GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: So it turns out the GK does matter quite a bit. The most surprising finding is that technique 13 > 8 results in going from 6th to relegation, though that is with my knife-edge 15 pace/acc roster of outfield players. Both pace & acc also turn out to be fairly important.
A fair number of the attributes result in 1-2 places position drop if you go from 13/14 > 8, so I think in general you want the GK to be reasonably well-rounded.
Behold, the ultimate goalkeeper:
With this GK, the team finished 3rd, 5th, 4th, 1st.
BTW, I don't keep track of this, but I know that I've simulated at least over 10,000 real Premier Leagues matches in full detail now with these 15 pace/acc templates and coming ~4th-5th ~80-90%+ of the time.
Now I know some genuinely care about the accuracy question rather than just looking for any god-of-the-gaps excuse for SI's lies and imbecility. For these people, I have two things to say:
1) Yes, the points total even for a full season varies greatly, but the final position is much more stable. So my 15 pace/acc team might get 57 points or 81 points, but its position ~8 times out of 10 will be 3th-6th. Occasionally it will be 2nd or 8th or 10th. Rarely it will be 1st or 12th say.
2) Think about it deductively. If the RNG was so powerful that you couldn't tell reliably whether a team would come 1st or 10th in one season of samples, then you would have a fair chance every season of Liverpool coming 10th and not even qualifying for a cup spot. Ok, sometimes this does happen in the game, but let's be real, it's pretty rare.
I have a hypothesis as to why position is more stable than points. Rather than RNG causing the difference between the two, I would suspect it could be weather. Or some factor(s) other than just RNG, because the strange thing is that it must effect most or all teams equally, since the positions remain pretty stable, and I highly doubt that the game is looking at one team's 1-0 result and determining that the other game must end 2-0 to line the positions up at the end of the season. Expand
Based on this are you going to be changing GK weights drastically or mostly just technique?
Consistency 13 (49 weight for tool) Important Matches ~10-13 ('13' guarantees ~5th, '10' does 5th half the time, ~10th other half the time. Recommend weight of 42 or so.) Expand
Worth adding these hidden weights (along with pressure and professionalism) to your GK ratings from blended you said to just use on 26? You had slightly lower on those in that file for GK's. Thanks
Injury Proneness and dirtiness '50', but I think I just set these pretty arbitrarily for now. Basically means aiming for no higher than 13 in each.
The rest matter too little for performance, but you may also want to want to give some weight to ambition, loyalty, adaptability (if buying foreign players). Expand
Would you still recommend using anything for Consistency?
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: I edited an existing FM24 (legacy) role. Whenever I save it I have to refresh the page in my browser due to some bug where there's a remaining overlay I can't close. Maybe try different browser, or have you missed pressing the 'calculate' button again? Expand
Yeah I had the same thing as well. Yeah I recalculated and double checked the weights stayed correct, but for some reason the ratings just stay the same for me weird. I'll probably just stick with genie scout for the time being at least especially since it cant export the players and ratings while using a skin on FM26 lol
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: Unfortunately there is no proper substitute for Genie Scout. I've been considering FMRTE, but the free version doesn't allow you to save weight changes, and only some people will be willing to pay money for FMRTE. Expand
I actually bought FMRTE to try it out and you can enter weights like on genie scout for the most part, but there really isn't a good way of looking through all players who are on your list. Usually I will just look through all players willing to join me, but there didn't seem to be a way to do that there it only showed "All Players" or shortlists.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: Jeremy Doku plays alongside some of the best at Man City, and yet is supposedly a dud 48.12% in spite of 18 acc, 17 pace.
I think even if you spent a while looking at this guy's stats, you'd have to conclude there's something wrong with that low 48.12% rating..
..and yet Doku gets a measly 6.9 average rating before being sold off. Expand
So what is it in this case that is dragging Doku down? I see he has the 10 temperament and good natural fitness, pace, acceleration. Is it mostly the consistency?
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: Busy with life at the moment. Don't want to stress myself out with a deadline, so I'll just say it'd probably take 4 days if I dedicated all my time to it. So hopefully I'll put out a new file about a week from now, but depends how many breaks and tests I need.
