(Due to language issues, I can't explain many details through the translator becausethe translator always misses or distorts some content.) Your explanation is more clearer. I can't explain this matter very well in English
smigler said: any chance you test correlation between inverted wingbacks/fullbacks and preferred foots Expand
I tested inverted wingback and the difference was relatively small (within ≤5). So they can use either foot, and there is not much difference
inverted fullback I haven't had time to test it yet.
johnconnerson said: Is this effect linear? If a player has 12 or 13 for their weak foot (listed as "Fairly Strong" in-game), will they perform a little better than the players with 8 on their weak foot? Expand
Non linear Its influence is relatively significant from 1 to 8, but it becomes much smaller from 14 to 20
So from the perspective of "potential（PA） occupation", it is relatively good for a player to have 6 to 10 non-dominant feet
If he has, for instance, 16 ，18 , or even 20, it might waste a considerable amount of ability, but the effect actually only increases very little
Jolt said: A couple of quick questions to harvestgreen22 or someone that knows.
The training sessions generally show lowering "Condition"
But from my observations, condition always improves after each day with just training, and only lowerswhen playing matches (or getting injured, but that's beside the point). So my question, has it ever been tested whether these trainings actually: 1. Lower condition? OR 2. Training sessions with heavier condition reduction don't allow the players to recover condition as much as training sessions with lighter condition reduction?
The reason why I'm asking is simple: I'm unsure whether I should schedule my training sessions like this:
or like this:
If trainings don't lower condition, then putting a rest day in between sessions makes no sense, and it is always ideal to put all rest sessions immediately after a game, and the training sessions as late as possible (like in the second case).
If they do lower condition, then adding a rest day in between training sessions to allow the players to recover, can make sense to lower risk of injuries.
Hopefully my question is understandable.
如果你看不懂我的意思，我也会中文，所以如果我必须写汉字，我可以。(This says that I can also write in Chinese in case harvestgreen22 doesn't understand). Expand
I have discussed this issue in other posts and on our Chinese players Forum. Yes, there is indeed such a problem. A reduced training schedule brings both advantages and disadvantages
Advantages : Fewer training , Fewer injuries Disadvantage: Whether using "Recover (drop a little)" or "Rest (drop more)", Both "condition" and "March sharpness" will decline
However, these two things are useful and can affect the performance in the competition.
My idea is like this:
1. If it's a league with a very dense schedule of matches (like England), then this decline is basically not a problem because a large number of matches will make up for it
2. If it is a league with relatively few matches, then "arranging friendly matches" is needed to make up for this "condition" and "March sharpness".
3. Just right. According to another post I tested (posted on this forum), for young players, friendly matches are basically as valuable as official matches, providing the same growth needs and match time.
4.At the beginning of the season, friendly matches need to be arranged to ensure that "friendly matches + real matchs" = about twice a week.
Apart from being troublesome to arranged , there is no other Disadvantage to this.
Of course, the increased friendly matches will bring corresponding injury risks. However, by comparing "increasing friendly matches" and "increasing the training schedule", the test found that this risk would be lower.
5. For some special circumstances where friendly matches cannot be arranged and this "condition" and "March sharpness" are indeed needed, then a certain amount of training schedule can only be added according to these actual situations, and "recovery" should be used as much as possible to replace "rest" in the training schedule.
sisou said: Should I remove "Double Intensity" or "Additional Focus Quickness" from a player's ind. training if I don't want him to improve his pac/acc anymore? Expand
Yes , Additional Focus It works independently for each player , and is used to adjust the grow allocation. If you think any player's stats is sufficient, you can make changes at any time
jflavus said: Is there anyone who is willing to show me how this training system works and how to adjust it? I am quite new to the game and I am trying to understand what to do and how to implement it to the game. I haven't even started my career yet, it is funny how there is so much to learn in this game but when it is all in writing is so hard to understand.
Also I am trying to understand whether we put personal training to everyone on Quickness but the Goalkeepers? How do I get this " You can also in Staff -- Responsibilities -- Training, Hand over the training to the assistant, Then do the "only once" setting in the player's personal Settings and training schedule , You are in fact still in control of your training schedule and personal training Intensity , But all the complaints about training are gone because NPCS don't complain about NPCS " ??? I cant seem to see the settings for it like where?? Expand
————whether we put personal training to everyone on Quickness but the Goalkeepers Yes even Pace are One of the most important attributes of a goalkeeper
BrushlessPlaymaker said: What about training units? I seem to recall reading somewhere that it'd be optimal to set CenterBacks in the Defensive Units, every other outfield player should be on the Attacking Unit. Is that the case, or it's completely irrelevant? Expand
This question has been raised by someone on this forum and in our Chinese forums.
I have also tried the test The result is strange. It seems The default setting is the best. Changing "Defensive Units" or "Attacking units" seems to have a negative effect.
I didn't continue to study this, but at least I didn't find that any change (such as just moving a small number of people over, or even all of them in the same group) could be beneficial, so I gave up on further research
SaMaHaJoGu said: I’m a little late to the party… but is there any schedule that will help maximize my GKs?
Like maybe use the Quickness, Match Practice x1, Attack From Back, and Shot Stopping? To help the GK(s) grow properly? LMK.
And what is the difference in Pace/Acceleration and overall CA gains between these two? 1. 1x Quickness, 1x Match Practice, and 1x Attack Shadow Play 2. 1x Quickness, 1x Match Practice, and 1x Attacking Direct Expand
1. Sorry I didn't consider how to make the training program take goalkeepers into account
If you only use the training schedule I recommend (such as Quickness, Match Practice x1, Attack x1, and then add a goalkeeper type of training on this basis)
It is very likely that the goalkeeper will not receive the optimal allocation.
2. My idea is: There is only one goalkeeper, and his importance is definitely far less than the growth of other non-goalkeepers.
Secondly, based on my tests, "Agility" and "Pace" are also among the most important attributes for goalkeepers.
And this training schedule for "physical" attributes can also greatly enhance goalkeepers' "Agility" and "Pace". All that is needed is to change the primary "additional focus" of goalkeepers to "Agility"
The third reason is that I had other things that interested me, so I didn't continue the test
3. If you want to quantify it, it's best to directly look at the table I uploaded earlier.
If quantification is not needed but only a rough explanation is required,
Both of these plans are attempts I have made,
aiming to allocate growth as much as possible to the "effective" attribute under the premise of having as few training programs as possible (so that there are fewer injuries).
As for what the "effective" attribute is, you can refer to my other posts It's probably Pace, Acceleration, Jumping Reach, Dribbling, Work Rate... .
4. Meanwhile, I will also try to allocate as few attributes as possible to "ineffective" attributes, or attributes that occupy a lot of potential but have poor effects, such as Decisions, First Touch, even if the cost is to reduce "total growth".
Even if the cost is a reduction in "total growth".
Because the actual rate of growth is closely related to the "difference between potential and current ability", if the growth in the first year is very high but occupies a large amount of ability, the subsequent growth will be greatly slowed down
helioserebus said: Hey, first I would like to thank you muchly for your efforts on doing this research about training phenomena.
My only fear is what happens if our player does not train for specific role & duty and other attributes that highlighted green (which he needs for that role).
I mean that my only worry is that other attributes like finishing, composure, marking, tackling will decrease in time - actually which is what I saw in my save. Should I be worried about this decrease? Because I think and I believe, for example, having a decrease in finishing, composure, technique etc on my STs will effect their scoring performance. Expand
I'll explain the community discussions I've encountered in my memory and what ideas were formed. It might be a bit wordy and lengthy
Core viewpoints and principle explanations
First, let's talk about the core viewpoint
other attributes like finishing, composure, marking, tackling will decrease, Yes
If from the perspective of immersion, those "UI with red, in decline" don't look good, then to solve this problem, you need to add some more diverse training programs, and even to cancel "extra focus" or "double intensity".
And if you can sacrifice the "sense of immersion" to a certain extent and only consider the intensity of the "Meta".
The value of these reduced weak attributes , Is far lower than , the value of the increased strong attributes that you Gain.
Including one of the good valuable attribute "Dribbling", it will also decline in the most extreme training "All rest".
At the same time, since this training schedule minimizes the occupation of unnecessary attributes as much as possible, the gap between your potential and current ability will be relatively larger, and the actual attribute allocation will be faster
Another consideration is to consider selling the player in the short term, so he needs to have a high CA. Or if you want to fully utilize the potential of the players, then it is necessary to adopt "less extreme training and training with increased CA" at the appropriate time point, and not use "full rest" training.
principle explanations
The method I adopted is the "Exclusion method". It is used to test which attributes are "truly effective", which are "effective but not so strong", which are "just so-so", and which are "approximately ineffective".
Eliminate methods that are difficult to implement in practice // require an extremely large amount of time to achieve, and use actual data to Exclusion those "I think" ideas
1. First of all, I establish a set of standard attributes, and every player have this attribute. Under the control of variables, increase or reduce a given of attribute to test the changes in goal difference and winning rate. Goal difference and win rate represent the effectiveness of this attribute
2. Then, according to some players' opinions, they believe that attributes are "combined".
That is: Some attributes only have an effect when combined with others to improve together.
Based on the ALL Series of Combinations they provided, the goal difference and win rate were tested, and no special combinations were found.
From the data results, no magical effect was found that "Attribute A, Attribute B, and Attribute C all require at least xx attributes to take effect. Once they take effect, they produce an extremely significant effect, far exceeding your imagination.
3. Then, when adding or reducing a single attribute, observe their performance in the statistical data. For instance, “number of passes, successful passes”
It has been observed that there is indeed an impact, but it is very difficult to infer the performance using statistical data because it is too unintuitive
In addition, there are some attributes that do not directly reflect the statistics that can be found in the game.
For example,if you want to look for the "Heading" attribute, it's obvious that you should look for those items related to heading. -- But, for example, "Anticipation", it is a useful attribute, but I cannot find out exactly what it corresponds to
4. Then, another player pointed out to me, "Your test only used a single tactic, which is unreasonable. Moreover, this tactic is a meta tactic, which is also unreasonable."
Secondly, they believe that "you should test according to each 'Role' of this' player position 'because each' Role 'requires different attributes."
