I think tests on the presets are great, to give a sense of the kind of baseline we are dealing with.
Also a lot of people use presets with a few tweaks to play the game, maybe not on this site. Downloading the most OP tactic can make the game too easy, while on the other hand you don't want to hinder yourself completely by playing catenaccio or whatever performs the worst this year.
NandaldiaN said: I just dont know what ratings use right now... I bought konaté wich is by far better in ratings compared to hojlund but the last one is always performing better, scoring more, assisting more... and its not the first time it is happening to me with some players.. its weird to me Expand
All of them are pretty good, none are perfect. Plus there is more to performance than just these ratings. Hidden attributes, suitability to your tactic, form and so on all play a massive role.
DreadPirateRoberts said: I don't think that is the answer tho. From 1 -> 5, basically every single attribute has big impact on the result. Once you surpass 5-10, suddenly only like 7 attributes have any effect at all. The effectivness of attributes do not happen incrementally, but rather all of the effectivness lie in the first 5-10 points. They go from being astronomically important, to being disregarded completely. Surely if for example passing is hugely important from 1 to 5, it wouldn't be completely useless by the time it reaches 10 if your theory is correct. How come the drop off is so insanely huge ? Expand
I don't even know where you are getting these cutoffs. Maybe I missed a test somewhere?
It's hard to say whether there are diminishing returns on attribute gains or what I suspect it's just harder to achieve higher scores. Going from bad to good is much easier than from good to excellent. Maybe if 5 pace scored 60 points, 10 pace would also be only 81 and not 91.
And anyone reading into anything within 2 points ... just don't.
Lapidus said: I just want to stress once more that the "Match Expertise" level not only depends on "playing matches" but it also depends on "Training".
"No Training/Resting" = rapid declining of "Match Expertise" which might be a very negative thing.
Players by training not only improves their attributes but also build/keep their "Match Expertise" level.
When a player often "resting" then his "Match Expertise" drop much faster and even his CA might drop which to decreasing attributes.
So I'm trying to say that you need to very careful with "resting" thing. Yes, it might decrease "fatigue" but for what cost? Is it worth the cost? Expand
Honestly been using ZaZ training rest settings for at least a year. Never really had problems with match sharpness. Roughly 1 game per 10-14 days will easily maintain their sharpness. If a player plays less than that you can easily give him a game in u21s or something. So I don't think it's ever an issue and I wouldn't compromise physical fitness for it.
ZaZ said: In short, players with "fresh" fatigue perform much worse than those with "low" fatigue (which perform much better than those getting fatigued or fatigued), which is how FM simulates the conditioning of muscles. Expand
That is very interesting and surprising. I always like to keep my guys fresh ...
sponsorkindest said: So stupid, man here we are using ML rating, python code, excel sheet, genie scout and FMRTE to get the recruitment right but when in reality all you need a filter with Pace >= 16 Expand
What do you think all of those do? They all heavily favor pace and acceleration, some of them because of these exact tests.
MeanOnSunday said: It’s loading the db from the game that’s slow; it takes a couple of minutes for something that should take 1-2 seconds. Otherwise you can easily make your own ratings for GS to match any particular python script. Expand
I mean, opening the correct view in FM, copying and pasting, opening the right file and all the other minor things you have to do also take like a minute or two in total. Plus you actually need to be doing stuff in that minute instead of 1 click to load database and do other things while it finishes.
dzek said: First of all, I want to say that I am glad that we are discussing some issues other than tactics (and around them) here at FM-Arena.
I totally respect your opinion and I see no reason for someone to hate you because you have a different opinion but I want to emphasize some things. I will speak for myself and in no way represent the opinion of others in the community.
We need to understand from the start that SI, Activision etc are companies first and foremost and then anything else so in order to survive they need money. When a company officially announces to you that on a certain date they will release their new game with its new features, the excitement starts to grow among the fans around the game (see Rockstar and GTA VI). We all want to buy it and play countless hours for many reasons, someone because it escapes reality, someone because they had a dream of becoming a coach in real life and didn't, someone because they like football in general and so on.