Here are some new test results:
Luton 15 pace/acc - 14th, 10th, 8th Luton 15 pace/acc alt tactic - 8th Luton pace/acc max - 14th, 9th, 9th, 9th Luton pace/acc max alt tactic - 13th, 12th
15 pace/acc = template I showed before, with £200k/player budget Alt tactic = different 4-2-4 knap tactic I used (TON 424 HP HUB MC P105 EFC) Pace/acc max = picking for just highest pace/acc players with £3mil/player budget
I found this fruitful. I think the implications are pretty obvious. I'll be doing more alternate tactic testing to get more data on that aspect. Expand
@GeorgeFloydOverdosed So if you are starting a save with a small club in a small league with little reputation I'm wondering what the best play is. Do you just go for the best players you can get according to current GS rating at the start or would you look for the best potential ratings?
LightningFlik said: This is surprising to me. I looked at how effective a player like this would be using your blended weights and they don't appear to be anywhere near good enough to achieve a top-four finish.
I created a player using the same attribute values you listed (see screenshot) and calculated his rating at all outfield positions (I gave him 17 jumping reach when calculating centre-back rating). Here's what I got:
| Position | Rating | |----|---------| | FB | 74.4% | | CB | 76.98% | | WB | 73.97% | | DM | 67.56% | | W | 65.42% | | MC | 68.73% | | AM | 69.26% | | ST | 62.37% |
Don't give too much thought to the actual values because my weights are arbitrary but here's the rating of Newcastle's best XI on May 4th, 2025 in my current save (the season is over, they've finished in 4th place):
| Player | Position | Rating | |----|--------|--------| | Nick Pope | GK | 75.65% | | Ferdi Kadıoğlu | DL | 85.35% | | Gianluca Mancini | DC | 77.97% | | Sven Botman | DC | 78.32% | | Tino Livramento | DR | 78.93% | | Alexander Isak | ML | 79.31% | | Joe Willock | MC | 74.17% | | Sandro Tonali | MC | 76.27% | | Joelinton | MR | 74.78% | | Bryan Mbeumo | ST | 69.2% | | Anthony Gordon | ST | 68.2% |
The low-CA player you posted is at least 3-4% worse off than this real team that finished 4th in my game (in 5th place was an even stronger Manchester United). If I make Newcastle play with a defensive midfielder, it picks Tonali and Willock who score 74% each.
If you holidayed with a tactic which isn't considered overpowered, I see this as a bit of an indictment of the weights we've been talking about.
Of course, if you've crunched the numbers yourself and actually find your team is considered much stronger than your closest competition (ideally without the use of Genie Scout thumbing the scale mysteriously) then I'll hold my hands up. This has left me confused though.
EDIT: It strikes me that this might be what you meant when you wrote this:
DOUBLE EDIT: Ignore the CA in the Lewdandowski screenshot. Ignore everything except the ability values and the overall rating. I took the real player and modified his attributes just to see what the formula would spit out. Expand
If anyone is testing this out on the FM Tweak match engine that was recently released let us know the results. I've been testing and this still works great with attacking and positive I'm just not sure which is technically better yet.
A fair number of the attributes result in 1-2 places position drop if you go from 13/14 > 8, so I think in general you want the GK to be reasonably well-rounded.
Behold, the ultimate goalkeeper:
With this GK, the team finished 3rd, 5th, 4th, 1st.
BTW, I don't keep track of this, but I know that I've simulated at least over 10,000 real Premier Leagues matches in full detail now with these 15 pace/acc templates and coming ~4th-5th ~80-90%+ of the time.
Now I know some genuinely care about the accuracy question rather than just looking for any god-of-the-gaps excuse for SI's lies and imbecility. For these people, I have two things to say:
1) Yes, the points total even for a full season varies greatly, but the final position is much more stable. So my 15 pace/acc team might get 57 points or 81 points, but its position ~8 times out of 10 will be 3th-6th. Occasionally it will be 2nd or 8th or 10th. Rarely it will be 1st or 12th say.
2) Think about it deductively. If the RNG was so powerful that you couldn't tell reliably whether a team would come 1st or 10th in one season of samples, then you would have a fair chance every season of Liverpool coming 10th and not even qualifying for a cup spot. Ok, sometimes this does happen in the game, but let's be real, it's pretty rare.
I have a hypothesis as to why position is more stable than points. Rather than RNG causing the difference between the two, I would suspect it could be weather. Or some factor(s) other than just RNG, because the strange thing is that it must effect most or all teams equally, since the positions remain pretty stable, and I highly doubt that the game is looking at one team's 1-0 result and determining that the other game must end 2-0 to line the positions up at the end of the season.
Based on this are you going to be changing GK weights drastically or mostly just technique?
Consistency 13 (49 weight for tool)
Important Matches ~10-13 ('13' guarantees ~5th, '10' does 5th half the time, ~10th other half the time. Recommend weight of 42 or so.)
