animatron said: This shows that by far [Rest]+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness] is the best training for Players under 19 (not including 19). Thank you for sharing this Expand
Does it? I feel people seriously underestimate the power of CA growth for young players. Your 85 CA 18 year old physical freaks will not get any decent loans, you'll have to keep them at the club costing their further growth because of lack of competitive game time plus you'll want to guide their development. I find that it is unnecessary to cap CA growth, you can reach 20 pace and acceleration on "normal" schedules from these tests.
Thanks for the tests. Glad to see most stuff I value in a GK is near the top of the list. The big surprise for me is vision, still not sure why it performs so well. I guess pace being that high instead of acceleration is also unexpected.
mcqueenhaffarguzz said: i have seen countless different threads with different schedueles and im wondering what the current meta is, i have tried a couple but it seems like everytime i try them my players barely grow at all. if you have a schedule please also include rest and individual! Expand
Go through the testing results and pick something you like. There is no definitive answer and it depends on your preferences. Most of the schedules are very close together so it really doesn't matter which one you pick.
Rest settings and individual training have also been stated in the original posts.
Gianaa9 said: Tbh i'm pretty happy that with this new feature people could realize that even a point of difference (which could look huge on the table) means pretty the same win rate, and that tactics with a pretty low score can even have only 5% less of win rate. I think we were getting too much involved in trying to reach an high score, forgetting that we should just find tactic with a good win rate. I think that now people managing teams with suitable players for non-top tactic could be more encouraged to choose different tactics from usual seeing that the win rate difference is so small. Expand Considering the table is standardized for 38 match season for years now the win% was "there" the whole time, just no one bothered to calculate it or rather post about it. In fact it's not even win% but % of points. Additionally the % has no meaning outside of the testing league.
Maybe it conveys more clearly how close the tactics are but anyone paying attention knows that tactics within a point or two are very comparable anyway, within the margin of error.
I think people get way too hung up on terms like "realistic" or "simulation". It's our expectations that are probably way too high. In the end it's a game with it's benefits and flaws. Obviously it can't function as real life, most things have to be dumbed down so you can actually put it into code. And just like any game there are things that translate better and some worse, some stuff sort of gets dragged with minimal changes for year or decades, as in any game there are cookie cutter builds/tactics, certain ways of playing more successful than others ... On top of that the game is intentionally beatable, meaning an average player can have success within reasonable timeframe (=way way shorter than in real life).
So maybe if we started treating it as a game and just that, there would probably be a lot less of these types of frustrations. It's still the best football management game ever by far and it doesn't look like that is about to change very soon.
debelizec19 said: Thank You @freshandy for the explanation. So, if we look on Zaz example, after AFC match there is travel and we can not use superrest but why he didn't use superrest before Brighton match and after Aston Villa match on sunday 31.12.? Expand
If there is another session on the day like travel or match focus you cannot get a super rest, so there is no point scheduling rests
Would it be possible to test some other additional focuses? Like strength for jumping reach or ball control for dribbling, maybe others. For example with V7 schedule or whatever people most commonly use except with a different additional focus, and you can probably use same metrics as you already do.
I ask because at a certain point one might prefer other attributes than pure speed. For example center backs don't seem to develop much jumping reach and strength using these schedules, or maybe they do and I've just been unlucky. I'd rather have a 14 pace 14 acc 14 jumping reach center back than 16, 16 and 10. 10 vs 14 is probably too big of a gap, but just to illustrate the point.
To put it simply: [Recovery]x7 It's used to "remove/lower" certain weights so that the most important attributes get more assigned weight
Then, A8 is the training program proposed by EBFM (I added [Addtional Focus Quickness]+[Double Intensity] to this) and it takes 11 training sessions per week I achieved the same results in about 5 training per week in another exercise by "increasing/decreasing the weight" Expand
Have you tried basically no training but with 7 recovery sessions?
Eppstar said: Here is the progression of three players after 9 seasons. I used R5 training for the U19s and V7 training for the first and second teams. They spent 2 years in the U19s, 1 year in the second team (Championnat National 2), and the rest in the first team.
PS: I made these three players younger at the start of the game because I wanted to observe their progression over the longest possible period. Expand
That goalkeepers development looks super interesting. We've established roughly how things work for outfield players but I didn't think it would work so well on a GK
Han106 said: So what I'm taking from this is that the coaching assignments seem to have no effect at all. In fact I have no idea if coaching even has an effect on player growth. Why do we even have coaches? Expand
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, I vaguely remember from EBFM videos that coaches don't matter that much for highly professional players but gain in value with lower professionalism. Since these tests are done with 20/20 it's possible the effect is small and within the margin of error.
