flob said: Okay thanks! As I don't know how to do that 2nd part, I guess I will just ignore the comments then. May I ask, as a follow up question, do you take control of the other teams like U21 and U18 and use the same training schedules? Or do you leave all that standard and to the assistant? Expand
If I think there are players who need special separation, I choose to take over the U18/U21 training and then put them on a different training schedule.
You can also decide if you want to do this according to your preference
Footballenjoyer said: So you actually get more CA increase from not having any coaches at all in the
Can you please reupload the imgur link since it's dead.
The result from age change shouldn't be too surprising since developers have always said younger players develop faster.
So beside the obvious 4 (strength, quickness, shot stopping, Possession Technical) Should we assign coaches to Defending tatical (concentration) and/or Possession Tactical (Anticipation) Expand
flob said: @harvestgreen22 Do you maybe have a thought/idea on players complaining about training in general like the screenshot I posted a copple days ago in this topic? Do you not have this issue? If so, which training schedule do you use then if I may ask? Expand
They would 100% complain, and then I would ignore them. My feeling is that these complaints won't have a big impact on morale
If you want to have no complaints, you have to give the responsibility to the Assistant. Then, set up the training plan and individual training. Select "Only once" when setting up. This way, it looks like the Assistant is in charge, but you're actually in control. But NPCS don't complain about NPC , so they have no complaints at all
https://imgur.com/a/YZRx9Iv Compare M10 and Z10, To my great surprise Test conditions, Change From age 20, to age 17,
CA increased from 20s to 30s per season, Physical attributes, no proportional increase, And this part of the increase in CA is basically technical and mental.
Han106 said: I just thought of this what if you setup up your coaches where they are 5 stars in Quickness/Strength and Possession Technical and 1 star everywhere else, can you handicap the growth in the bad attributes? @harvestgreen22 Expand
coaches where they are 5 stars in Quickness/Strength and Possession Technical and 1 star everywhere else = B11
https://imgur.com/a/YZRx9Iv Compare M10 and Z10, To my great surprise Test conditions, Change From age 20, to age 17,
CA increased from 20s to 30s per season, Physical attributes, no proportional increase, And this part of the increase in CA is basically technical and mental.
Pabsquatch said: Quick question. On Z8, wouldn't it be better to train defensive shadow play instead of attacking shadow play, since defensive trains both anticipation and concentration at 60%. Since no other training requiers an attacking unit, you can move every player to the defensive unit. Expand
This is ok optional, Z8,
Sometimes I put so much emphasis on reducing the "Number of training required per week" that I overlook some effects, So I picked a "3 training per week", You can choose as you like
caffeiner said: I did some tests with flair but didn't really notice a negative correlation. 4 team league, teams B, C, D have all players with 20 in all normal attributes. Team A players have everything on 20 except flair, which is on 1. All attributes are frozen (this means that the attributes stay on the same level all season). All players are proficient in all positions. The formation used was a 4-1-1-3-1, for all teams (FB (De), CD (De), DM (Su), CM (Su), W (At), AM (Su), AF (At)).
I ran 10 seasons (the first season 10 times, to be precise). Team A won the league twice, got third a couple of times and second a couple too. The goal difference wasn't really relevant either: 19, 15, -6,-1, -16, -10, -2, 15, -6, 12.
Didn't test combinations or other attributes, though.
Of course, 10 seasons amounts to a very small number of matches in a league with 4 teams (300 matches per team), so more testing is surely required. Expand
Thank you. If I have time I'll keep expanding the sample to see if it's random, if it's due to certain conditions, or if it's true
Han106 said: I just thought of this what if you setup up your coaches where they are 5 stars in Quickness/Strength and Possession Technical and 1 star everywhere else, can you handicap the growth in the bad attributes? @harvestgreen22 Expand
I hadn't thought of it that way. It's a novel idea. I'll try it out when I have time
gideon101 said: I can understand using one of these training methods for the youth teams, but on my first team there are a couple training I would want to use that aren't stricly for development, like set piece routines for increasing set piece familarity and team bonding/community outreach for morale. Would it screw up the training to add those for the first team?