The day of the game's release comes (you are full of excitement and looking forward to it) and you start your first save. During the game you notice that features that were advertised to you as being new/improved in the game are broken/incomplete or only half working and sometimes weird or even worse than before. What will you feel at that particular moment? Quite possibly badly but you'll keep playing. But when this has been happening for years? When every year you spend money to buy something that was promised and not delivered and worse yet not communicated to you in the first place? This paints a picture of a company that only cares about money and not their community, which in essence if it wasn't for all of us there would be no FM, but anyway let's skip that.
We get to the community thing where there are two categories of players. The casuals and the hardcores. Without the casuals the game(and the company) can survive because there are the obsessive hardcore players who will pay every year to get the new version. But without the hardcore gamers do you think any gaming company can survive in the competition? I'm afraid not. So then we who are not just casuals gamers and play the game for countless hours and know the game and its capabilities have some requirements. If that sounds toxic to you then you are entitled but know that thanks to hardcore gamers the game got here with all the upgrades it has had over the years through suggestions and discussions on the official forum and beyond.
I don't agree with not releasing updates but also with releasing one every week just to release one. The wiser thing is to put it out when and if they feel it's ready (i.e. as SI has been doing for the last three years). You know what the issue is? Communication. That's my complaint myself but I can say that they have improved quite a bit over the last few years. Just that. Anyway we look forward to the sequel then.
Thanks for reading! Expand
You seem to go into the game looking for issues. "Let me see if they finally fixed this". You could just try to enjoy the game for what it is. Or if it frustrates you so much, you know, not buy it or play it.
The casual-hardcore divide is also a classic. As if a casual's opinion is worth less. On top of that, based on the feedback so far majority of "hardcore" players enjoy the game a lot. There is a small minority dissecting every problem with the game and letting that dictate their enjoyment. Yes there are issues, SI is working to fix them, some will be fixed some not. I think SI is far more on top of it and better in communicating than 90%+ other companies. Most of the stuff that was promised is working to a reasonable degree, some need a few tweaks. A lot of times we read too much into the statements by developers and project our wishes into it ... and are then disappointed because those aren't fulfilled.
That is only true for the very best prospects from 15/16 years old with additional training from the start. If you buy an 18 year old wonderkid the effect of additional focus is close to 0, maybe 1 point overall and I'd argue that's pretty much nothing. It won't transform the player, in essence he's still the same player with maybe (big maybe) slight tweaks here or there.
5+ years of additional training for a single attribute point ... and not like it's coming free either, it's coming at the cost of other attributes. I'll need some hard data to convince me that it's not largely cosmetic.
I didn't say it's worthless. But people expect massive changes because of it and it is simply not true in practice. From my experience you can get maybe 1-2 additional points in the selected attributes over the course of whole career. If you are lucky. Some focuses work better than others, some I'd argue don't even work.
I feel like individual training is vastly overrated or rather people obsess with it way too much. The effects really aren't that large. You won't get someone with 6 positioning to 16 over the course of his career because of it. He'll naturally go from 6 to lets say 11 just with GK/SK training, and if you put him on individual training that involves positioning throughout his whole career you might get him to 12 or 13. All of these numbers apply for a guy from intake with great development and high potential. If you buy him at 18, develops less than ideally and/or just doesn't have elite potential you can easily half the numbers.
We should reward exploration, trying new ideas and taking risks, not posting 12 versions of a cookie cutter tactics so you can get a shiny badge for highest point average. There is enough competition as it is, there is even a HoF category.
Also I think what you guys suggest is too subjective and not really worth the effort and policing and would only cause bad blood. Most of us who regularly visit the site know who are the "innovators", "tweakers" etc. anyway or at least for me personally who is who.
Also a lot of people use presets with a few tweaks to play the game, maybe not on this site. Downloading the most OP tactic can make the game too easy, while on the other hand you don't want to hinder yourself completely by playing catenaccio or whatever performs the worst this year.
All of them are pretty good, none are perfect. Plus there is more to performance than just these ratings. Hidden attributes, suitability to your tactic, form and so on all play a massive role.
I don't even know where you are getting these cutoffs. Maybe I missed a test somewhere?
And anyone reading into anything within 2 points ... just don't.
Kind of hilarious
"No Training/Resting" = rapid declining of "Match Expertise" which might be a very negative thing.