The third point they think that each "player position" requires different attributes, and it is not reasonable to apply a general theory to all "player positions"
5. Based on their ideas,
First of all, I went through the same process with multiple tactics (various preset tactics) and reached almost the same conclusion
(Only the importance of a very few attributes has increased or decreased, and the degree of change is not significant.)
According to the "Exclusion method", since I haven't found a counterexample, I assume it doesn't exist
6. Secondly, I switched between various "roles". Of course, I didn't test all of them at once; I only tested some representative ones
Similarly, the data does not indicate that they have undergone significant changes
According to the "Exclusion method", since I haven't found a counterexample, I assume it doesn't exist
7. Thirdly, the test results do indeed reflect that the attributes of some location requirements are different.
But this difference doesn't work as people imagine.
For example,
Example 1: There is a player whose statistics show that he never makes a "Crossing" in any game. However, its "Crossing" attribute does have an impact on the team's goal difference/winning rate
Example 2: The "Finishing" and "Long Shots" of the frontcourt players are indeed more important, but not so important as to contribute to the effect of the entire team. Or rather, a defender who hardly shoots, his "Finishing" and "Long Shots" also contribute to the team 's "shot attempts" and "shot success rate"
Example 3. Under some conditions, the increase of certain attributes of one or more players instead leads to the decline of the team's performance. A typical example is "First Touch".
This represents that to separate out the true effect of "Role", the amount of testing work and knowledge required is much greater than my ability, so I gave up continuing the testing on this point
paddybhoy1 said: hi new to this forum and the game tbh. i made a schedule for this but it isnt showing for whatever reason. also how would i implement thre training for u21 and u18s thanks Expand Could you send a screenshot? It's hard to explain without a picture
baldg22 said: I have a question. do you train players position? or leave it until they are 21 Expand 1. If you are on the player page and select "Position/Role/Duty" under "Development" You will find that some "highlighted" attributes have been "added" Its effect is to take away a part of your growth and allocate it to these highlighted attributes.
So when you don't want to "waste" a part of your growth on these "newly added highlighted attributes", then don't choose.
2. Meanwhile. If "Position" is selected, he can increase "position proficiency".
3. This creates a contradiction. If you want him to grow optimally, he should not choose "Position".
There are two ways.
One is that you just choose to sacrifice a little of your growth.
Another option is that you can directly control his appearance in matches. In that case, you can have him participate in a large number of actual matches (friendly matches are also fine), place him in the "position" that needs to be practiced, and use matches instead of training to increase "position proficiency".
For example, if I have him play friendly matches twice a week for a whole season, he can basically master his position proficiency to the fullest
4.The younger the age, the fewer positions one can master simultaneously, and the faster one can practice position proficiency
Mantorras77 said: @harvestgreen22 I used Max's (EBFM) Training Test League and ran 20 simulations of a few training schedules including Max's training schedule from FM23 and your latest findings of [Quickness]+[Attacking]+[Match Practice]+[Recovery]x7+[Addtional Focus Quickness].
The test league is set up with just a starting 11. Everyone is 20 years old. All attributes set at 10 including all hidden attributes. Fitness coach of 5 stars, Training Facilities at 5 stars. All 11 players played mostly 30 games but the average attributes increase is significantly less than what you're reporting. With Max's training schedule Im seeing an average increase of CA of 204 points (total of first 11) and with yours im seeing only an average increase of CA of 169 points.
I have yet to check which attributes increased as that will be my next task but i'm curious to know if i'm missing something here or? When I checked your Excel it looked like the average increase per player was 20+ points where in my tests it's more like 15.
Expand
Sorry, I was busy with other things a while ago. I'm replying now. It's been 9 months already
I used the same control variables and the same test league at that time.I tested all the training schedules recommended by EBFM and also averaged them multiple times.
When the training schedule is oriented towards "maximizing CA growth", under all the same conditions, I have tested that they are very close (with a difference of less than 5%).
Then I also tried to reduce the EBFM training schedule from being packed for an entire week to just a few sessions, and then roughly set up a training schedule in a way that I thought was close to its allocation model. As a result, the allocation and total growth were also close.
From this result, I think it indicates that superimposing a large number of projects will not increase growth.
I can't find the corresponding data for the time being because all my test data were randomly placed in the folder Then, if you download the table link I sent earlier, the two training schedules "H21" and "I21" in it should be able to illustrate this point. This table also includes the growth of all attributes If you can't find the link or it's invalid, I'll upload another one
This point has also been tested by a large number of players in our community. I think that since they (testers and ordinary users) have not raised any questions (in our forum, the total download volume exceeds ten thousand times), I guess I've never encountered this situation before, so I'm not sure where the problem either
duxa92 said: Do I need to train role and duty for GK or leave it blank as well as field players? Expand I haven't considered the goalkeeper and their training. I can't answer this for the time being
AFI said: If my player already have 20 acc and pace, do i change additional focus from quickness ? Expand Yes, change additional focus
Flourix said: So, what would you do when you have reached a high Pace like 16+ and have points left between the CA/PA? Is it safe to hop off the individual training in Pace for the 2nd most important attribute? Or will this make the player lose the Pace again even though points are left in PA to take from? Or do you just continue training them in their Pace and the game will automatically assign in other areas? Expand
1.
In my personal opinion, each player is in a different actual situation and needs to make adjustments according to the specific circumstances.
Most of my games are played in medium and low-level leagues, where their potential is limited. So the decisions I made are related to this environment.
If I aim solely at "maximizing combat effectiveness",
I will always adopt the "full rest" approach and only change the additional focus to something else when it's around 19 Pace+19 Acc.
And only when the attributes of the entire team were so high did they finally consider changing the training program to "CA Growth".
2.
In most cases, you don't need to worry about "losing Pace again".
In some extreme cases, for instance, if your player's "Professionalism" is too strong, and he is very young and has a lot of remaining potential, this will cause his growth (redistribution) to be very fast/very strong.
This might lead to, for instance: His Pace and Acc have already reached 20, and then you choose other "additional focuses" This led him to take away some attributes of Pace and Acc (dropping them to 19) and allocate them to other attributes. When such a thing happens, all it takes is to adjust his additional focus again.
If you are talking FM26 I had already spent all my time testing non-goalkeepers before , then I successfully got refund when it was just released. So i didn't tested it.
IF you are taking that in FM24 You can search in forum. I've already posted it on the forum. Generally speaking, the most important attribute is Agility. There are many other attributes that are also useful. I can't remember them all at once and can't find the table either
Only some specific meta tactical situations were tested
My native language is not English. Some of the following content was directly translated by me using a translator I don't know if anyone has taken this test before. Since I searched for some keywords but couldn't find anything, I guess no one has posted this content
Default setting before test: 1.All players on the Left side use their left foot as the main foot, The non-main foot always = 8 Left Feet = 20 . Right Feet =8 2.All players on the Right side use their right foot as the main foot, The non-main foot always = 8 Left Feet = 8 . Right Feet =20 3.Players on Central axis , Left Feet = 8 . Right Feet =20 4.Some characters in specific positions, such as "Inside Forward", will default to using the foot in the opposite direction as the main foot
Let's analyze the data. There are Average goals scored, Average goals conceded, win rate, loss rate, Average goal difference in the table I use Average goal difference as the indicator for comparison
----------------------- Analysis 1. "4231"
Look at tables 1,2,3 1 is the most ideal state, where all players have 20 on both their left and right feet. Its Average goal difference is 44.2
2 is to change non-main foot to 8. Among all the players, the players on the left (except Inside Forward as the opposite) all have their left foot as the main foot. The players on the right (except Inside Forward as the opposite) all use their right foot as the main foot. Its Average goal difference is 32.1
The overall performance dropped by 44.2-32.1=12.1, but this value is actually not significant (because increasing the number of non-skilled feet from 8 to 20 would require a very large amount of CA, and the improvement in performance is not much compared to the CA it occupies).
3 is in contrast to 2. It indicates: In the "Meta 4231" tactic, Inside Forward actually doesn't need opposite feet (the two only differ by 0.7 and can be regarded as having no actual difference). ----------------------- Analysis 2. "3421"
Look at tables 4,5 and 6
This tactic has 3 BPD, 2 DM, 2 WB, 2 IF and 1 AF
Compare 5 and 6. The same conclusion: Inside Forward actually doesn't need opposite feet. The difference between the two is only 1.4 ----------------------- Analysis 3. "433"
Look at Tables 7,8 and 9
This tactic has 2 MC and 1 DM
The situation of this tactic is a bit different. Inside Forward performs better when using the main foot in the opposite position ----------------------- Analysis 4. "4231"
Look at Tables 2,10 and 11
10,11 They replaced "Inside Forward" with "Winger", and it can be found that "Winger" strongly requires the main foot at the same position ----------------------- Analysis 5. "433 3st3dm"
Look at Tables 12,13 and 14
This case is about comparing which foot to usefor "Left / Right Pressing Forward".
