Lapidus said: Bear in mind, that the accuracy of evolution "Ability" and "Potential" depends on the attributes of a scout/staff.
To be as accuracy as possible a scout/staff must have "20" in Determining Player Protentional/Ability attributes. Expand
Right, I was assuming 20 in JCA/JPA because sadly you get inaccurate results anyways. I would appreciate if better judging abilities made an actual big difference.
Lapidus said: The default star ratings are not "inaccurate"
People just don't understand the way it works
The scouts and staff evaluate players for you based on the quality of your player.
If you mange a lower leagues club and your best player is 80 CA then any 100 CA player will be evaluated as a 5 Star Rating player by your scouts and staff.
You suggest a complete overhaul to the way ranking system work... and I really like your approach more than the default logic. Expand
You are right, what you described is the context of the ratings and that's not inaccuracy. Sometimes though, a better player in the same context of another will display a worse star rating, and that's what I was thinking about. I don't think it's inherently wrong, as you can't get a 100% accurate guess of a players ability and potential in real life, but I wanted to try something different.
I have been playing for a while now, and while I get someone may enjoy star ratings being inaccurate, I wanted to improve my experience a bit making them more accurate without making it too unfair, so I made a workaround using the real numeric values and transforming them to stars.
I am using the Sas24.Mar.2-Hidden skin, and modifying the header info card.xml file from the skin and adding the following widget: Spoiler
<widget class="value_based_picture" id="PPAB"> <list id="value_list"> <record min_value="0" max_value="40" file="yacs/scouting/two" colour="red"/> <record min_value="41" max_value="80" file="yacs/scouting/four" colour="low attribute"/> <record min_value="81" max_value="120" file="yacs/scouting/six" colour="normal attribute" /> <record min_value="121" max_value="160" file="yacs/scouting/eight" colour="good attribute" /> <record min_value="161" max_value="200" file="yacs/scouting/ten" colour="excellent attribute"/> </list> <record id="object_property" get_property="PPAB" /> </widget>
Instead of this one: Spoiler
<widget class="scout_stars_label" alignment="right,centre_y"> <record id="object_property" get_property="Ppab" /> </widget>
I am able to see a more accurate star rating of a player in its profile ONLY IF I HAVE A SCOUT REPORT.
- 1 star: 0 to 40 CA or PA - 2 stars: 41 to 80 - 3 stars: 81 to 120 - 4 stars: 121 to 160 - 5 stars: 161 to 200
I removed half stars to keep the uncertainty. Also, the stars show only when you have a scout report, so you still enjoy scouting. I find this way better than just revealing the hidden CA/PA numeric values.
I wanted to share this as I found it interesting and maybe some of you can make use of it too. I also wanted to ask If you also find the inconsistency of star ratings annoying, or rather you enjoy them or just ignore them. How do you guys play?
For most simplicity, you can just use "All-Rest+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]" (It is one of the most effective)
for all team , include u18, u21 & first team
Fewer training programs, Bad: It will be harder to maintain "match sharpnes" ,so it will have a Indirect effect Good: Much lower injuries , much higher "overall condition"
Since Pace and Acceleration are the strongest attributes in the game, using "The All rest" is a way to get your players to "the maximum combat effectiveness" in the shortest time,, so as long as you don't sell your players to your current competitors, you are earning ,
and that's the best as You guarantee that you can win the current game as much as possible, so that the player gets the reputation of winning the game, and the reputation can be translated into the price when selling
1. The role of Recovery itself: Compared with rest , Bad: Increase less condition and Fatigue Good: Reduce Sharpness by less , Reduce extra injury risk , Do not reduce Cohesion
2. What Recovery does when assigning attributes: It has the effect of "pulling" the attribute assignment more into the Physical class attribute. However Its "pull" effect is weak (not like things like "[Quickness]", so once you have no room to put it in schedule , the lack of it doesn't matter much Expand
In I17 and J17 (Training English 10), I observed slightly better meta growth with only 1 [Recovery] instead of x7, and in B21, I also saw [Resistance] perform above [Quickness] in the standard:
Robbo84FM said: I know fantastic work has gone into this and i do appreciate it but it's too much for my simple mind looking at all these charts and tons of post saying this and that, has anyone actually had in game success with what schedules for u18, u21 & first team and is it just worth focusing on the meta attributes or overall growth, thanks Expand
If you want to keep it simple, I'd say just stick to what gives the most meta growth:
[Defending from the Front]+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
Is this the best one for the just meta attributes, not all rounded development. Expand
According to me (I may be wrong), that's the best training schedule from @harvestgreen22s Training English 2 sheet, out of all the options of only 1 training block. But If you consider maximum meta growth only, this should be the best one:
Honestly I don't know, as I had the in-game editor from the start. Sorry!
To be as accuracy as possible a scout/staff must have "20" in Determining Player Protentional/Ability attributes.
Right, I was assuming 20 in JCA/JPA because sadly you get inaccurate results anyways. I would appreciate if better judging abilities made an actual big difference.
People just don't understand the way it works
The scouts and staff evaluate players for you based on the quality of your player.
If you mange a lower leagues club and your best player is 80 CA then any 100 CA player will be evaluated as a 5 Star Rating player by your scouts and staff.
