treath said: mate in your rating (btw much better than the original post) what you would do to find like a complete forward?
It's not a complain, but i want to find a mixed striker, what your recomendations to edit in rating to find those players? Expand
I class a complete forward as target striker really. The match engine doesnt care about a lot of attributes. You could maybe add vision a little bit. But id still make them strong, good jumping reach, anticipation, balance and work rate. And of course not slow!!
Guys I am a returning player, I already have FM24, but I can get FM26 for cheap. How good is the ME compared to FM24? I know the UI sucks but I’ve heard the Tactical Creator gives you more options due to the OOP/IP formations and that you can play more varied styles of play. Is that true?
Fraudiola01 said: Guys I am a returning player, I already have FM24, but I can get FM26 for cheap. How good is the ME compared to FM24? I know the UI sucks but I’ve heard the Tactical Creator gives you more options due to the OOP/IP formations and that you can play more varied styles of play. Is that true? Expand If you mean the ME under the hood rather than the visuals, from what I've seen and read, it's about the same, the new OOP/IP is almost placebo, and it gets dominated by strikerless tactics.
( edited 19 hours, 10 min ago by GeorgeFloydOverdosed )
Share this post#484
Link to the post:
There are now 6 samples per player. That's 2,736 Premier League matches simulated on full detail + all other relevant first team competitions (i.e. Community Shield, Champions Cup, Club World Cup, etc.) simulated on full detail as well.
Edit: I've added a color-coded column to compare 4 different GS rating files. 1st is new Best fit file, 2nd is Premier League 1.0, 3rd is keithb, 4th is Falbravv's META FMA 2.0 file based on skawkclsrn's recent data. Green = 1% or less difference. Yellow = 2-4% difference. Red = 5%+ difference. Ignore Harry Kane, he needs a slight readjustment right now due to the latest samples.
There are a lot of new deductions that can be made.
One is that now we have a rough idea what GS % corresponds to in terms of concrete performance numbers, and another is that we can tell at what point random variation makes distinguishing between % numbers pointless.
We can always do with more samples, but if we just take the difference between whoever is highest and lowest between Lewandowski, Mbappe, Maeda, Kane, Vlahovic, Osimhen, and Messi (total +/- 1 position difference maximum) we get:
((4.08/80.70)x100) = 5.06% - My best fit of the data so far in GS (not to minimize %, but to correct player rank) ((14.30/91.99)x100) = 15.54% - Premier League 1.0 'weighted weights' version ((14.94/88.11)x100) = 16.96% - Premier League 1.0 ((14.14/92.25)x100) = 17.14% - 'Pure Performance' FM24 ((13.45/77.59)x100) = 17.33% - My first/original FM24 ratings file ((15.89/84.94)x100) = 18.71% - 'Blended' FM24 ((18.34/83.29)x100) = 22.02% - ykykyk05251's weights file ((22.88/88.01)x100) = 26.00% - Orion's coefficients file ((29.27/91.47)x100) = 32.00% - Genie Scout Default
That is where we are accounting for extreme cases. In other words, a 4-5% difference in GS is almost certainly an objectively better player.
But what if we make it a bit leniant, and tolerate ~10-20% being exceptions we miss. In other words, this is the more typical uncertainty range. To discover this, I exclude the bottom % player from the list:
((4.03/80.70)x100) = 4.99% - My best fit of the data so far in GS (not to minimize %, but to correct player rank) ((6.21/88.11)x100) = 7.05% - Premier League 1.0 ((6.00/83.29)x100) = 7.20% - ykykyk05251's weights file ((7.34/75.95)x100) = 9.66% - Falbravv's 'META FMA 2.0' file based on skawkclsrn's data this week ((10.39/89.51)x100) = 11.60% - Falbravv's 'META FMA' file based I think FM Arena's testing(?) ((11.67/91.47)x100) = 12.76% - Genie Scout Default ((13.45/77.59)x100) = 13.20% - My first/original FM24 ratings file ((12.61/95.25)x100) = 13.24% - 'Pure Performance' FM24 ((12.42/91.99)x100) = 13.50% - Premier League 1.0 'weighted weights' version ((13.21/94.59)x100) = 13.97% - keithb's weights 💩 ((13.64/88.01)x100) = 15.50% - Orion's coefficients file ((14.14/84.94)x100) = 16.65% - 'Blended' FM24
So we see that whatever the case, ~4-5% is going to be the range within which the player who is better becomes uncertain, but also the difference is going to be pretty meaningless objectively.