Conclusion: There is not much difference ----------------------- Analysis 6. "4231"
Look at Tables 2,15,16 and 17
In 15 The feet of "DL-"Full-Back" and" DR-"Full-Back" were reversed, resulting in a very obvious decline in performance
ConclusionL/DR "Full-Back" requires the use of the main foot in the same position
In 16, the feet of "DMCL-"Defensive Midfielder" and" DMCR-"Defensive Midfielder" were reversed, resulting in a slight decline in performance. It can be considered that the main feet of DMCL and DMCR in this tactic are not important
In 17 The feet of "DCL-"Ball Playing Defender" and" DCR-"Ball Playing Defender" were reversed. Similarly, a slight decline in performance can be regarded as unimportant . main feet of DCL and DCR in this tactic are not important ----------------------- Analysis 7. "424"
Look at 18 and 19 in the table
This is an unfinished process. I forgot to continue the test. Originally, I intended to swap the main foot of "Pressing Forward" based on 19. ----------------------- Analysis 8. "3421"
Look at Table 5,20,21,22
In 20 is to reverse the feet of "WBL- "Wing-back" and" WBR- "Wing-back" The performance dropped significantly, from 39.1 to 29.7. Conclusion: In this tactic, WBL and WBR strongly need to use the main feet in the same position
In 21 is reversing the feet of "DMCL-"Defensive Midfielder" and" DMCR-"Defensive Midfielder", The performance is approximately unchanged Conclusion: In this tactic,the main feet of DMCL and DMCR have no impact
In 22 is to reverse the feet of "DCL-"Ball Playing Defender" and" DCR-"Ball Playing Defender" The performance has dropped significantly Conclusion: In this tactic, DCL and DCR need to use the main feet in the same position
----------------------- Note that in order to control the variables, I only changed the foot of one type position each time. I didn't try to combine multiple situations
-----------------------
Based on the summary of the test results
1. In most of the tactics tested, "Inside Forward" doesn't care which foot is used.
(The only exception is the example of "433 2cm 1dm" . But the impact here is not significant)
2."Winger", it is extremely necessary for the player's main foot to be on the same side as his position
3. "Pressing Forward" doesn't matter which foot is used
4. In 4231, "DL/DR" always requires the player's main foot to be on the same side as his position, which has a very very significant impact
5. In 4231, the feet of "DM and DC" have some influence, but the influence is small
6. In 3421, "DM" has no effect. "DCL/DCR" has a significant impact and requires that the player's main foot be on the same side as his position.
7. In 3421, "WB" requires that the player's main foot be on the same side as his position , which has a very very significant impact
I found that I posted it in the wrong partition. It should be posted in "Guides, Researches and Hints for Football Manager" If the administrator sees it, help me delete this post and I repost it over there
Only some specific meta tactical situations were tested
My native language is not English. Some of the following content was directly translated by me using a translator I don't know if anyone has taken this test before. Since I searched for some keywords but couldn't find anything, I guess no one has posted this content
Default setting before test: 1.All players on the Left side use their left foot as the main foot, The non-main foot always = 8 Left Feet = 20 . Right Feet =8 2.All players on the Right side use their right foot as the main foot, The non-main foot always = 8 Left Feet = 8 . Right Feet =20 3.Players on Central axis , Left Feet = 8 . Right Feet =20 4.Some characters in specific positions, such as "Inside Forward", will default to using the foot in the opposite direction as the main foot
Let's analyze the data. There are Average goals scored, Average goals conceded, win rate, loss rate, Average goal difference in the table I use Average goal difference as the indicator for comparison
----------------------- Analysis 1. "4231"
Look at tables 1,2,3 1 is the most ideal state, where all players have 20 on both their left and right feet. Its Average goal difference is 44.2
2 is to change non-main foot to 8. Among all the players, the players on the left (except Inside Forward as the opposite) all have their left foot as the main foot. The players on the right (except Inside Forward as the opposite) all use their right foot as the main foot. Its Average goal difference is 32.1
The overall performance dropped by 44.2-32.1=12.1, but this value is actually not significant (because increasing the number of non-skilled feet from 8 to 20 would require a very large amount of CA, and the improvement in performance is not much compared to the CA it occupies).
3 is in contrast to 2. It indicates: In the "Meta 4231" tactic, Inside Forward actually doesn't need opposite feet (the two only differ by 0.7 and can be regarded as having no actual difference). ----------------------- Analysis 2. "3421"
Look at tables 4,5 and 6
This tactic has 3 BPD, 2 DM, 2 WB, 2 IF and 1 AF
Compare 5 and 6. The same conclusion: Inside Forward actually doesn't need opposite feet. The difference between the two is only 1.4 ----------------------- Analysis 3. "433"
Look at Tables 7,8 and 9
This tactic has 2 MC and 1 DM
The situation of this tactic is a bit different. Inside Forward performs better when using the main foot in the opposite position ----------------------- Analysis 4. "4231"
Look at Tables 2,10 and 11
10,11 They replaced "Inside Forward" with "Winger", and it can be found that "Winger" strongly requires the main foot at the same position ----------------------- Analysis 5. "433 3st3dm"
Look at Tables 12,13 and 14
This case is about comparing which foot to usefor "Left / Right Pressing Forward".
Conclusion: There is not much difference ----------------------- Analysis 6. "4231"
Look at Tables 2,15,16 and 17
In 15 The feet of "DL-"Full-Back" and" DR-"Full-Back" were reversed, resulting in a very obvious decline in performance
ConclusionL/DR "Full-Back" requires the use of the main foot in the same position
In 16, the feet of "DMCL-"Defensive Midfielder" and" DMCR-"Defensive Midfielder" were reversed, resulting in a slight decline in performance. It can be considered that the main feet of DMCL and DMCR in this tactic are not important
In 17 The feet of "DCL-"Ball Playing Defender" and" DCR-"Ball Playing Defender" were reversed. Similarly, a slight decline in performance can be regarded as unimportant . main feet of DCL and DCR in this tactic are not important ----------------------- Analysis 7. "424"
Look at 18 and 19 in the table
This is an unfinished process. I forgot to continue the test. Originally, I intended to swap the main foot of "Pressing Forward" based on 19. ----------------------- Analysis 8. "3421"
Look at Table 5,20,21,22
In 20 is to reverse the feet of "WBL- "Wing-back" and" WBR- "Wing-back" The performance dropped significantly, from 39.1 to 29.7. Conclusion: In this tactic, WBL and WBR strongly need to use the main feet in the same position
In 21 is reversing the feet of "DMCL-"Defensive Midfielder" and" DMCR-"Defensive Midfielder", The performance is approximately unchanged Conclusion: In this tactic,the main feet of DMCL and DMCR have no impact
In 22 is to reverse the feet of "DCL-"Ball Playing Defender" and" DCR-"Ball Playing Defender" The performance has dropped significantly Conclusion: In this tactic, DCL and DCR need to use the main feet in the same position
----------------------- Note that in order to control the variables, I only changed the foot of one type position each time. I didn't try to combine multiple situations
You guys (or gals) have tested things WAY more than the average Joe. Your inputs on this might help MANY players better understand their favorite games. As I also saw many people getting disenchanted with the ME, while I feel all of your findings are not as damning as it seems. Expand
“If attributes testing are done with a "meta tactic" (which is wide/fast/gegenpress-heavy), then maybe we are actually skewing our perception of attributes importance toward physical a lot”
——In fact, I have also conducted tests in other tactics .Not Meta tactics , It's the preset tactics .
The conclusion is basically the same (some minor attributes have slightly change , but the overall situation remains unchanged).
Since my native language is not English,
It's too troublesome for me to organize these things and translate them into English.
So I only posted the result under the condition of the Gegenpress Meta tactic (which is also the type of tactic used by most casual players).
what do you think about the find that CA can win games? as mentioned i increased my player’s CA and PA (but not the attributes) directly before a match (so that everything stayed unchanged) and suddenly i started winning against the same team I always lost against (reloaded a savegame many times) it would mean that mental and technical attributes can make a difference because the game assigns CA to them.
maybe this is sports interactives trick to make attributes matter - even if they cannot show things like passing in the match engine (pace / acceleration are very easy to show in the match engine) they just generally change the odds of winning 😀
that’s why i made another small experiment, i gave a player a 20 in passing/technique/vision/flair and compared this to him having a 1 in these attributes. My team won more games because of higher CA but the “passing match stats” like “passes completed” or “key passes” did not change at all Expand
I successfully refunded the FM26, so I can't continue to study it
1. Your guess might be right. I haven't conducted this test (under the condition that the attribute lock remains unchanged —— only changing the CA to observe if there are any changes in the result).
2. Under appropriate circumstances, the effects of technical and mental attributes (multivariable combinations) are positive. But in some other cases, they inhibit each other.
For Example, a certain attribute is best when it is of medium , and second best when it is of high , worst in low . increase it from 1 to 20 , It did enhance its performance, but its best performance might be around 10
Because these combinations are too complex, players cannot control them. So I think it's enough to roughly know which ones are strong and which ones are weak.
3. We all know that strong attributes do not necessarily consume more CA. Weak attributes do not necessarily consume less CA. For instance, "Decisions" occupies a lot of CA in all positions, but the effect is very poor
4. Therefore, CA cannot fully represent the strength of the players.
However, it cannot be ruled out that , For exactly the same attributes, if there are different ca, due to the calculations of the game engine, there may be different performances.
5. I have posted about my gaming career twice on our Chinese forum/video website for some time before.
One of them was to use a second-tier league team from China to replace the Maltese league through mod, thus being able to participate in the UEFA Champions League.
Then I look for randomly generated virtual young Chinese players. Because the Chinese "youth training score" in the game is only 60 (very low). The average PA of randomly generated virtual players is basically 60 to 70.
I used "full rest training", and several years later, the players were all at about 20 Pace and 20 Acceleration. However, their other attributes, such as the technical category, are very poor.
6. The result was great: the game started in 2023. Win the UEFA Champions League titles in 2026,2027,2028,2029 and 2030. The champion of the 2030 World Cup.
Some of our players once thought it was an impossible challenge.
The final average CA is only around 70 to 75. The strong opponents usually have a CA of around 170. This CA with 100 less still won all the way.
I use one of the good tactics and set-piece tactics from FM-arena. This makes a certain contribution ( Outside the contribution of attributes )
but it can also prove to some extent that this theory can be applied to actual games (Even with such a poor PA and such a low-priced player, one can still pass one of the most difficult challenges in the game).
and sorry if that has been asked before, but it seems you isolated attributes that should work in a bundle, for example passing needs passing+technique+vision+decisions to be effective. same like marking needs strength, pace, anticipation etc. to succeed. do you think that this could make a difference? Expand
I have studied this issue together with other players and I hope to explain it in the simplest possible way. It's probably like this:
1. Normally speaking, Positive plus positive, it's impossible to get negative.
2. Separately increase the values of A, B, C, and D, and the winning rate will increase
3. Now, add A, B, C and D "simultaneously" In some combinations, the winning rate did not increase significantly In some other combinations, the winning rate even decreased (that is, it became negative).