You suggest a complete overhaul to the way ranking system work... and I really like your approach more than the default logic.
You are right, what you described is the context of the ratings and that's not inaccuracy. Sometimes though, a better player in the same context of another will display a worse star rating, and that's what I was thinking about. I don't think it's inherently wrong, as you can't get a 100% accurate guess of a players ability and potential in real life, but I wanted to try something different.
Glad you like my approach
I am using the Sas24.Mar.2-Hidden skin, and modifying the header info card.xml file from the skin and adding the following widget:
Spoiler <widget class="value_based_picture" id="PPAB">
<list id="value_list">
<record min_value="0" max_value="40" file="yacs/scouting/two" colour="red"/>
<record min_value="41" max_value="80" file="yacs/scouting/four" colour="low attribute"/>
<record min_value="81" max_value="120" file="yacs/scouting/six" colour="normal attribute" />
<record min_value="121" max_value="160" file="yacs/scouting/eight" colour="good attribute" />
<record min_value="161" max_value="200" file="yacs/scouting/ten" colour="excellent attribute"/>
</list>
<record id="object_property" get_property="PPAB" />
</widget>
Instead of this one:
Spoiler <widget class="scout_stars_label" alignment="right,centre_y">
<record id="object_property" get_property="Ppab" />
</widget>
I am able to see a more accurate star rating of a player in its profile ONLY IF I HAVE A SCOUT REPORT.
- 1 star: 0 to 40 CA or PA
- 2 stars: 41 to 80
- 3 stars: 81 to 120
- 4 stars: 121 to 160
- 5 stars: 161 to 200
I removed half stars to keep the uncertainty. Also, the stars show only when you have a scout report, so you still enjoy scouting. I find this way better than just revealing the hidden CA/PA numeric values.
I wanted to share this as I found it interesting and maybe some of you can make use of it too. I also wanted to ask If you also find the inconsistency of star ratings annoying, or rather you enjoy them or just ignore them. How do you guys play?
Cheers
Most Important: Pace, Acceleration
Important: Jumping Reach, Anticipation, Balance, Agility, Concentration, Finishing
Good: Work Rate, Dribbling, Stamina, Strength, Passing, Determination, Vision
Decent: Long Shots, Marking, Decisions, First Touch,
Almost Irrelevant: Off the Ball, Tackling, Teamwork, Composure, Technique, Positioning
This was the post and obviously some are going to be more relevant than others for each position
I personally trust @Zippos test the most as it's something he's done for years.
harvestgreen22 said: https://fm-arena.com/thread/14456-corrigendum-for-previous-test-error-friendly-matches-actually-count-as-the-number-of-matches-playing-friendly-matches-can-increase-ca/
You can take a look at this. I just sent it
For most simplicity, you can just use
"All-Rest+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]" (It is one of the most effective)
for all team , include u18, u21 & first team
Fewer training programs,
Bad: It will be harder to maintain "match sharpnes" ,so it will have a Indirect effect
Good: Much lower injuries , much higher "overall condition"
In contrast, I would suggest increase "match sharpnes" or "Familiarity" by scheduling friendly games.
check this link
https://fm-arena.com/thread/14456-corrigendum-for-previous-test-error-friendly-matches-actually-count-as-the-number-of-matches-playing-friendly-matches-can-increase-ca/
Since Pace and Acceleration are the strongest attributes in the game, using "The All rest" is a way to get your players to "the maximum combat effectiveness" in the shortest time,, so as long as you don't sell your players to your current competitors, you are earning ,
and that's the best as You guarantee that you can win the current game as much as possible, so that the player gets the reputation of winning the game, and the reputation can be translated into the price when selling
1.
The role of Recovery itself:
Compared with rest ,
Bad: Increase less condition and Fatigue
Good: Reduce Sharpness by less , Reduce extra injury risk , Do not reduce Cohesion
2.
What Recovery does when assigning attributes:
It has the effect of "pulling" the attribute assignment more into the Physical class attribute.
However Its "pull" effect is weak (not like things like "[Quickness]"
In I17 and J17 (Training English 10), I observed slightly better meta growth with only 1 [Recovery] instead of x7, and in B21, I also saw [Resistance] perform above [Quickness] in the standard:
[Quickness]+[Match Practice]+[Attacking]+[Recovery]x7+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
So, I wonder If, combining both observations, the following schedule is the most optimal for overall growth:
[Resistance]+[Match Practice]+[Attacking]+[Recovery]+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
What are your thoughts?
If you want to keep it simple, I'd say just stick to what gives the most meta growth:
[Quickness]+[Match Practice]+[Attacking]+[Recovery]+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
You can swap the [Recovery] for another [Attacking] for extra development, but I just prefer to minimize injury risk.
Bafici said: I just figured it out.
[Defending from the Front]+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
Is this the best one for the just meta attributes, not all rounded development.
According to me (I may be wrong), that's the best training schedule from @harvestgreen22s Training English 2 sheet, out of all the options of only 1 training block. But If you consider maximum meta growth only, this should be the best one:
[Resistance]+[Match Practice]+[Attacking]+[Recovery]+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
I used @Zippos Attribute Testing as reference to do the calcs.