You think genie scout default ratings are better than some rating files produced by people who made files based on reliable testing? hahaha
And your file is, obviously, at the top yet Mbappe in this latest rigorous test comes out 2nd/3rd and you have him as the 20th best striker in your premier league file?? Makes sense I guess
Rather than carrying on with all this testing that apparently keeps getting better and changing your findings, why dont you practise your makeup? I hear the circus is in town soon, and they are always looking for clowns.
Ps I dont have Mbappe and Haaland rated the same. You dont even know how to use and read GS. How can you make a file for it? I love that you lie all the time, it just makes it funnier.
keithb said: Ps I dont have Mbappe and Haaland rated the same. You dont even know how to use and read GS. How can you make a file for it? I love that you lie all the time, it just makes it funnier. Expand I wouldn't want to misrepresent you. This is what your GS file says does it not?
Default database, start of game (England - 3/7/2023)
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: If you mean the ME under the hood rather than the visuals, from what I've seen and read, it's about the same, the new OOP/IP is almost placebo, and it gets dominated by strikerless tactics. Expand
I mean that it seems more styles of play are possible. Also that some TI works better, such as Work Ball into the Box, or Play out of Defence(Play through Press) which used to be “lose more” buttons in FM24 but actually work nicely in FM26.
Default database, start of game (England - 3/7/2023) Expand
haahah. You lie and misrepresent what I say often. You're a clown.
No Mbappe and Haaland are not rated the same. And when you increase TS to 107, like I said in the post, the gap becomes even bigger. Its 2% and then becomes 4%. They are not rated the same. Is there actually something wrong with you?
AGAIN how can you create a file and use and not see this?? There's a worrying disconnect.
keithb said: haahah. You lie and misrepresent what I say often. You're a clown.
No Mbappe and Haaland are not rated the same. And when you increase TS to 107, like I said in the post, the gap becomes even bigger. Its 2% and then becomes 4%. They are not rated the same. Is there actually something wrong with you?
AGAIN how can you create a file and use and not see this?? There's a worrying disconnect. Expand To be honest I didn't even check if you had a TS rating, because I took one look at the FS rating and knew it was rubbish.
The screenshot I provided is, you'll agree, the FS ratings you've given.
So do you want me to use the FS or TS rating?
Looking at your TS ratings, you have Osimhem above Lewandowski even though both having 15 jumping reach, so more of the same 💩 either way.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: To be honest I didn't even check if you had a TS rating, because I took one look at the FS rating and knew it was rubbish.
The screenshot I provided is, you'll agree, the FS ratings you've given.
So do you want me to use the FS or TS rating?
Looking at your TS ratings, you have Osimhem above Lewandowski even though both having 15 jumping reach, so more of the same 💩 either way. Expand
Please stop making me laugh hahaha. I do have somework to do.
Well I know im very smart and you aren't and you know people call me a visionary and stuff. But what I do is I use BOTH. I know im so clever right? No one else has ever thought to do this. That means I can still include strikers with no jumping reach in fast strikers and strikers who have an overall excellent physical profile can be target strikers. And then I/we can choose which type we want. Sorry if I blew your mind with that.
Well Osimhem is probably above Lewa because his other key attributes are better? I haven't just set jumping reach on its on in the weighting for TS. Again if this is new information for you, then you're welcome.
So to clarify I've ALWAYS had Haaland as the best player in fm24. So you've repeatedly lied and said I haven't. Tbh he should be 10% clear, but I dont like the other positions having such low scores. Thats probably wrong but its just how I used GS.