4. Under normal logic, some attributes should "interact and promote each other", generating an effect where 1+1 is greater than 2 , 1+1+1 >3 Now, under specific testing conditions, the test obtained a completely illogical result: 1+1+1<0 ( like " passing+technique+vision+decisions "
Due to time constraints, I can't spend an unlimited amount of time going through all conditions and thoroughly understanding them. And there must be a reason for its emergence
5. This is not an isolated case; rather, many attributes are like this Here it refers to the combination of "technical type and technical type attributes" and "technical type and spiritual type attributes". The "physical type attributes" currently all seem to be completely positive.
6. My personal theory is what was mentioned in the previous post. Technical type and spiritual type attributes , They simultaneously represent "success rate" and "tendency/behavioral positivity". The latter may have negative effects, and sometimes the negative impact is so great that the increase in success rate is not enough to make up for it.
7. There are also some other new results (not on the same topic as this one or this post) that were developed by other players through unpacking. What they mean is "Don't tell foreigners" (because they are afraid of bearing legal responsibility as unpacking), so it only spreads internally Because I was too busy, I didn't study what they wrote. Their conclusion was roughly: the attribute , penalty taking ，Free Kick，is ineffective ， The success rate (expected goals) is calculated and random based on some fixed parameters
I tried to make a test league by myself, but it was too complicated. I have done my best, but I am not competent enough. So I can only turn to everyone for help
Since the FM24 save is compatible with FM26, I plan to edit the test league with FM24 so that others in our player community can use this test save to test the content of their FM24 or FM26.
The online search didn't yield good results (their test league didn't meet the requirements or there was a paywall). while our player community has a strong demand for testing tactics, but lacks the necessary tools
dzek 's testing league Goods: 1.In one-on-one matches between player teams and AI teams, there will be no mutual matches, which saves the amount of computation and the time required for operation
2.The coach of AI will not be fired because they are set to transfer to other teams 100 years later (My understanding is like this. I don't know if i am wrong.) Since they already have transfer contracts, it seems that they won't be fired due to the team's poor performance.
Bads: 1.I need the head coach to maintain their "information" and "Formations/Tendencies" information However, dzek's test league removed "Formations/Tendencies"
2.FMRTE can not add "Tendencies" , once deleted i can't add it back in FMRTE
3.If I want to restore the "Formations/Tendencies" of the original AI coach, I need to find another coach and change his "Formations/Tendencies" to that of the original coach. Then let this new coach take office.
4.But the new coach will/sometimes be fired halfway due to the team's poor performance. If the coach is replaced by a random new one, it will cause some disturbance to the test results
5.This led to the tests not being able to proceed until the end of the season (testing end in mid of year before any coach fired)
Requirement:
1.The head coach of AI will not be fired, so many matches can be tested at once
2. The head coach can keep the original "Formations/Tendencies" and "information" in the game (so don't change them at will). Or, it has been changed, but not "all deleted", so I can restore them to their original state in the game in FMRTE (FMRTE cannot add Tendencies, but it can modify).
3. Player teams should play one-on-one against 10 to 15 world-renowned coaches. This way, there is a large enough sample size, and it won't take a long time to run a season due to an excessive amount of data
4.As for the attributes set for both teams' players, this can be changed according to every one's own needs (Whether it is a real player or a custom player with the same attributes). FMRTE can modify it .So it doesn't matter
Steelwood said: If you bought it on Steam you can get a refund as it is still in Beta Expand
I have been testing the game for over 40 hours (which is more than the normal 2 hours max to refund). I applied for a refund yesterday. I don't know if it will really succeed
duxa92 said: Would you test hidden attributes? Especially consistency and important matches? Expand
I tested hidden attributes in FM24 , and also attributes in different tactics (not just Gegenpressing).
I didn't test on FM26 because it was too troublesome to convert the testing save from FM24 to FM26. (I knew that FMRTE-26 was on sale today, but it wasn't available when I was testing.)
I'm trying to refund FM26. If the refund is successful, I won't test it anymore. If the refund fails, I might test it when I have time
1.Training system Use "Football Manager 2024 Resource Archiver" to unzip the file , and compare it with software in Binary. Result: They are exactly the same, with only one config.xml having a 3-byte difference (format changes, content remains the same)
In the fm24 test, I selected 15 AI coaches, while in fm26, to save time, I only chose 5
PEP GUARDIOLA (fm24 Manchester City) ERIK TEN HAG (fm24 Manchester United) MIKEL ARTETA (fm24 Arsenal) KLOPP (fm24 Liverpool Football Club) MAURICIO POCHETTINO (fm24 Chelsea) As I mentioned before, the "formations/tendencies" of the head coach have a considerable influence and cannot be ignored. However, the original test league of DZEK cleared out the "formations/tendencies" of many coaches.
Since FMRTE cannot add new tendencies, I had to find some other head coaches, import the attributes of the required head coaches, and then modify "formations/tendencies" to the head coach to be simulated （This has brought about another problem. The original head coaches of the DZEK test league were set to transfer 100 years later, so these head coaches will not be dismissed. I don't know how to set it so that I won't be fired, and I don't know how to use an editor And my new coach after the change will have the opportunity to be dismissed in the middle of the year. Therefore, I had to test only until June 1st）
Then, in order to demonstrate the influence degree of different range attributes as much as possible, I adjusted the attributes of all the players to this
3.Result I use the save of fm24 to import fm26. Due to the absence of FMRTE, some variables cannot be locked, so there will inevitably be some errors In statistics . more accuracy need to wait for FMRTE, but I can't wait any longer. I plan to get a refund after test (UI issue). I have tested each situation 645 matchs or more
What do these tables mean? Table 1.a is "Increase that attribute of the player's player to 18." How much has the winning rate changed? Table 1.b is "Increase that attribute of the player's player to 18." How much has the goal difference changed?
Table 2.a is "Reduce that attribute of the player's player to 1." How much has the winning rate changed? Table 2.b is "Reduce that attribute of the player's player to 1." How much has the goal difference changed?
Table 3.a , 3.b ,This table is the difference between the previous two tables , It can be directly used to estimate the overall validity of the entire attribute".
Theoretically, this could be more refined, for instance, attributes could be divided into 1-4,4-8,8-12... However, to save time, I only made two sections
4.Give a few examples: Acceleration: The initial attributes of Acceleration of the opponent and the player are 12.
During the test, change the Acceleration of the player's player to 18 The result is winning rate increased by+31.6%, Record it in Table 1.a Re-read the original test league During the test, change the Acceleration of the player's player to 1 The result is winning rate increased by -45.9%, Record it in Table 1.b
Acceleration From 12 to 18, the result has improved (+31.6%). Acceleration From 12 to 1, the result gets bad (-45.9%). Therefore, it is an attribute that the higher, the better.
Fill in their differences in Table 3.a, and the result is 31.6%-(-45.9%)=77.5% Use this value to measure its importance
5.Crossing: The initial attributes of Crossing of the opponent and the player are 12.
During the test, change the Crossing of the player's player to 18 The result is winning rate increased by+7.1%, Record it in Table 1.a Re-read the original test league During the test, change the Crossing of the player's player to 1 The result is winning rate increased by +2.8%, Record it in Table 1.b
Crossing From 12 to 18, the result has improved (+7.1%). Crossing From 12 to 1, the result has improved (+2.8%). Therefore, it is Not an attribute that the higher, the better. It performs better when it is "high attribute" or "low attribute" than when it is "medium attribute"
Fill in their differences in Table 3.a, and the result is 7.1%-(2.8%)=4.3% Use this value to measure its importance
6.Decisions: The initial attributes of Decisions of the opponent and the player are 12.
During the test, change the Decisions of the player's player to 18 The result is winning rate increased by-2.3%, Record it in Table 1.a Re-read the original test league During the test, change the Decisions of the player's player to 1 The result is winning rate increased by -4.7%, Record it in Table 1.b
Decisions From 12 to 18, the result gets bad (-2.3%). Decisions From 12 to 1, the result gets bad (-4.7%). Therefore, it is Not an attribute that the higher, the better. It is best when it is "medium attributes". Raising or lowering it will both reduce performance
Fill in their differences in Table 3.a, and the result is -2.3%-(-4.7%)=2.3% Use this value to measure its importance
7.Summary Pace and Acceleration , It remains the most important attribute. However, due to the enhancement of other attributes, their dominance is not as absolute as that of fm24
Finishing , Long Shots , Agility , It has been significantly enhanced (compared to fm24) . "Finishing" has been approximately enhanced by 2 times. "Long Shots" has been approximately enhanced by 3 times.
Work Rate , It is very similar to the characteristics of fm24. The period from 1 to 12 has a very significant impact. It can be inferred that it must have more than 6 points; otherwise, it will greatly drag down the team's performance .On fm26 , Its importance has slightly declined .
Jumping Reach Compared with fm24, it has been slightly enhanced
Concentration ，Composure Compared with fm24, "Composure " has been approximately enhanced by 2 times. Concentration , Its importance has also been slightly enhanced
Stamina , Strength Stamina Decline in importance Strength Increased in importance
Aggression , Determination Increased in importance
If I were to give a ranking of importance: 1.Pace , Acceleration 2.Work Rate ,Jumping Reach , Agility 3.Finishing ,Dribbling , Concentration 4.Anticipation , Composure , Long Shots , Determination 5.Balance , Strength , Stamina , Aggression All other attributes can be ignored
8.Position proficiency FM26 has added a two-stage tactic of "with the ball and without the ball"
I only tested one set of situations. Suppose, use preset "fluid counter attack" 424/442 For 424/442 In the "without ball phase", Right /Left winger needs to change to Right /Left Midfielder
I changed the Right /Left Midfielder position proficiency of these two players to 5 (the maximum is 20). This led to a 13 drop in goal difference , and a 6% decrease in winning rate
This indicates that if players want to play in different formations in the two stages, their players need to have all the proficiency in the corresponding positions
8.About fm26
I think the UI is too bad, and there are no plans for major changes to it for a foreseeable long time I couldn't accept this UI, so I applied for a refund I spent 40 hours in the test and then played for several more hours. I don't know if I can get a refund successfully
(Due to language issues, I can't explain many details through the translator becausethe translator always misses or distorts some content.)
Your explanation is more clearer. I can't explain this matter very well in English
I tested inverted wingback and the difference was relatively small (within ≤5).