Also, for what is the intensity rating for each level of tiredness in the experiments? It's not clear in the data, even when double intensity+ is written. Expand
If you're worried All-rest it's too extreme, you can adopt it instead “[Quickness]+[Attacking Shadow Play]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]+[Double Intensity]” Add moderate levels of CA, moderate proportions of Pace and other attributes
Or “[Quickness]+[Match Practice]+[Recovery]x7+[Attacking]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]+[Double Intensity]” Add large levels increase in CA, Pace and other key attributes has a relatively small proportion but also a high growth
[Double Intensity] in the table picture ==“Training Intensity Scheduling”set："no pitch，no pitch，no pitch，Double Intensity，Double Intensity"
thank you and Your information Some community players speculate: Whether higher Technique/Flair in specific positions (e.g., midfield, or defenders) has led to a drop in overall goal difference, or whether it has an effect in all positions,
bigloser said: In the control group did you lower their technique? By default nearly all the Man City players have over 10 technique so you wouldn't be able to raise it by 10.
In the Machine Learning weights technique was only moderately weighted high on DM(RPM), AMC, ST. One theory is it's bad to have defenders with high technique/flair. The attribute table from 2022 is basically the same as today.
Or another is technique (decisions/vision/passing?) is related to the success of certain traits like tries killer passes/curls ball/round the keeper/shoots with power/places shots/etc. And you would need said traits to get any benefit. But that doesn't explain why it's negative as you would expect it to be neutral. In the Man City example Haaland only has "tries first time shots" related to technique. This is the only thing I can think of.
The most likely scenario is technique was good at some point in previous editions but other changes made in the engine over the years has unintentionally made it bad. Expand
——did you lower their technique no. + 10, if + 10 and result greater than 20, then = 20 (This means that the average actual increase is less than 10.)
I am busy now , I will try other conditions when I am free.
2. Now, there are four Manchester City replicants Manchester City's players are already at the top of the game, Their ability is high , so It is impossible not high enough to support "high Flair " or "high Technique".
They use the same formation, Default 433 ball control Tactics, Team A's starting morale is a little bit higher, This is used to increase the degree of differentiation and avoid mixing the data together
Each person also has attributes corresponding to their duties according to their position, It didn't say that the attributes didn't match his duties, his position, his role
14.6/12.3≈120% There's always higher variance to higher Flair , Which means Flair's true meaning may be "unexpectedness." it causes both unexpected good and unexpected bad, But the average goal difference has gone down
As for Technique , since its Goal difference from the standard is negative, it is a negative attribute
3.Four teams of Manchester United replicants
Number of test match: 900 Also exactly replicating in-game player attributes. Standard Group : Goal Difference =4.1, variance =16.4 Flair +10: Goal difference =2.7, variance =19.3
19.3/16.4≈118% They use the same formation, Default 442 defend Tactics, The technique is also below Standard ,Under different conditions, higher Flair shows higher variance , higher Flair and higher technique show lower Goal Difference
So, I'm guessing now, Flair and Technique are negative attributes , Flair is "unexpectedness."
sylekta said: V7 vs H8 seems strange, is there enough sample size? Why does +2 recovery sessions make it better? Expand
I don't know why it happened.
The sample size is not large enough, 4 seasons, but the error is not that large (Yes, there is a slight error, but it takes me a lot of time to test too many.)
RFC said: Apologies in advance as there is a lot of big brain thinking that's going over my head.
If I'm following, the training is based on what we currently think the best attributes are right?
Most of them make sense to me - priority in getting to the ball through pace and acceleration when it's on the deck and jumping reach when it's in the air.
Even Goalkeepers follow a similar logic, Agility to move in the right direction, Reflexes to get there and Arial Ability to be able to reach.
The other physicals like balance and agility factor in essentially to turn/change momentum and the mental like anticipation to start moving in the right direction before it's time to apply the physicals.