Anyway always hilarious interacting with you. I fondly remember when you told me I was pissing in my own face for saying stamina is important lol and in almost everything you type out shit is literally coming out of your mouth. Im a huge fan of irony and you are the king of it. I would say dont ever change, but thats me being selfish for entertainment purposes. You should change for the benefit of other people you are constantly misleading over football manager.
Jumping reach keeps landing third on every importance list. But it's nowhere near acc and pace. So that makes me wonder — would two players with 18+ JR be enough to cover set pieces, while everyone else just sits at average (10-15)?
Fraudiola01 said: Guys I am a returning player, I already have FM24, but I can get FM26 for cheap. How good is the ME compared to FM24? I know the UI sucks but I’ve heard the Tactical Creator gives you more options due to the OOP/IP formations and that you can play more varied styles of play. Is that true? Expand
Do not buy fm26 its utter crap, just be patient and wait for 27
treath said: mate in your rating (btw much better than the original post) what you would do to find like a complete forward?
It's not a complain, but i want to find a mixed striker, what your recomendations to edit in rating to find those players?
I class a complete forward as target striker really. The match engine doesnt care about a lot of attributes. You could maybe add vision a little bit. But id still make them strong, good jumping reach, anticipation, balance and work rate. And of course not slow!!
Guys I am a returning player, I already have FM24, but I can get FM26 for cheap. How good is the ME compared to FM24? I know the UI sucks but I’ve heard the Tactical Creator gives you more options due to the OOP/IP formations and that you can play more varied styles of play. Is that true?
Fraudiola01 said: Guys I am a returning player, I already have FM24, but I can get FM26 for cheap. How good is the ME compared to FM24? I know the UI sucks but I’ve heard the Tactical Creator gives you more options due to the OOP/IP formations and that you can play more varied styles of play. Is that true?
If you mean the ME under the hood rather than the visuals, from what I've seen and read, it's about the same, the new OOP/IP is almost placebo, and it gets dominated by strikerless tactics.
There are now 6 samples per player. That's 2,736 Premier League matches simulated on full detail + all other relevant first team competitions (i.e. Community Shield, Champions Cup, Club World Cup, etc.) simulated on full detail as well.
90% | 90% | 90% | 90% | Erling Haaland - 1st, 1st, 4th, 1st, 2nd, 1st = 1.666 position, 1.119 goals/match, 7.80 rating
84% | 84% | 80% | 79% | Robert Lewandowski - 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 2nd = 2.666 position, 0.721 goals/match, 7.33 rating
84% | 81% | 90% | 87% | Kylian Mbappe - 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, 5th, 2nd = 3 position, 0.701 goals/match, 7.48 rating
80% | 69% | 76% | 72% | Daizen Maeda - 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 4th, 2nd, 3rd = 3 position, 0.586 goals/match, 7.23 rating
83% | 84% | 80% | 78% | Harry Kane - 5th, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 1st, 7th = 3.5 position, 0.563 goals/match, 7.29 rating
80% | 81% | 77% | 78% | Dusan Vlahovic - 1st, 4th, 4th, 5th, 1st, 6th, 4th = 3.571 position, 0.634 goals/match, 7.23 rating
80% | 81% | 84% | 85% | Victor Osimhen - 3rd, 3rd, 7th, 3rd, 3rd, 4th = 3.833 position, 0.714 goals/match, 7.29 rating
80% | 78% | 85% | 80% | Lionel Messi - 4th, 2nd, 1st, 5th, 9th, 3rd = 4 position, 0.588 goals/match, 7.16 rating
75% | 72% | 77% | 74% | Donyell Malen - 2nd, 2nd, 7th, 5th, 5th, 7th = 4.666 position, 0.514 goals/match, 7.22 rating
75% | 74% | 69% | 72% | Robert Glatzel - 5th, 7th, 6th, 3rd, 12th, 6th = 6.5 position, 0.634 goals/match, 7.16 rating
72% | 72% | 79% | 71% | Paulo Dybala - 5th, 5th, 6th, 10th, 3rd, 12th = 6.833 position, 0.492 goals/match, 7.07 rating
61% | 63% | 62% | 61% | Adam Le Fondre - 8th, 11th (sacked), 5th, 7th (sacked), 6th (sacked), 8th (sacked) = 7.5 position
Edit: I've added a color-coded column to compare 4 different GS rating files. 1st is new Best fit file, 2nd is Premier League 1.0, 3rd is keithb, 4th is Falbravv's META FMA 2.0 file based on skawkclsrn's recent data. Green = 1% or less difference. Yellow = 2-4% difference. Red = 5%+ difference. Ignore Harry Kane, he needs a slight readjustment right now due to the latest samples.