So they can use either foot, and there is not much difference
inverted fullback I haven't had time to test it yet.
johnconnerson said: Is this effect linear? If a player has 12 or 13 for their weak foot (listed as "Fairly Strong" in-game), will they perform a little better than the players with 8 on their weak foot?
Non linear
Its influence is relatively significant from 1 to 8, but it becomes much smaller from 14 to 20
So from the perspective of "potential（PA） occupation", it is relatively good for a player to have 6 to 10 non-dominant feet
If he has, for instance, 16 ，18 , or even 20, it might waste a considerable amount of ability, but the effect actually only increases very little
The training sessions generally show lowering "Condition"
But from my observations, condition always improves after each day with just training, and only lowerswhen playing matches (or getting injured, but that's beside the point). So my question, has it ever been tested whether these trainings actually: 1. Lower condition? OR 2. Training sessions with heavier condition reduction don't allow the players to recover condition as much as training sessions with lighter condition reduction?
The reason why I'm asking is simple: I'm unsure whether I should schedule my training sessions like this:
or like this:
If trainings don't lower condition, then putting a rest day in between sessions makes no sense, and it is always ideal to put all rest sessions immediately after a game, and the training sessions as late as possible (like in the second case).
If they do lower condition, then adding a rest day in between training sessions to allow the players to recover, can make sense to lower risk of injuries.
Hopefully my question is understandable.
如果你看不懂我的意思，我也会中文，所以如果我必须写汉字，我可以。(This says that I can also write in Chinese in case harvestgreen22 doesn't understand).
I have discussed this issue in other posts and on our Chinese players Forum. Yes, there is indeed such a problem.
A reduced training schedule brings both advantages and disadvantages
Advantages : Fewer training , Fewer injuries
Disadvantage: Whether using "Recover (drop a little)" or "Rest (drop more)",
Both "condition" and "March sharpness" will decline
However, these two things are useful and can affect the performance in the competition.
My idea is like this:
1. If it's a league with a very dense schedule of matches (like England), then this decline is basically not a problem because a large number of matches will make up for it
2. If it is a league with relatively few matches, then "arranging friendly matches" is needed to make up for this "condition" and "March sharpness".
3. Just right. According to another post I tested (posted on this forum), for young players, friendly matches are basically as valuable as official matches, providing the same growth needs and match time.
4.At the beginning of the season, friendly matches need to be arranged to ensure that "friendly matches + real matchs" = about twice a week.
Apart from being troublesome to arranged , there is no other Disadvantage to this.
Of course, the increased friendly matches will bring corresponding injury risks.
However, by comparing "increasing friendly matches" and "increasing the training schedule", the test found that this risk would be lower.
5. For some special circumstances where friendly matches cannot be arranged and this "condition" and "March sharpness" are indeed needed, then a certain amount of training schedule can only be added according to these actual situations, and "recovery" should be used as much as possible to replace "rest" in the training schedule.
Yes , Additional Focus It works independently for each player , and is used to adjust the grow allocation. If you think any player's stats is sufficient, you can make changes at any time
jflavus said: Is there anyone who is willing to show me how this training system works and how to adjust it? I am quite new to the game and I am trying to understand what to do and how to implement it to the game. I haven't even started my career yet, it is funny how there is so much to learn in this game but when it is all in writing is so hard to understand.
Also I am trying to understand whether we put personal training to everyone on Quickness but the Goalkeepers?
How do I get this " You can also in Staff -- Responsibilities -- Training, Hand over the training to the assistant, Then do the "only once" setting in the player's personal Settings and training schedule , You are in fact still in control of your training schedule and personal training Intensity , But all the complaints about training are gone because NPCS don't complain about NPCS " ???
I cant seem to see the settings for it like where??
————whether we put personal training to everyone on Quickness but the Goalkeepers
Yes
even Pace are One of the most important attributes of a goalkeeper
BrushlessPlaymaker said: What about training units? I seem to recall reading somewhere that it'd be optimal to set CenterBacks in the Defensive Units, every other outfield player should be on the Attacking Unit. Is that the case, or it's completely irrelevant?
This question has been raised by someone on this forum and in our Chinese forums.
I have also tried the test
The result is strange. It seems The default setting is the best. Changing "Defensive Units" or "Attacking units" seems to have a negative effect.
I didn't continue to study this, but at least I didn't find that any change (such as just moving a small number of people over, or even all of them in the same group) could be beneficial, so I gave up on further research
Like maybe use the Quickness, Match Practice x1, Attack From Back, and Shot Stopping? To help the GK(s) grow properly? LMK.
And what is the difference in Pace/Acceleration and overall CA gains between these two?
1. 1x Quickness, 1x Match Practice, and 1x Attack Shadow Play
2. 1x Quickness, 1x Match Practice, and 1x Attacking Direct
1.
Sorry I didn't consider how to make the training program take goalkeepers into account
If you only use the training schedule I recommend (such as Quickness, Match Practice x1, Attack x1, and then add a goalkeeper type of training on this basis)
It is very likely that the goalkeeper will not receive the optimal allocation.
2.
My idea is:
There is only one goalkeeper, and his importance is definitely far less than the growth of other non-goalkeepers.
Secondly, based on my tests, "Agility" and "Pace" are also among the most important attributes for goalkeepers.
And this training schedule for "physical" attributes can also greatly enhance goalkeepers' "Agility" and "Pace". All that is needed is to change the primary "additional focus" of goalkeepers to "Agility"
The third reason is that I had other things that interested me, so I didn't continue the test
3.
If you want to quantify it, it's best to directly look at the table I uploaded earlier.
If quantification is not needed but only a rough explanation is required,
Both of these plans are attempts I have made,
aiming to allocate growth as much as possible to the "effective" attribute under the premise of having as few training programs as possible (so that there are fewer injuries).
As for what the "effective" attribute is, you can refer to my other posts It's probably
Pace, Acceleration, Jumping Reach, Dribbling, Work Rate... .
4.
Meanwhile, I will also try to allocate as few attributes as possible to "ineffective" attributes, or attributes that occupy a lot of potential but have poor effects,
such as Decisions, First Touch, even if the cost is to reduce "total growth".
Even if the cost is a reduction in "total growth".
Because the actual rate of growth is closely related to the "difference between potential and current ability", if the growth in the first year is very high but occupies a large amount of ability, the subsequent growth will be greatly slowed down
helioserebus said: Hey, first I would like to thank you muchly for your efforts on doing this research about training phenomena.
My only fear is what happens if our player does not train for specific role & duty and other attributes that highlighted green (which he needs for that role).
I mean that my only worry is that other attributes like finishing, composure, marking, tackling will decrease in time - actually which is what I saw in my save. Should I be worried about this decrease? Because I think and I believe, for example, having a decrease in finishing, composure, technique etc on my STs will effect their scoring performance.
I'll explain the community discussions I've encountered in my memory and what ideas were formed. It might be a bit wordy and lengthy
Core viewpoints and principle explanations
First, let's talk about the core viewpoint
other attributes like finishing, composure, marking, tackling will decrease, Yes
If from the perspective of immersion, those "UI with red, in decline" don't look good, then to solve this problem, you need to add some more diverse training programs, and even to cancel "extra focus" or "double intensity".
And if you can sacrifice the "sense of immersion" to a certain extent and only consider the intensity of the "Meta".
The value of these reduced weak attributes , Is far lower than , the value of the increased strong attributes that you Gain.
Including one of the good valuable attribute "Dribbling", it will also decline in the most extreme training "All rest".
At the same time, since this training schedule minimizes the occupation of unnecessary attributes as much as possible, the gap between your potential and current ability will be relatively larger, and the actual attribute allocation will be faster
Another consideration is to consider selling the player in the short term, so he needs to have a high CA. Or if you want to fully utilize the potential of the players, then it is necessary to adopt "less extreme training and training with increased CA" at the appropriate time point, and not use "full rest" training.
principle explanations
The method I adopted is the "Exclusion method".
It is used to test which attributes are "truly effective", which are "effective but not so strong", which are "just so-so", and which are "approximately ineffective".
Eliminate methods that are difficult to implement in practice // require an extremely large amount of time to achieve, and use actual data to Exclusion those "I think" ideas
1.
First of all, I establish a set of standard attributes, and every player have this attribute.
Under the control of variables, increase or reduce a given of attribute to test the changes in goal difference and winning rate.
Goal difference and win rate represent the effectiveness of this attribute
2.
Then, according to some players' opinions, they believe that attributes are "combined".
That is: Some attributes only have an effect when combined with others to improve together.
Based on the ALL Series of Combinations they provided,
the goal difference and win rate were tested, and no special combinations were found.
From the data results, no magical effect was found that "Attribute A, Attribute B, and Attribute C all require at least xx attributes to take effect. Once they take effect, they produce an extremely significant effect, far exceeding your imagination.
3.
Then, when adding or reducing a single attribute, observe their performance in the statistical data. For instance,
“number of passes, successful passes”
It has been observed that there is indeed an impact, but it is very difficult to infer the performance using statistical data because it is too unintuitive
In addition, there are some attributes that do not directly reflect the statistics that can be found in the game.
For example,if you want to look for the "Heading" attribute, it's obvious that you should look for those items related to heading.
-- But, for example, "Anticipation", it is a useful attribute, but I cannot find out exactly what it corresponds to
4.
Then, another player pointed out to me,
"Your test only used a single tactic, which is unreasonable. Moreover, this tactic is a meta tactic, which is also unreasonable."
Secondly, they believe that
"you should test according to each 'Role' of this' player position 'because each' Role 'requires different attributes."
The third point they think that
each "player position" requires different attributes, and it is not reasonable to apply a general theory to all "player positions"
5.
Based on their ideas,
First of all, I went through the same process with multiple tactics (various preset tactics) and reached almost the same conclusion
(Only the importance of a very few attributes has increased or decreased, and the degree of change is not significant.)
According to the "Exclusion method", since I haven't found a counterexample, I assume it doesn't exist
6.
Secondly, I switched between various "roles". Of course, I didn't test all of them at once; I only tested some representative ones
Similarly, the data does not indicate that they have undergone significant changes
According to the "Exclusion method", since I haven't found a counterexample, I assume it doesn't exist
7.