If my understanding here is right, and I get that's a big if, the one that's throwing me is Work Rate.
That should help all the physical and mental in so far as it's how often the player attempts to move towards the ball
The revelation that anything after 10 on Work Rate has diminished returns makes me wonder if this is explicitly tied to Stamina.
Like if a players Stamina can't keep up with their Work Rate as suggested by the in-game prompts, does too high a Work Rate turn out to be a bad thing?
Is there a way to re-test Work Rate where Stamina is increased at the same rate to see if that has any impact on the importance of Work Rate? Expand
I can test it when I have time,
And，similar other attributes, such as Finishing, Technique, Flair, etc., about 12 attributes. Recently, i've done a lot of tests sample . it show that their conclusions (Importance ranking) are the same as in the "all 10 attributes" case, The test uses "Manchester City replicators team x4", so these players have attributes assigned to the roles/positions/responsibilities they should have , And has one of the best enough technical/mental/physical attributes in the game to execution tactics
Stryfe002 said: Thank you for doing this in-depth type testing. Big fan!
I have been testing V7 with 2 matches, and doing well, but my questions are:
Should I pay any attention to when my coaches think the player will no longer benefit or are not showing any improvement using focused Quickness? Or is just in-game coach programming non-sense?
Is there an age that we should generally stop using it as the focus? Expand
focus : I think it can be used at any time. Because it just means a "super stats weight distributor." If you're missing something, use it to add weight, For example, to strengthen the parts that are already strong, Or supplement the weak parts,
If the player is old and he 's stats starts to decline, then distribution actually means that you choose which attributes of him to keep off from declining. In this case, a "super weight allocator" is also useful
Graz said: Mentoring can change - also with Professionalism. Have you or the community looked at Mentoring in more detail? Expand
I'm a new player, I probably knew that Mentoring could do it, but I hadn't tried it
Then I mean, the training schedule provides the attributes for growth. (Mentoring not included） I looked at a couple of test cases where their Determination didn't grow.
If I think there are players who need special separation, I choose to take over the U18/U21 training and then put them on a different training schedule.
You can also decide if you want to do this according to your preference
Footballenjoyer said: So you actually get more CA increase from not having any coaches at all in the
Can you please reupload the imgur link since it's dead.
The result from age change shouldn't be too surprising since developers have always said younger players develop faster.
So beside the obvious 4 (strength, quickness, shot stopping, Possession Technical) Should we assign coaches to Defending tatical (concentration) and/or Possession Tactical (Anticipation)
https://pixeldrain.com/u/a2ht7fuS
I reuploaded the picture to another web disk
They would 100% complain, and then I would ignore them.
My feeling is that these complaints won't have a big impact on morale
If you want to have no complaints, you have to give the responsibility to the Assistant.
Then, set up the training plan and individual training. Select "Only once" when setting up.
This way, it looks like the Assistant is in charge, but you're actually in control.
But NPCS don't complain about NPC , so they have no complaints at all
don't assign coaches in those categories = Y10
https://imgur.com/a/YZRx9Iv
Compare M10 and Z10,
To my great surprise
Test conditions,
Change From age 20, to age 17,
CA increased from 20s to 30s per season,
Physical attributes, no proportional increase,
And this part of the increase in CA is basically technical and mental.
coaches where they are 5 stars in Quickness/Strength and Possession Technical and 1 star everywhere else = B11
https://imgur.com/a/YZRx9Iv
Compare M10 and Z10,
To my great surprise
Test conditions,
Change From age 20, to age 17,
CA increased from 20s to 30s per season,
Physical attributes, no proportional increase,
And this part of the increase in CA is basically technical and mental.