Players by training not only improves their attributes but also build/keep their "Match Expertise" level.
When a player often "resting" then his "Match Expertise" drop much faster and even his CA might drop which to decreasing attributes.
So I'm trying to say that you need to very careful with "resting" thing. Yes, it might decrease "fatigue" but for what cost? Is it worth the cost?
Honestly been using ZaZ training rest settings for at least a year. Never really had problems with match sharpness. Roughly 1 game per 10-14 days will easily maintain their sharpness. If a player plays less than that you can easily give him a game in u21s or something. So I don't think it's ever an issue and I wouldn't compromise physical fitness for it.
That is very interesting and surprising. I always like to keep my guys fresh ...
What do you think all of those do? They all heavily favor pace and acceleration, some of them because of these exact tests.
I mean, opening the correct view in FM, copying and pasting, opening the right file and all the other minor things you have to do also take like a minute or two in total. Plus you actually need to be doing stuff in that minute instead of 1 click to load database and do other things while it finishes.
Again, loud minority. Most people never post anything, it's mostly the players that are annoyed by something. Making that forum very unrepresentative
I totally respect your opinion and I see no reason for someone to hate you because you have a different opinion but I want to emphasize some things. I will speak for myself and in no way represent the opinion of others in the community.
We need to understand from the start that SI, Activision etc are companies first and foremost and then anything else so in order to survive they need money. When a company officially announces to you that on a certain date they will release their new game with its new features, the excitement starts to grow among the fans around the game (see Rockstar and GTA VI). We all want to buy it and play countless hours for many reasons, someone because it escapes reality, someone because they had a dream of becoming a coach in real life and didn't, someone because they like football in general and so on.
The day of the game's release comes (you are full of excitement and looking forward to it) and you start your first save. During the game you notice that features that were advertised to you as being new/improved in the game are broken/incomplete or only half working and sometimes weird or even worse than before. What will you feel at that particular moment? Quite possibly badly but you'll keep playing. But when this has been happening for years? When every year you spend money to buy something that was promised and not delivered and worse yet not communicated to you in the first place? This paints a picture of a company that only cares about money and not their community, which in essence if it wasn't for all of us there would be no FM, but anyway let's skip that.
We get to the community thing where there are two categories of players. The casuals and the hardcores. Without the casuals the game(and the company) can survive because there are the obsessive hardcore players who will pay every year to get the new version. But without the hardcore gamers do you think any gaming company can survive in the competition? I'm afraid not. So then we who are not just casuals gamers and play the game for countless hours and know the game and its capabilities have some requirements. If that sounds toxic to you then you are entitled but know that thanks to hardcore gamers the game got here with all the upgrades it has had over the years through suggestions and discussions on the official forum and beyond.
I don't agree with not releasing updates but also with releasing one every week just to release one. The wiser thing is to put it out when and if they feel it's ready (i.e. as SI has been doing for the last three years). You know what the issue is? Communication. That's my complaint myself but I can say that they have improved quite a bit over the last few years. Just that. Anyway we look forward to the sequel then.
Thanks for reading!
You seem to go into the game looking for issues. "Let me see if they finally fixed this". You could just try to enjoy the game for what it is. Or if it frustrates you so much, you know, not buy it or play it.
The casual-hardcore divide is also a classic. As if a casual's opinion is worth less. On top of that, based on the feedback so far majority of "hardcore" players enjoy the game a lot. There is a small minority dissecting every problem with the game and letting that dictate their enjoyment. Yes there are issues, SI is working to fix them, some will be fixed some not. I think SI is far more on top of it and better in communicating than 90%+ other companies. Most of the stuff that was promised is working to a reasonable degree, some need a few tweaks. A lot of times we read too much into the statements by developers and project our wishes into it ... and are then disappointed because those aren't fulfilled.
Criticise them if they underperform. I usually get 2/3 of my team at 8+
Did we?
5+ years of additional training for a single attribute point ... and not like it's coming free either, it's coming at the cost of other attributes. I'll need some hard data to convince me that it's not largely cosmetic.
Also I think what you guys suggest is too subjective and not really worth the effort and policing and would only cause bad blood. Most of us who regularly visit the site know who are the "innovators", "tweakers" etc. anyway or at least for me personally who is who.