Thirdly, the test results do indeed reflect that the attributes of some location requirements are different.
But this difference doesn't work as people imagine.
For example,
Example 1: There is a player whose statistics show that he never makes a "Crossing" in any game. However, its "Crossing" attribute does have an impact on the team's goal difference/winning rate
Example 2: The "Finishing" and "Long Shots" of the frontcourt players are indeed more important, but not so important as to contribute to the effect of the entire team. Or rather, a defender who hardly shoots, his "Finishing" and "Long Shots" also contribute to the team 's "shot attempts" and "shot success rate"
Example 3. Under some conditions, the increase of certain attributes of one or more players instead leads to the decline of the team's performance. A typical example is "First Touch".
This represents that to separate out the true effect of "Role", the amount of testing work and knowledge required is much greater than my ability, so I gave up continuing the testing on this point
i made a schedule for this but it isnt showing for whatever reason.
also how would i implement thre training for u21 and u18s
thanks
Could you send a screenshot? It's hard to explain without a picture
baldg22 said: I have a question. do you train players position? or leave it until they are 21
1.
If you are on the player page and select "Position/Role/Duty" under "Development"
You will find that some "highlighted" attributes have been "added"
Its effect is to take away a part of your growth and allocate it to these highlighted attributes.
So when you don't want to "waste" a part of your growth on these "newly added highlighted attributes", then don't choose.
2.
Meanwhile. If "Position" is selected, he can increase "position proficiency".
3.
This creates a contradiction. If you want him to grow optimally, he should not choose "Position".
There are two ways.
One is that you just choose to sacrifice a little of your growth.
Another option is that you can directly control his appearance in matches. In that case, you can have him participate in a large number of actual matches (friendly matches are also fine), place him in the "position" that needs to be practiced, and use matches instead of training to increase "position proficiency".
For example, if I have him play friendly matches twice a week for a whole season, he can basically master his position proficiency to the fullest
4.The younger the age, the fewer positions one can master simultaneously, and the faster one can practice position proficiency
Mantorras77 said: @harvestgreen22 I used Max's (EBFM) Training Test League and ran 20 simulations of a few training schedules including Max's training schedule from FM23 and your latest findings of [Quickness]+[Attacking]+[Match Practice]+[Recovery]x7+[Addtional Focus Quickness].
The test league is set up with just a starting 11. Everyone is 20 years old. All attributes set at 10 including all hidden attributes. Fitness coach of 5 stars, Training Facilities at 5 stars. All 11 players played mostly 30 games but the average attributes increase is significantly less than what you're reporting. With Max's training schedule Im seeing an average increase of CA of 204 points (total of first 11) and with yours im seeing only an average increase of CA of 169 points.
I have yet to check which attributes increased as that will be my next task but i'm curious to know if i'm missing something here or? When I checked your Excel it looked like the average increase per player was 20+ points where in my tests it's more like 15.
Sorry, I was busy with other things a while ago. I'm replying now. It's been 9 months already
I used the same control variables and the same test league at that time.I tested all the training schedules recommended by EBFM and also averaged them multiple times.
When the training schedule is oriented towards "maximizing CA growth", under all the same conditions, I have tested that they are very close (with a difference of less than 5%).
Then I also tried to reduce the EBFM training schedule from being packed for an entire week to just a few sessions, and then roughly set up a training schedule in a way that I thought was close to its allocation model. As a result, the allocation and total growth were also close.
From this result, I think it indicates that superimposing a large number of projects will not increase growth.
I can't find the corresponding data for the time being because all my test data were randomly placed in the folder
Then, if you download the table link I sent earlier, the two training schedules "H21" and "I21" in it should be able to illustrate this point. This table also includes the growth of all attributes
If you can't find the link or it's invalid, I'll upload another one
This point has also been tested by a large number of players in our community.
I think that since they (testers and ordinary users) have not raised any questions (in our forum, the total download volume exceeds ten thousand times),
I guess I've never encountered this situation before, so I'm not sure where the problem either
duxa92 said: Do I need to train role and duty for GK or leave it blank as well as field players?
I haven't considered the goalkeeper and their training. I can't answer this for the time being
AFI said: If my player already have 20 acc and pace, do i change additional focus from quickness ?
Yes, change additional focus
Flourix said: So, what would you do when you have reached a high Pace like 16+ and have points left between the CA/PA? Is it safe to hop off the individual training in Pace for the 2nd most important attribute? Or will this make the player lose the Pace again even though points are left in PA to take from?
Or do you just continue training them in their Pace and the game will automatically assign in other areas?
1.
In my personal opinion, each player is in a different actual situation and needs to make adjustments according to the specific circumstances.
Most of my games are played in medium and low-level leagues, where their potential is limited. So the decisions I made are related to this environment.
If I aim solely at "maximizing combat effectiveness",
I will always adopt the "full rest" approach and only change the additional focus to something else when it's around 19 Pace+19 Acc.
And only when the attributes of the entire team were so high did they finally consider changing the training program to "CA Growth".
2.
In most cases, you don't need to worry about "losing Pace again".
In some extreme cases, for instance, if your player's "Professionalism" is too strong, and he is very young and has a lot of remaining potential, this will cause his growth (redistribution) to be very fast/very strong.
This might lead to, for instance: His Pace and Acc have already reached 20, and then you choose other "additional focuses"
This led him to take away some attributes of Pace and Acc (dropping them to 19) and allocate them to other attributes.
When such a thing happens, all it takes is to adjust his additional focus again.
If you are talking FM26
I had already spent all my time testing non-goalkeepers before , then I successfully got refund when it was just released. So i didn't tested it.
IF you are taking that in FM24
You can search in forum. I've already posted it on the forum.
Generally speaking, the most important attribute is Agility.
There are many other attributes that are also useful. I can't remember them all at once and can't find the table either
My native language is not English. Some of the following content was directly translated by me using a translator
I don't know if anyone has taken this test before. Since I searched for some keywords but couldn't find anything, I guess no one has posted this content
Default setting before test:
1.All players on the Left side use their left foot as the main foot, The non-main foot always = 8
Left Feet = 20 . Right Feet =8
2.All players on the Right side use their right foot as the main foot, The non-main foot always = 8
Left Feet = 8 . Right Feet =20
3.Players on Central axis , Left Feet = 8 . Right Feet =20
4.Some characters in specific positions, such as "Inside Forward", will default to using the foot in the opposite direction as the main foot
Let's analyze the data. There are Average goals scored, Average goals conceded, win rate, loss rate, Average goal difference in the table
I use Average goal difference as the indicator for comparison
-----------------------
Analysis 1. "4231"
Look at tables 1,2,3
1 is the most ideal state, where all players have 20 on both their left and right feet. Its Average goal difference is 44.2
2 is to change non-main foot to 8.
Among all the players,
the players on the left (except Inside Forward as the opposite) all have their left foot as the main foot.
The players on the right (except Inside Forward as the opposite) all use their right foot as the main foot.
Its Average goal difference is 32.1
The overall performance dropped by 44.2-32.1=12.1,
but this value is actually not significant (because increasing the number of non-skilled feet from 8 to 20 would require a very large amount of CA, and the improvement in performance is not much compared to the CA it occupies).
3 is in contrast to 2.
It indicates: In the "Meta 4231" tactic, Inside Forward actually doesn't need opposite feet (the two only differ by 0.7 and can be regarded as having no actual difference).
-----------------------
Analysis 2. "3421"
Look at tables 4,5 and 6
This tactic has 3 BPD, 2 DM, 2 WB, 2 IF and 1 AF
Compare 5 and 6.
The same conclusion: Inside Forward actually doesn't need opposite feet. The difference between the two is only 1.4
-----------------------
Analysis 3. "433"
Look at Tables 7,8 and 9
This tactic has 2 MC and 1 DM
The situation of this tactic is a bit different. Inside Forward performs better when using the main foot in the opposite position
-----------------------
Analysis 4. "4231"
Look at Tables 2,10 and 11
10,11 They replaced "Inside Forward" with "Winger",
and it can be found that "Winger" strongly requires the main foot at the same position
-----------------------
Analysis 5. "433 3st3dm"
Look at Tables 12,13 and 14
This case is about comparing which foot to usefor "Left / Right Pressing Forward".
Conclusion: There is not much difference
-----------------------
Analysis 6. "4231"
Look at Tables 2,15,16 and 17
In 15 The feet of "DL-"Full-Back" and" DR-"Full-Back" were reversed, resulting in a very obvious decline in performance
Conclusion
In 16, the feet of "DMCL-"Defensive Midfielder" and" DMCR-"Defensive Midfielder" were reversed, resulting in a slight decline in performance.
It can be considered that the main feet of DMCL and DMCR in this tactic are not important
In 17 The feet of "DCL-"Ball Playing Defender" and" DCR-"Ball Playing Defender" were reversed. Similarly, a slight decline in performance can be regarded as unimportant . main feet of DCL and DCR in this tactic are not important
-----------------------
Analysis 7. "424"
Look at 18 and 19 in the table
This is an unfinished process. I forgot to continue the test. Originally, I intended to swap the main foot of "Pressing Forward" based on 19.
-----------------------
Analysis 8. "3421"
Look at Table 5,20,21,22
In 20 is to reverse the feet of "WBL- "Wing-back" and" WBR- "Wing-back"
The performance dropped significantly, from 39.1 to 29.7.
Conclusion: In this tactic, WBL and WBR strongly need to use the main feet in the same position
In 21 is reversing the feet of "DMCL-"Defensive Midfielder" and" DMCR-"Defensive Midfielder",
The performance is approximately unchanged
Conclusion: In this tactic,the main feet of DMCL and DMCR have no impact
In 22 is to reverse the feet of "DCL-"Ball Playing Defender" and" DCR-"Ball Playing Defender"
The performance has dropped significantly
Conclusion: In this tactic, DCL and DCR need to use the main feet in the same position
-----------------------
Note that in order to control the variables, I only changed the foot of one type position each time.