There are a lot of new deductions that can be made.
One is that now we have a rough idea what GS % corresponds to in terms of concrete performance numbers, and another is that we can tell at what point random variation makes distinguishing between % numbers pointless.
We can always do with more samples, but if we just take the difference between whoever is highest and lowest between Lewandowski, Mbappe, Maeda, Kane, Vlahovic, Osimhen, and Messi (total +/- 1 position difference maximum) we get:
((4.08/80.70)x100) = 5.06% - My best fit of the data so far in GS (not to minimize %, but to correct player rank)
((14.30/91.99)x100) = 15.54% - Premier League 1.0 'weighted weights' version
((14.94/88.11)x100) = 16.96% - Premier League 1.0
((14.14/92.25)x100) = 17.14% - 'Pure Performance' FM24
((13.45/77.59)x100) = 17.33% - My first/original FM24 ratings file
((15.89/84.94)x100) = 18.71% - 'Blended' FM24
((18.34/83.29)x100) = 22.02% - ykykyk05251's weights file
((22.88/88.01)x100) = 26.00% - Orion's coefficients file
((29.27/91.47)x100) = 32.00% - Genie Scout Default
That is where we are accounting for extreme cases. In other words, a 4-5% difference in GS is almost certainly an objectively better player.
But what if we make it a bit leniant, and tolerate ~10-20% being exceptions we miss. In other words, this is the more typical uncertainty range. To discover this, I exclude the bottom % player from the list:
((4.03/80.70)x100) = 4.99% - My best fit of the data so far in GS (not to minimize %, but to correct player rank)
((6.21/88.11)x100) = 7.05% - Premier League 1.0
((6.00/83.29)x100) = 7.20% - ykykyk05251's weights file
((7.34/75.95)x100) = 9.66% - Falbravv's 'META FMA 2.0' file based on skawkclsrn's data this week
((10.39/89.51)x100) = 11.60% - Falbravv's 'META FMA' file based I think FM Arena's testing(?)
((11.67/91.47)x100) = 12.76% - Genie Scout Default
((13.45/77.59)x100) = 13.20% - My first/original FM24 ratings file
((12.61/95.25)x100) = 13.24% - 'Pure Performance' FM24
((12.42/91.99)x100) = 13.50% - Premier League 1.0 'weighted weights' version
((13.21/94.59)x100) = 13.97% - keithb's weights 💩
((13.64/88.01)x100) = 15.50% - Orion's coefficients file
((14.14/84.94)x100) = 16.65% - 'Blended' FM24
So we see that whatever the case, ~4-5% is going to be the range within which the player who is better becomes uncertain, but also the difference is going to be pretty meaningless objectively.
You think genie scout default ratings are better than some rating files produced by people who made files based on reliable testing? hahaha
And your file is, obviously, at the top yet Mbappe in this latest rigorous test comes out 2nd/3rd and you have him as the 20th best striker in your premier league file?? Makes sense I guess
Rather than carrying on with all this testing that apparently keeps getting better and changing your findings, why dont you practise your makeup? I hear the circus is in town soon, and they are always looking for clowns.