This is ok optional, Z8,
Sometimes I put so much emphasis on reducing the "Number of training required per week" that I overlook some effects, So I picked a "3 training per week",
You can choose as you like
It was scattered, because I also randomly put together some training schedules in my free time, and I didn't think about anything
4 team league, teams B, C, D have all players with 20 in all normal attributes. Team A players have everything on 20 except flair, which is on 1. All attributes are frozen (this means that the attributes stay on the same level all season). All players are proficient in all positions. The formation used was a 4-1-1-3-1, for all teams (FB (De), CD (De), DM (Su), CM (Su), W (At), AM (Su), AF (At)).
I ran 10 seasons (the first season 10 times, to be precise). Team A won the league twice, got third a couple of times and second a couple too. The goal difference wasn't really relevant either: 19, 15, -6,-1, -16, -10, -2, 15, -6, 12.
Didn't test combinations or other attributes, though.
Of course, 10 seasons amounts to a very small number of matches in a league with 4 teams (300 matches per team), so more testing is surely required.
Thank you. If I have time I'll keep expanding the sample to see if it's random, if it's due to certain conditions, or if it's true
I hadn't thought of it that way. It's a novel idea. I'll try it out when I have time
I hadn't thought of it that way. It's a novel idea. I'll try it out when I have time
Also, for what is the intensity rating for each level of tiredness in the experiments? It's not clear in the data, even when double intensity+ is written.
If you're worried All-rest it's too extreme, you can adopt it instead
“[Quickness]+[Attacking Shadow Play]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]+[Double Intensity]”
Add moderate levels of CA, moderate proportions of Pace and other attributes
Or
“[Quickness]+[Match Practice]+[Recovery]x7+[Attacking]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]+[Double Intensity]”
Add large levels increase in CA, Pace and other key attributes has a relatively small proportion but also a high growth
[Double Intensity] in the table picture
==“Training Intensity Scheduling”set："no pitch，no pitch，no pitch，Double Intensity，Double Intensity"
Some community players speculate:
Whether higher Technique/Flair in specific positions (e.g., midfield, or defenders) has led to a drop in overall goal difference, or whether it has an effect in all positions,
In the Machine Learning weights technique was only moderately weighted high on DM(RPM), AMC, ST. One theory is it's bad to have defenders with high technique/flair. The attribute table from 2022 is basically the same as today.
Or another is technique (decisions/vision/passing?) is related to the success of certain traits like tries killer passes/curls ball/round the keeper/shoots with power/places shots/etc. And you would need said traits to get any benefit. But that doesn't explain why it's negative as you would expect it to be neutral. In the Man City example Haaland only has "tries first time shots" related to technique. This is the only thing I can think of.
The most likely scenario is technique was good at some point in previous editions but other changes made in the engine over the years has unintentionally made it bad.
——did you lower their technique
no.
+ 10, if + 10 and result greater than 20, then = 20 (This means that the average actual increase is less than 10.)
I am busy now , I will try other conditions when I am free.
How good his technique and ball control is
(how comfortable he is on the ball).
Flair (absolute-mental)
How likely he is to try the unexpected."
I use two data points ,
Goal difference
and
variance (statistical language)
1.In the last test (last post),
all 10 attributes , Goal difference =20.1 , variance =17.8
Increase Flair to 20 , Goal difference =16.9 , variance =24.5
Increase technique to 20 , Goal difference =16.5 , variance =17.4
2.
Now, there are four Manchester City replicants
Manchester City's players are already at the top of the game,
Their ability is high , so It is impossible not high enough to support "high Flair " or "high Technique".
They use the same formation, Default 433 ball control Tactics,
Team A's starting morale is a little bit higher, This is used to increase the degree of differentiation and avoid mixing the data together
Each person also has attributes corresponding to their duties according to their position,
It didn't say that the attributes didn't match his duties, his position, his role
Number of test match: 3800
Standard Group : Goal Difference =4.3, variance =12.3
Flair +10: Goal difference =3.3, variance =14.6
Technique +10: Goal difference =-0.1, variance =9.7
14.6/12.3≈120%
There's always higher variance to higher Flair , Which means Flair's true meaning may be "unexpectedness."
it causes both unexpected good and unexpected bad,
But the average goal difference has gone down
As for Technique , since its Goal difference from the standard is negative, it is a negative attribute
3.Four teams of Manchester United replicants
Number of test match: 900
Also exactly replicating in-game player attributes.