I didn't try to combine multiple situations
-----------------------
Based on the summary of the test results
1. In most of the tactics tested, "Inside Forward" doesn't care which foot is used.
(The only exception is the example of "433 2cm 1dm" . But the impact here is not significant)
2."Winger", it is extremely necessary for the player's main foot to be on the same side as his position
3. "Pressing Forward" doesn't matter which foot is used
4. In 4231, "DL/DR" always requires the player's main foot to be on the same side as his position, which has a very very significant impact
5. In 4231, the feet of "DM and DC" have some influence, but the influence is small
6. In 3421, "DM" has no effect.
"DCL/DCR" has a significant impact and requires that the player's main foot be on the same side as his position.
7. In 3421, "WB" requires that the player's main foot be on the same side as his position , which has a very very significant impact
It should be posted in "Guides, Researches and Hints for Football Manager"
If the administrator sees it, help me delete this post and I repost it over there
1. In most of the tactics tested, "Inside Forward" doesn't care which foot is used.
(The only exception is the example of "433 2cm 1dm" . But the impact here is not significant)
2."Winger", it is extremely necessary for the player's main foot to be on the same side as his position
3. "Pressing Forward" doesn't matter which foot is used
4. In 4231, "DL/DR" always requires the player's main foot to be on the same side as his position, which has a very very significant impact
5. In 4231, the feet of DM and DC have some influence, but the influence is small
6. In 3421, DM has no effect.
DCL/DCR has a significant impact and requires that the player's main foot be on the same side as his position.
7. In 3421, WB requires that the player's main foot be on the same side as his position , which has a very very significant impact
My native language is not English. Some of the following content was directly translated by me using a translator
I don't know if anyone has taken this test before. Since I searched for some keywords but couldn't find anything, I guess no one has posted this content
Default setting before test:
1.All players on the Left side use their left foot as the main foot, The non-main foot always = 8
Left Feet = 20 . Right Feet =8
2.All players on the Right side use their right foot as the main foot, The non-main foot always = 8
Left Feet = 8 . Right Feet =20
3.Players on Central axis , Left Feet = 8 . Right Feet =20
4.Some characters in specific positions, such as "Inside Forward", will default to using the foot in the opposite direction as the main foot
Let's analyze the data. There are Average goals scored, Average goals conceded, win rate, loss rate, Average goal difference in the table
I use Average goal difference as the indicator for comparison
-----------------------
Analysis 1. "4231"
Look at tables 1,2,3
1 is the most ideal state, where all players have 20 on both their left and right feet. Its Average goal difference is 44.2
2 is to change non-main foot to 8.
Among all the players,
the players on the left (except Inside Forward as the opposite) all have their left foot as the main foot.
The players on the right (except Inside Forward as the opposite) all use their right foot as the main foot.
Its Average goal difference is 32.1
The overall performance dropped by 44.2-32.1=12.1,
but this value is actually not significant (because increasing the number of non-skilled feet from 8 to 20 would require a very large amount of CA, and the improvement in performance is not much compared to the CA it occupies).
3 is in contrast to 2.
It indicates: In the "Meta 4231" tactic, Inside Forward actually doesn't need opposite feet (the two only differ by 0.7 and can be regarded as having no actual difference).
-----------------------
Analysis 2. "3421"
Look at tables 4,5 and 6
This tactic has 3 BPD, 2 DM, 2 WB, 2 IF and 1 AF
Compare 5 and 6.
The same conclusion: Inside Forward actually doesn't need opposite feet. The difference between the two is only 1.4
-----------------------
Analysis 3. "433"
Look at Tables 7,8 and 9
This tactic has 2 MC and 1 DM
The situation of this tactic is a bit different. Inside Forward performs better when using the main foot in the opposite position
-----------------------
Analysis 4. "4231"
Look at Tables 2,10 and 11
10,11 They replaced "Inside Forward" with "Winger",
and it can be found that "Winger" strongly requires the main foot at the same position
-----------------------
Analysis 5. "433 3st3dm"
Look at Tables 12,13 and 14
This case is about comparing which foot to usefor "Left / Right Pressing Forward".
Conclusion: There is not much difference
-----------------------
Analysis 6. "4231"
Look at Tables 2,15,16 and 17
In 15 The feet of "DL-"Full-Back" and" DR-"Full-Back" were reversed, resulting in a very obvious decline in performance
Conclusion
In 16, the feet of "DMCL-"Defensive Midfielder" and" DMCR-"Defensive Midfielder" were reversed, resulting in a slight decline in performance.
It can be considered that the main feet of DMCL and DMCR in this tactic are not important
In 17 The feet of "DCL-"Ball Playing Defender" and" DCR-"Ball Playing Defender" were reversed. Similarly, a slight decline in performance can be regarded as unimportant . main feet of DCL and DCR in this tactic are not important
-----------------------
Analysis 7. "424"
Look at 18 and 19 in the table
This is an unfinished process. I forgot to continue the test. Originally, I intended to swap the main foot of "Pressing Forward" based on 19.
-----------------------
Analysis 8. "3421"
Look at Table 5,20,21,22
In 20 is to reverse the feet of "WBL- "Wing-back" and" WBR- "Wing-back"
The performance dropped significantly, from 39.1 to 29.7.
Conclusion: In this tactic, WBL and WBR strongly need to use the main feet in the same position
In 21 is reversing the feet of "DMCL-"Defensive Midfielder" and" DMCR-"Defensive Midfielder",
The performance is approximately unchanged
Conclusion: In this tactic,the main feet of DMCL and DMCR have no impact
In 22 is to reverse the feet of "DCL-"Ball Playing Defender" and" DCR-"Ball Playing Defender"
The performance has dropped significantly
Conclusion: In this tactic, DCL and DCR need to use the main feet in the same position
-----------------------
Note that in order to control the variables, I only changed the foot of one type position each time.
I didn't try to combine multiple situations
@harvestgreen22
@Gerrard
You guys (or gals) have tested things WAY more than the average Joe. Your inputs on this might help MANY players better understand their favorite games. As I also saw many people getting disenchanted with the ME, while I feel all of your findings are not as damning as it seems.
“If attributes testing are done with a "meta tactic" (which is wide/fast/gegenpress-heavy), then maybe we are actually skewing our perception of attributes importance toward physical a lot”
——In fact, I have also conducted tests in other tactics .Not Meta tactics , It's the preset tactics .
The conclusion is basically the same (some minor attributes have slightly change , but the overall situation remains unchanged).
Since my native language is not English,
It's too troublesome for me to organize these things and translate them into English.
So I only posted the result under the condition of the Gegenpress Meta tactic (which is also the type of tactic used by most casual players).
what do you think about the find that CA can win games? as mentioned i increased my player’s CA and PA (but not the attributes) directly before a match (so that everything stayed unchanged) and suddenly i started winning against the same team I always lost against (reloaded a savegame many times)
it would mean that mental and technical attributes can make a difference because the game assigns CA to them.
maybe this is sports interactives trick to make attributes matter - even if they cannot show things like passing in the match engine (pace / acceleration are very easy to show in the match engine) they just generally change the odds of winning 😀
that’s why i made another small experiment, i gave a player a 20 in passing/technique/vision/flair and compared this to him having a 1 in these attributes. My team won more games because of higher CA but the “passing match stats” like “passes completed” or “key passes” did not change at all
I successfully refunded the FM26, so I can't continue to study it
1. Your guess might be right. I haven't conducted this test (under the condition that the attribute lock remains unchanged —— only changing the CA to observe if there are any changes in the result).
2. Under appropriate circumstances, the effects of technical and mental attributes (multivariable combinations) are positive. But in some other cases, they inhibit each other.
For Example, a certain attribute is best when it is of medium , and second best when it is of high , worst in low . increase it from 1 to 20 , It did enhance its performance, but its best performance might be around 10
Because these combinations are too complex, players cannot control them. So I think it's enough to roughly know which ones are strong and which ones are weak.
3. We all know that strong attributes do not necessarily consume more CA.
Weak attributes do not necessarily consume less CA.
For instance, "Decisions" occupies a lot of CA in all positions, but the effect is very poor
4. Therefore, CA cannot fully represent the strength of the players.
However, it cannot be ruled out that , For exactly the same attributes, if there are different ca, due to the calculations of the game engine, there may be different performances.
5. I have posted about my gaming career twice on our Chinese forum/video website for some time before.
One of them was to use a second-tier league team from China to replace the Maltese league through mod, thus being able to participate in the UEFA Champions League.
Then I look for randomly generated virtual young Chinese players.
Because the Chinese "youth training score" in the game is only 60 (very low).
The average PA of randomly generated virtual players is basically 60 to 70.
I used "full rest training", and several years later, the players were all at about 20 Pace and 20 Acceleration. However, their other attributes, such as the technical category, are very poor.
6. The result was great: the game started in 2023. Win the UEFA Champions League titles in 2026,2027,2028,2029 and 2030. The champion of the 2030 World Cup.
Some of our players once thought it was an impossible challenge.
The final average CA is only around 70 to 75. The strong opponents usually have a CA of around 170. This CA with 100 less still won all the way.
I use one of the good tactics and set-piece tactics from FM-arena. This makes a certain contribution ( Outside the contribution of attributes )
but it can also prove to some extent that this theory can be applied to actual games
(Even with such a poor PA and such a low-priced player, one can still pass one of the most difficult challenges in the game).
and sorry if that has been asked before, but it seems you isolated attributes that should work in a bundle, for example passing needs passing+technique+vision+decisions to be effective. same like marking needs strength, pace, anticipation etc. to succeed.
do you think that this could make a difference?
I have studied this issue together with other players and I hope to explain it in the simplest possible way.
It's probably like this:
1.
Normally speaking,
Positive plus positive, it's impossible to get negative.
2.
Separately increase the values of A, B, C, and D, and the winning rate will increase
3.
Now, add A, B, C and D "simultaneously"
In some combinations, the winning rate did not increase significantly
In some other combinations, the winning rate even decreased (that is, it became negative).
4.
Under normal logic, some attributes should "interact and promote each other", generating an effect where 1+1 is greater than 2 , 1+1+1 >3
Now, under specific testing conditions, the test obtained a completely illogical result: 1+1+1<0
( like " passing+technique+vision+decisions "
Due to time constraints, I can't spend an unlimited amount of time going through all conditions and thoroughly understanding them.
