oop-position-proficiency-on-the-result-fm26/
Thanks Yarema! I hadn't seen this post, much appreciated!
Another thing about player position proficiency and how it should affect Genie Scout's ratings.
My understanding is that, according to the rating filter, each player gets a score for each position.
This is the "general rating", when looking at one player's profil in GS. Then, the general rating is adjusted as a "positional rating" according to the player's position proficiency.
When chosing which player to play at a given position, "positional rating" is thus more relevant since it takes into consideration the position's proficiency. However, this can't seem to be configurable and only a GS inner calculation. We've seen somewhere that 1 point of proficiency has the similar impact on a player's performance than 1 point of pace "lost". E.g. A player with 17 speed and natural (20) is similar in performance than a player with 20 speed and accomplished (17). It's probably more complex than that, but it is the simplest way to compare.
Now, I'm not sure that this translates well into GS "positinal rating". For instance, let's look at 2 players in my team, contenders for playing WBL (for the sake of the discussion). I'm using the GS file in the OG post (zhf2yl)
Player A:
General Rating = 45.0
WBL proficiency = 10
Positional Rating = 42.91 (So being only 10 proficient made him drop 2.09 pts)
He is 45.0 positional rating for DR
Player B:
General Rating = 42.6
WBL proficiency = 15
Positional Rating = 41.74 (So having 5 less than 20 proficiency made him drop 0.86 pts)
He is 42.6 positional rating for DL
I feel like, even if GS shows player A as a better WBL, player B might be a better option. It seems to me that GS does not weight positional proficiency enough. My personal impression is that we should remove another 0.5 pt per proficiency below 20 to actually represent the player's efficiency.
That would make the "adjusted positional rating" like so:
Player A: 37.91
Player B: 40.24 (He's now the best WBL between the two)
For reference, I have a player C with 1 in WBL proficiency:
Player C:
General Rating = 53.3
WBL proficiency = 1
Positional Rating = 42.7 (Just 10.6 pts less, even being totally ineffectual)
Making him "theoretically" (without the adujsted positional rating) the best WBL even with 1 proficiency.
I'd like thoughts of smarter people than me on this.
Some visual (with another player) to complement my point.
This guy is proficient as a DC, and can play somewhat as DR, DM and, to a lesser extent, WBR
Hi general rating (purely calculated through the attributes weighting) is similar everywhere (the weights are similar everywhere, except DC and ST where jumping reach has higher value in general)
Pretty much 41 across the board, and 42/43 DC/ST (the dude is huge)
Now, if we look at the actual position rating (the ones that appear if you set position ratings in your columns - it never shows the general rating), we see that the difference between his positional score as DC and as AMR is less than 10 points appart, which feels off. He should be very very low AMR, having 1 proficiency at that position.
Final thing, I never use the actual "role" rating since GS seem to add a layer of its own calculations on top of the user-defined weights. So I don't know how those relate to truly tested attributes.
been using Premier League 1.0 GS ratings... and this guy...
being rated at 64, seems unfair. He's a beast, only downside I see is his determination. If I follow these ratings, he won't make the bench in the Portuguese league, where I'm still dominating by far with a team with avg rating way lower than the best in the league.
Can someone clarify this Premier League 1.0 ratings? I was using Orion's and Bafici's rating's a while back, what is everyone's opinion on theese ratings?
BrushlessPlaymaker said: been using Premier League 1.0 GS ratings... and this guy...
being rated at 64, seems unfair. He's a beast, only downside I see is his determination. If I follow these ratings, he won't make the bench in the Portuguese league, where I'm still dominating by far with a team with avg rating way lower than the best in the league.
Can someone clarify this Premier League 1.0 ratings? I was using Orion's and Bafici's rating's a while back, what is everyone's opinion on theese ratings?
It seems you have already realised the answer....... If a ratings system doesn't put Mbappe in the top 20 players or strikers, something is wrong? Ngolo Kante is a better right winger than Yamal(at his peak)? I dont think so.
btw the player you posted is ok. He'd tear up tier two leagues and do well in some top leagues. But he's not a champions league player for me. Yes he would while you're still building a team, but he's not top class.
BrushlessPlaymaker said: been using Premier League 1.0 GS ratings... and this guy...
being rated at 64, seems unfair. He's a beast, only downside I see is his determination. If I follow these ratings, he won't make the bench in the Portuguese league, where I'm still dominating by far with a team with avg rating way lower than the best in the league.