Ps I dont have Mbappe and Haaland rated the same. You dont even know how to use and read GS. How can you make a file for it? I love that you lie all the time, it just makes it funnier.
keithb said: Ps I dont have Mbappe and Haaland rated the same. You dont even know how to use and read GS. How can you make a file for it? I love that you lie all the time, it just makes it funnier.
I wouldn't want to misrepresent you. This is what your GS file says does it not?
Default database, start of game (England - 3/7/2023)
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: If you mean the ME under the hood rather than the visuals, from what I've seen and read, it's about the same, the new OOP/IP is almost placebo, and it gets dominated by strikerless tactics.
I mean that it seems more styles of play are possible. Also that some TI works better, such as Work Ball into the Box, or Play out of Defence(Play through Press) which used to be “lose more” buttons in FM24 but actually work nicely in FM26.
Also, what do you mean by IP/OOP being placebo?
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: I wouldn't want to misrepresent you. This is what your GS file says does it not?
Default database, start of game (England - 3/7/2023)
haahah. You lie and misrepresent what I say often. You're a clown.
No Mbappe and Haaland are not rated the same. And when you increase TS to 107, like I said in the post, the gap becomes even bigger. Its 2% and then becomes 4%. They are not rated the same. Is there actually something wrong with you?
AGAIN how can you create a file and use and not see this?? There's a worrying disconnect.
keithb said: haahah. You lie and misrepresent what I say often. You're a clown.
No Mbappe and Haaland are not rated the same. And when you increase TS to 107, like I said in the post, the gap becomes even bigger. Its 2% and then becomes 4%. They are not rated the same. Is there actually something wrong with you?
AGAIN how can you create a file and use and not see this?? There's a worrying disconnect.
To be honest I didn't even check if you had a TS rating, because I took one look at the FS rating and knew it was rubbish.
The screenshot I provided is, you'll agree, the FS ratings you've given.
So do you want me to use the FS or TS rating?
Looking at your TS ratings, you have Osimhem above Lewandowski even though both having 15 jumping reach, so more of the same 💩 either way.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: To be honest I didn't even check if you had a TS rating, because I took one look at the FS rating and knew it was rubbish.
The screenshot I provided is, you'll agree, the FS ratings you've given.
So do you want me to use the FS or TS rating?
Looking at your TS ratings, you have Osimhem above Lewandowski even though both having 15 jumping reach, so more of the same 💩 either way.
Please stop making me laugh hahaha. I do have somework to do.
Well I know im very smart and you aren't and you know people call me a visionary and stuff. But what I do is I use BOTH. I know im so clever right? No one else has ever thought to do this. That means I can still include strikers with no jumping reach in fast strikers and strikers who have an overall excellent physical profile can be target strikers. And then I/we can choose which type we want. Sorry if I blew your mind with that.
Well Osimhem is probably above Lewa because his other key attributes are better? I haven't just set jumping reach on its on in the weighting for TS. Again if this is new information for you, then you're welcome.
So to clarify I've ALWAYS had Haaland as the best player in fm24. So you've repeatedly lied and said I haven't. Tbh he should be 10% clear, but I dont like the other positions having such low scores. Thats probably wrong but its just how I used GS.
Anyway always hilarious interacting with you. I fondly remember when you told me I was pissing in my own face for saying stamina is important lol and in almost everything you type out shit is literally coming out of your mouth. Im a huge fan of irony and you are the king of it. I would say dont ever change, but thats me being selfish for entertainment purposes. You should change for the benefit of other people you are constantly misleading over football manager.
can you give us the pics for each position on genie scout with the data for the new files for best fit gs file
Jumping reach keeps landing third on every importance list. But it's nowhere near acc and pace. So that makes me wonder — would two players with 18+ JR be enough to cover set pieces, while everyone else just sits at average (10-15)?
Fraudiola01 said: Guys I am a returning player, I already have FM24, but I can get FM26 for cheap. How good is the ME compared to FM24? I know the UI sucks but I’ve heard the Tactical Creator gives you more options due to the OOP/IP formations and that you can play more varied styles of play. Is that true?
Do not buy fm26 its utter crap, just be patient and wait for 27