And there must be a reason for its emergence
5.
This is not an isolated case; rather, many attributes are like this
Here it refers to the combination of "technical type and technical type attributes" and "technical type and spiritual type attributes".
The "physical type attributes" currently all seem to be completely positive.
6. My personal theory is what was mentioned in the previous post.
Technical type and spiritual type attributes , They simultaneously represent "success rate" and "tendency/behavioral positivity".
The latter may have negative effects, and sometimes the negative impact is so great that the increase in success rate is not enough to make up for it.
7. There are also some other new results (not on the same topic as this one or this post) that were developed by other players through unpacking.
What they mean is "Don't tell foreigners" (because they are afraid of bearing legal responsibility as unpacking), so it only spreads internally
Because I was too busy, I didn't study what they wrote. Their conclusion was roughly: the attribute , penalty taking ，Free Kick，is ineffective ， The success rate (expected goals) is calculated and random based on some fixed parameters
I have done my best, but I am not competent enough. So I can only turn to everyone for help
Since the FM24 save is compatible with FM26, I plan to edit the test league with FM24 so that others in our player community can use this test save to test the content of their FM24 or FM26.
I searched on the forum and only found one test league of dzek
https://fm-arena.com/thread/8679-anyone-interested-in-downloading-my-test-league/
The online search didn't yield good results
(their test league didn't meet the requirements or there was a paywall).
while our player community has a strong demand for testing tactics, but lacks the necessary tools
dzek 's testing league
Goods:
1.In one-on-one matches between player teams and AI teams, there will be no mutual matches, which saves the amount of computation and the time required for operation
2.The coach of AI will not be fired because they are set to transfer to other teams 100 years later
(My understanding is like this. I don't know if i am wrong.)
Since they already have transfer contracts, it seems that they won't be fired due to the team's poor performance.
Bads:
1.I need the head coach to maintain their "information" and "Formations/Tendencies" information
However, dzek's test league removed "Formations/Tendencies"
2.FMRTE can not add "Tendencies" , once deleted i can't add it back in FMRTE
3.If I want to restore the "Formations/Tendencies" of the original AI coach, I need to find another coach and change his "Formations/Tendencies" to that of the original coach. Then let this new coach take office.
4.But the new coach will/sometimes be fired halfway due to the team's poor performance.
If the coach is replaced by a random new one, it will cause some disturbance to the test results
5.This led to the tests not being able to proceed until the end of the season (testing end in mid of year before any coach fired)
Requirement:
1.The head coach of AI will not be fired, so many matches can be tested at once
2. The head coach can keep the original "Formations/Tendencies" and "information" in the game (so don't change them at will).
Or, it has been changed, but not "all deleted", so I can restore them to their original state in the game in FMRTE (FMRTE cannot add Tendencies, but it can modify).
3. Player teams should play one-on-one against 10 to 15 world-renowned coaches.
This way, there is a large enough sample size, and it won't take a long time to run a season due to an excessive amount of data
4.As for the attributes set for both teams' players, this can be changed according to every one's own needs (Whether it is a real player or a custom player with the same attributes). FMRTE can modify it .So it doesn't matter
I have been testing the game for over 40 hours (which is more than the normal 2 hours max to refund). I applied for a refund yesterday. I don't know if it will really succeed
I tested hidden attributes in FM24 , and also attributes in different tactics (not just Gegenpressing).
I didn't test on FM26 because it was too troublesome to convert the testing save from FM24 to FM26.
(I knew that FMRTE-26 was on sale today, but it wasn't available when I was testing.)
I'm trying to refund FM26. If the refund is successful, I won't test it anymore.
If the refund fails, I might test it when I have time
I don't know what genie scout weights is. I haven't used it
A cleaner table interface
Use "Football Manager 2024 Resource Archiver" to unzip the file , and compare it with software in Binary.
Result: They are exactly the same, with only one config.xml having a 3-byte difference (format changes, content remains the same)
2.How I do attribute tests
https://fm-arena.com/thread/8679-anyone-interested-in-downloading-my-test-league/
DZEK's test league
In the fm24 test, I selected 15 AI coaches, while in fm26, to save time, I only chose 5
PEP GUARDIOLA (fm24 Manchester City)
ERIK TEN HAG (fm24 Manchester United)
MIKEL ARTETA (fm24 Arsenal)
KLOPP (fm24 Liverpool Football Club)
MAURICIO POCHETTINO (fm24 Chelsea)
As I mentioned before, the "formations/tendencies" of the head coach have a considerable influence and cannot be ignored.
However, the original test league of DZEK cleared out the "formations/tendencies" of many coaches.
Since FMRTE cannot add new tendencies,
I had to find some other head coaches, import the attributes of the required head coaches, and then modify "formations/tendencies" to the head coach to be simulated
（This has brought about another problem. The original head coaches of the DZEK test league were set to transfer 100 years later, so these head coaches will not be dismissed.
I don't know how to set it so that I won't be fired, and I don't know how to use an editor
And my new coach after the change will have the opportunity to be dismissed in the middle of the year.
Therefore, I had to test only until June 1st）
Then, in order to demonstrate the influence degree of different range attributes as much as possible, I adjusted the attributes of all the players to this
3.Result
I use the save of fm24 to import fm26.
Due to the absence of FMRTE, some variables cannot be locked, so there will inevitably be some errors In statistics .
more accuracy need to wait for FMRTE, but I can't wait any longer. I plan to get a refund after test (UI issue).
I have tested each situation 645 matchs or more
What do these tables mean?
Table 1.a is "Increase that attribute of the player's player to 18." How much has the winning rate changed?
Table 1.b is "Increase that attribute of the player's player to 18." How much has the goal difference changed?
Table 2.a is "Reduce that attribute of the player's player to 1." How much has the winning rate changed?
Table 2.b is "Reduce that attribute of the player's player to 1." How much has the goal difference changed?
Table 3.a , 3.b ,This table is the difference between the previous two tables , It can be directly used to estimate the overall validity of the entire attribute".
Theoretically, this could be more refined, for instance, attributes could be divided into 1-4,4-8,8-12... However, to save time, I only made two sections
4.Give a few examples:
Acceleration:
The initial attributes of Acceleration of the opponent and the player are 12.
During the test, change the Acceleration of the player's player to 18
The result is winning rate increased by+31.6%, Record it in Table 1.a
Re-read the original test league
During the test, change the Acceleration of the player's player to 1
The result is winning rate increased by -45.9%, Record it in Table 1.b
Acceleration From 12 to 18, the result has improved (+31.6%).
Acceleration From 12 to 1, the result gets bad (-45.9%).
Therefore, it is an attribute that the higher, the better.
Fill in their differences in Table 3.a, and the result is 31.6%-(-45.9%)=77.5%
Use this value to measure its importance
5.Crossing:
The initial attributes of Crossing of the opponent and the player are 12.
During the test, change the Crossing of the player's player to 18
The result is winning rate increased by+7.1%, Record it in Table 1.a
Re-read the original test league
During the test, change the Crossing of the player's player to 1
The result is winning rate increased by +2.8%, Record it in Table 1.b
Crossing From 12 to 18, the result has improved (+7.1%).
Crossing From 12 to 1, the result has improved (+2.8%).
Therefore, it is Not an attribute that the higher, the better.
It performs better when it is "high attribute" or "low attribute" than when it is "medium attribute"
Fill in their differences in Table 3.a, and the result is 7.1%-(2.8%)=4.3%
Use this value to measure its importance
6.Decisions:
The initial attributes of Decisions of the opponent and the player are 12.
During the test, change the Decisions of the player's player to 18
The result is winning rate increased by-2.3%, Record it in Table 1.a
Re-read the original test league
During the test, change the Decisions of the player's player to 1
The result is winning rate increased by -4.7%, Record it in Table 1.b
Decisions From 12 to 18, the result gets bad (-2.3%).
Decisions From 12 to 1, the result gets bad (-4.7%).
Therefore, it is Not an attribute that the higher, the better.
It is best when it is "medium attributes". Raising or lowering it will both reduce performance
Fill in their differences in Table 3.a, and the result is -2.3%-(-4.7%)=2.3%
Use this value to measure its importance
7.Summary
Pace and Acceleration ,
It remains the most important attribute. However, due to the enhancement of other attributes, their dominance is not as absolute as that of fm24
Finishing , Long Shots , Agility ,
It has been significantly enhanced (compared to fm24) . "Finishing" has been approximately enhanced by 2 times. "Long Shots" has been approximately enhanced by 3 times.
Work Rate ,
It is very similar to the characteristics of fm24. The period from 1 to 12 has a very significant impact. It can be inferred that it must have more than 6 points; otherwise, it will greatly drag down the team's performance .On fm26 , Its importance has slightly declined .
Jumping Reach
Compared with fm24, it has been slightly enhanced
Concentration ，Composure
Compared with fm24, "Composure " has been approximately enhanced by 2 times.
Concentration , Its importance has also been slightly enhanced
Stamina , Strength
Stamina Decline in importance
Strength Increased in importance
Aggression , Determination
Increased in importance
If I were to give a ranking of importance:
1.Pace , Acceleration
2.Work Rate ,Jumping Reach , Agility
3.Finishing ,Dribbling , Concentration
4.Anticipation , Composure , Long Shots , Determination
5.Balance , Strength , Stamina , Aggression
All other attributes can be ignored
8.Position proficiency
FM26 has added a two-stage tactic of "with the ball and without the ball"
I only tested one set of situations. Suppose, use preset "fluid counter attack" 424/442
For 424/442
In the "without ball phase", Right /Left winger needs to change to Right /Left Midfielder
I changed the Right /Left Midfielder position proficiency of these two players to 5 (the maximum is 20).
This led to a 13 drop in goal difference , and a 6% decrease in winning rate
This indicates that if players want to play in different formations in the two stages, their players need to have all the proficiency in the corresponding positions
8.About fm26
I think the UI is too bad, and there are no plans for major changes to it for a foreseeable long time
I couldn't accept this UI, so I applied for a refund
I spent 40 hours in the test and then played for several more hours. I don't know if I can get a refund successfully