Can someone clarify this Premier League 1.0 ratings? I was using Orion's and Bafici's rating's a while back, what is everyone's opinion on theese ratings?
I'll have a look into it a bit later, but two things are obvious to me here:
1) That is a near perfect player, if you compare his attributes to what I've found to be the ideal set of attributes. The only thing lacking is jumping reach, which is quite important.
2) The Premier League 1.0 GS rating file does not weight hidden & personality attributes, because Genie Scout is too bugged to include them. I haven't given up on this forever, but at the moment there's no viable solution. Your player has ridiculously perfect hiddens & personality, even temperament is very close to its optimal of 10 rather than 20. I daresay this is actually this is the main reason the rating is inaccurate rather than the excellent distribution of visible attributes.
You could make the argument that hiddens & personality should be weighted at least somewhat, even if it messes the ratings up a bit, because a 4% error might be better than a 8% error say. But a player with those hiddens & personality is extremely atypical.. so if we did this it might end up that yes, your player becomes 4% more accurate rating, but 90% of players become ~1-2% less accurate say. I'm sure it could be tweaked a little, but I don't think it's obvious what that tweak would be.
This pretence that something is up with genie scout when the ratings severely undervalue speed is embarrassing. You could literally change speed to 100 for both and it would increase the players score a fair bit.
He's not even close to the near perfect player. He will do well for his CA because he's 18/18 speed. Near perfect would see a big increase in dribbling, anticipation and agility and balance. The player also doesn't need jumping reach. Some of the best 10's and wingers ive ever had were under 5 for jumping reach.
Not including his hidden attributes has nothing to do with the score and its deceitful to claim it is. Its also funny. You've still never answered why Mbappe scores so poorly using Premier league 1.0 ratings. But you always avoid questions and go full lockjaw.
keithb said: This pretence that something is up with genie scout when the ratings severely undervalue speed is embarrassing. You could literally change speed to 100 for both and it would increase the players score a fair bit.
He's not even close to the near perfect player. He will do well for his CA because he's 18/18 speed. Near perfect would see a big increase in dribbling, anticipation and agility and balance. The player also doesn't need jumping reach. Some of the best 10's and wingers ive ever had were under 5 for jumping reach.
Not including his hidden attributes has nothing to do with the score and its deceitful to claim it is. Its also funny. You've still never answered why Mbappe scores so poorly using Premier league 1.0 ratings. But you always avoid questions and go full lockjaw.
There are 14 players in the starting database that have 18 pace/18 acc/14 drib or higher.
I've done testing previously, and have posted about it, that jumping reach is not just necessary in high amounts for certain players - it is an important attribute for all players, and even going from say 8 to 12.
You are also wrong in your claim on the previous page that players age 18 or less benefit from loans. You seem to just reflexively claim the opposite of anything I say. Here is the data from EBFM on the matter:
We see here that for players age 18 or less:
Training with no matches = +17 CA
Matches but no training = +13 CA
Matches & training = +19 CA
By contrast for a player age 21:
Training with no matches = +1 CA
Matches but no training = +4.5 CA
Matches & training = +9 CA
Now factor in the following:
1) Your team (likely) has better training facilities, staff, and most importantly, uses a top training schedule
2) Your player age 18 or less is more likely to be inadequate to play in a decent division and either will be hard-capped by the low division rep, or simply not start games
And even if the planets did align, it would only be for ~10% extra growth. By contrast, a player age 21 simply doesn't grow without competitive matches. For a player age 20 it remains possible that keeping them at the club in the reserves is better than loaning them out (training no match vs. match no training).
Any word on why Mbappe scores so low?
keithb said: Any word on why Mbappe scores so low?
I've answered this before here, here, and here.
Someone else also tried to inform you here, to which you responded that the bottom line for you is your motivation to 'blame the person who made the file'.
This is why I will not be responding to any more Mbappe rubbish from you.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: I've answered this before here, here, and here.
Someone else also tried to inform you here, to which you responded that the bottom line for you is your motivation to 'blame the person who made the file'.
This is why I will not be responding to any more Mbappe rubbish from you.
hahaha. Classic Bozo. So no answer then. What I said is true. Your ratings are awful as some people are starting to realise.....
Maybe Im just very lucky to I can get Mbappe to be the best fast striker in GS and you cant?
Whats also funny is we know, at least you should, that someone pointed out the ratings were wrong using the old file you posted. But that was because you didn't understand how to use hidden attributes in GS. It has no relevance at all to your premier league garbage file. Does it?