Standard Group : Goal Difference =4.1, variance =16.4
Flair +10: Goal difference =2.7, variance =19.3
19.3/16.4≈118%
They use the same formation, Default 442 defend Tactics,
The technique is also below Standard ,Under different conditions, higher Flair shows higher variance , higher Flair and higher technique show lower Goal Difference
So, I'm guessing now, Flair and Technique are negative attributes , Flair is "unexpectedness."
https://imgur.com/a/NZI5B31
updated few things
With limited free time, I just randomly tried new things and included more attributes in the table
Then, [all defend team]
and
[all attack team]
That means putting all 10 players on an attack or defend team
By default, there are 5 front-court players in attack team and 5 back-court players in defend team
[all defend team]+[Quickness]+[Defensive Shadow Play]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]+[Double Intensity]
[all defend team]+[Quickness]+[Attacking Shadow Play]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]+[Double Intensity]
[all attack team]+[Quickness]+[Match Practice]+[Recovery]x7+[attacking Direct]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]+[Double Intensity]
They're acting strange
compare to
[Quickness]+[Defensive Shadow Play]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]+[Double Intensity]
[Quickness]+[Attacking Shadow Play]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]+[Double Intensity]
[Quickness]+[Match Practice]+[Recovery]x7+[attacking Direct]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]+[Double Intensity]
Training programs that put 10 man on defend team or attack team lose some stat growth
I don't know why it happened.
The sample size is not large enough, 4 seasons,
but the error is not that large (Yes, there is a slight error, but it takes me a lot of time to test too many.)
If I'm following, the training is based on what we currently think the best attributes are right?
Most of them make sense to me - priority in getting to the ball through pace and acceleration when it's on the deck and jumping reach when it's in the air.
Even Goalkeepers follow a similar logic, Agility to move in the right direction, Reflexes to get there and Arial Ability to be able to reach.
The other physicals like balance and agility factor in essentially to turn/change momentum and the mental like anticipation to start moving in the right direction before it's time to apply the physicals.
If my understanding here is right, and I get that's a big if, the one that's throwing me is Work Rate.
That should help all the physical and mental in so far as it's how often the player attempts to move towards the ball
The revelation that anything after 10 on Work Rate has diminished returns makes me wonder if this is explicitly tied to Stamina.
Like if a players Stamina can't keep up with their Work Rate as suggested by the in-game prompts, does too high a Work Rate turn out to be a bad thing?
Is there a way to re-test Work Rate where Stamina is increased at the same rate to see if that has any impact on the importance of Work Rate?
I can test it when I have time,
And，similar other attributes, such as Finishing, Technique, Flair, etc., about 12 attributes. Recently, i've done a lot of tests sample .
it show that their conclusions (Importance ranking) are the same as in the "all 10 attributes" case,
The test uses "Manchester City replicators team x4", so these players have attributes assigned to the roles/positions/responsibilities they should have , And has one of the best enough technical/mental/physical attributes in the game to execution tactics
I have been testing V7 with 2 matches, and doing well, but my questions are:
Should I pay any attention to when my coaches think the player will no longer benefit or are not showing any improvement using focused Quickness? Or is just in-game coach programming non-sense?
Is there an age that we should generally stop using it as the focus?
focus :
I think it can be used at any time. Because it just means a "super stats weight distributor."
If you're missing something, use it to add weight,
For example, to strengthen the parts that are already strong,
Or supplement the weak parts,
If the player is old and he 's stats starts to decline, then distribution actually means that you choose which attributes of him to keep off from declining.
In this case, a "super weight allocator" is also useful
I'm a new player, I probably knew that Mentoring could do it, but I hadn't tried it
Then I mean, the training schedule provides the attributes for growth.
(Mentoring not included）
I looked at a couple of test cases where their Determination didn't grow.