Worth adding these hidden weights (along with pressure and professionalism) to your GK ratings from blended you said to just use on 26? You had slightly lower on those in that file for GK's. Thanks
Pressure '49'
Professionalism '49'
Injury Proneness and dirtiness '50', but I think I just set these pretty arbitrarily for now. Basically means aiming for no higher than 13 in each.
The rest matter too little for performance, but you may also want to want to give some weight to ambition, loyalty, adaptability (if buying foreign players).
Would you still recommend using anything for Consistency?
Yeah I had the same thing as well. Yeah I recalculated and double checked the weights stayed correct, but for some reason the ratings just stay the same for me weird. I'll probably just stick with genie scout for the time being at least especially since it cant export the players and ratings while using a skin on FM26 lol
I actually bought FMRTE to try it out and you can enter weights like on genie scout for the most part, but there really isn't a good way of looking through all players who are on your list. Usually I will just look through all players willing to join me, but there didn't seem to be a way to do that there it only showed "All Players" or shortlists.
Also this calculator that has been posted here is similar
https://fm-arena.com/thread/15561-player-attribute-calculator-aggregator/
Are you using the same weights for all positions?
I think even if you spent a while looking at this guy's stats, you'd have to conclude there's something wrong with that low 48.12% rating..
..and yet Doku gets a measly 6.9 average rating before being sold off.
So what is it in this case that is dragging Doku down? I see he has the 10 temperament and good natural fitness, pace, acceleration. Is it mostly the consistency?
Here are some new test results:
Luton 15 pace/acc - 14th, 10th, 8th
Luton 15 pace/acc alt tactic - 8th
Luton pace/acc max - 14th, 9th, 9th, 9th
Luton pace/acc max alt tactic - 13th, 12th
15 pace/acc = template I showed before, with £200k/player budget
Alt tactic = different 4-2-4 knap tactic I used (TON 424 HP HUB MC P105 EFC)
Pace/acc max = picking for just highest pace/acc players with £3mil/player budget
I found this fruitful. I think the implications are pretty obvious. I'll be doing more alternate tactic testing to get more data on that aspect.
Are you only doing FM24 or both?
I created a player using the same attribute values you listed (see screenshot) and calculated his rating at all outfield positions (I gave him 17 jumping reach when calculating centre-back rating). Here's what I got:
| Position | Rating |
|----|---------|
| FB | 74.4% |
| CB | 76.98% |
| WB | 73.97% |
| DM | 67.56% |
| W | 65.42% |
| MC | 68.73% |
| AM | 69.26% |
| ST | 62.37% |
Don't give too much thought to the actual values because my weights are arbitrary but here's the rating of Newcastle's best XI on May 4th, 2025 in my current save (the season is over, they've finished in 4th place):
| Player | Position | Rating |
|----|--------|--------|
| Nick Pope | GK | 75.65% |
| Ferdi Kadıoğlu | DL | 85.35% |
| Gianluca Mancini | DC | 77.97% |
| Sven Botman | DC | 78.32% |
| Tino Livramento | DR | 78.93% |
| Alexander Isak | ML | 79.31% |
| Joe Willock | MC | 74.17% |
| Sandro Tonali | MC | 76.27% |
| Joelinton | MR | 74.78% |
| Bryan Mbeumo | ST | 69.2% |
| Anthony Gordon | ST | 68.2% |
The low-CA player you posted is at least 3-4% worse off than this real team that finished 4th in my game (in 5th place was an even stronger Manchester United). If I make Newcastle play with a defensive midfielder, it picks Tonali and Willock who score 74% each.
If you holidayed with a tactic which isn't considered overpowered, I see this as a bit of an indictment of the weights we've been talking about.
Of course, if you've crunched the numbers yourself and actually find your team is considered much stronger than your closest competition (ideally without the use of Genie Scout thumbing the scale mysteriously) then I'll hold my hands up. This has left me confused though.
EDIT: It strikes me that this might be what you meant when you wrote this:
DOUBLE EDIT: Ignore the CA in the Lewdandowski screenshot. Ignore everything except the ability values and the overall rating. I took the real player and modified his attributes just to see what the formula would spit out.
What is this screenshot from?
I dm'd them to you
My save was bugged I started another and it works fine. Great game! Thanks
Yeah no idea I load it like that and it always continues to show the "new schedule" with all rest
Is there some secret sauce to getting these to actually load in game? I go to custom schedules and load it and nothing ever happens lol
Have you happened to try it on this engine yet? https://fmtweak.com/projects/fm-tweak-engine/