Steelwood said: Well what I found since posting that is that you will be fine as long as you make sure that training responsibility is set to the assistant. If not, they will get upset almost immediately, all of mine were upset about the standard of strength coaching Expand
Speaking of which. I haven't gone through every single routine in here so maybe it's included somewhere. Has Workthespace world cup corner routine been tested? Everyone seems to be using it lately
A Smile said: When we are constantly adjusting to a tactic, it is normal for such things to happen. To my surprise, the test results of 4800 or even 9600 matches still have a difference of 0.4 points. I think SI has adjusted something in the background, which leads to the instability of the test results. Although I don't have a relatively scientific and reasonable testing method like ARENA, I still feel this instability. Expand
That's completely normal. As you can see from the tables it is estimated that results are correct within rougly +-1 point. 0,4 is well within that range.
pawel said: for some reason my players dont make progress, in first month he made nice progress and then 0 even tho he played whole season i use this training
EDIT: if someone can please give me advice Expand He made some progress, is close to potential, in a bad league with mediocre facilities. Not sure what you are expecting. You won't be getting 25 CA per year.
Maybe we could take a step back and not conclude everything based on like 0,1 differences. These tests are great but there is still plenty of error in them due to sample size.
Compare for example H7 and S7. Huge difference for no apparent reason and even in the opposite direction as most others would suggest.
YAMS49 said: Been an FM player for ages and after reading this absolutely fascinating thread I have to ask a question if I may. Great work by the way, truly great work.
Rest & Individual Training Focus - I presume even with a schedule of full Rest the Individual Training Focus is still being done by the player/game in the background? So Individual Training Focus Quickness is still receiving Double Intensity even with full Rest in the team/main schedule?
This seems strange as the whole idea of rest is to rest is it not? If you're resting then surely you shouldn't be working on your Individual Training? Is this just a quirk of the training system?
Thank you. Expand
Rest session in a team session, doesn't mean players can't do their individual stuff.
Does it? I feel people seriously underestimate the power of CA growth for young players. Your 85 CA 18 year old physical freaks will not get any decent loans, you'll have to keep them at the club costing their further growth because of lack of competitive game time plus you'll want to guide their development. I find that it is unnecessary to cap CA growth, you can reach 20 pace and acceleration on "normal" schedules from these tests.
if you have a schedule please also include rest and individual!
Go through the testing results and pick something you like. There is no definitive answer and it depends on your preferences. Most of the schedules are very close together so it really doesn't matter which one you pick.
Rest settings and individual training have also been stated in the original posts.
Considering the table is standardized for 38 match season for years now the win% was "there" the whole time, just no one bothered to calculate it or rather post about it. In fact it's not even win% but % of points. Additionally the % has no meaning outside of the testing league.
Maybe it conveys more clearly how close the tactics are but anyone paying attention knows that tactics within a point or two are very comparable anyway, within the margin of error.
So maybe if we started treating it as a game and just that, there would probably be a lot less of these types of frustrations. It's still the best football management game ever by far and it doesn't look like that is about to change very soon.
I can do "another focus" test next time ,
You can give an example of which focus you need to test (For example with V7 schedule + xxx focus)
V7 + strength focus mainly, but can try others if you want: ball control, attacking movement ...
So, if we look on Zaz example, after AFC match there is travel and we can not use superrest but why he didn't use superrest before Brighton match and after Aston Villa match on sunday 31.12.?
If there is another session on the day like travel or match focus you cannot get a super rest, so there is no point scheduling rests
I ask because at a certain point one might prefer other attributes than pure speed. For example center backs don't seem to develop much jumping reach and strength using these schedules, or maybe they do and I've just been unlucky. I'd rather have a 14 pace 14 acc 14 jumping reach center back than 16, 16 and 10. 10 vs 14 is probably too big of a gap, but just to illustrate the point.
check N11
(To save time, I only tested them for 1 season)
To put it simply:
[Recovery]x7
It's used to "remove/lower" certain weights so that the most important attributes get more assigned weight
Then, A8 is the training program proposed by EBFM (I added [Addtional Focus Quickness]+[Double Intensity] to this) and it takes 11 training sessions per week
I achieved the same results in about 5 training per week in another exercise by "increasing/decreasing the weight"
Have you tried basically no training but with 7 recovery sessions?
PS: I made these three players younger at the start of the game because I wanted to observe their progression over the longest possible period.
That goalkeepers development looks super interesting. We've established roughly how things work for outfield players but I didn't think it would work so well on a GK
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, I vaguely remember from EBFM videos that coaches don't matter that much for highly professional players but gain in value with lower professionalism. Since these tests are done with 20/20 it's possible the effect is small and within the margin of error.
That's a coaching issue not schedule
That's completely normal. As you can see from the tables it is estimated that results are correct within rougly +-1 point. 0,4 is well within that range.
Pretty sure SI hasn't touched FM24 since march.
EDIT: if someone can please give me advice
He made some progress, is close to potential, in a bad league with mediocre facilities. Not sure what you are expecting. You won't be getting 25 CA per year.
Compare for example H7 and S7. Huge difference for no apparent reason and even in the opposite direction as most others would suggest.
Rest & Individual Training Focus - I presume even with a schedule of full Rest the Individual Training Focus is still being done by the player/game in the background? So Individual Training Focus Quickness is still receiving Double Intensity even with full Rest in the team/main schedule?
This seems strange as the whole idea of rest is to rest is it not? If you're resting then surely you shouldn't be working on your Individual Training? Is this just a quirk of the training system?
Thank you.
Rest session in a team session, doesn't mean players can't do their individual stuff.