Pressure is easier to explain, I refer you this post I made on it. Additionally, inadequate 'pressure' is more common than inadequate 'professionalism', which more explains why professionalism is given a fairly low value.
Unfortunately I do not remember why I set injury proneness so high relative to dirtiness, but I do remember it was intentional.
I generally start with considering how much pace/acc I would be willing to sacrifice for it. '-47' implies the following: 15.2 pace/15.2 acc/1 injprone = 20 pace/20 acc/20 injprone.
There is some simple bias towards having a low injury team factored into that, but as to why dirtiness is relatively so lowly valued it could be that similar to professionalism vs. pressure, high injury proneness is common while high dirtiness is rare.
I suppose another contributing factor could have been that I re-evaluated injury proneness in light of the fact that match sharpness actually matters quite a lot. And yet another would be that high dirtiness tends to matter only insofar as the player has high aggression I believe, so that cuts it to ~50% straight away, while injury proneness acts alone. But honestly, I just can't recall the reasoning I had at the time.
If I'm thinking about this correctly, you should only judge based on the position (i.e. ST) rating rather than role (i.e. Pressing Forward) rating. This is because role rating would only take into account certain attributes, rather than the full set of attributes that have been actually tested to matter. For instance, the game says mezzala role doesn't need pace, but testing showed pace matters a lot even for mezzala role player.
As a side note, I would caution anyone not to put say values for your ST target man in the AMC section of the ratings file, as FM Genie Scout from memory takes into account positional proficiency. So you would end up with inferior STs with 18+ AMC proficiency at the top of your ST target man list. You could use 'sweeper' position for the purpose, because no player has sweeper proficiency. Expand
Thank you for your response! It’s crazy how much work you put into these ratings
And thank you to @MeanOnSunday for your response too.
Thanks George for this amazing post! I got a couple questions.
1. I noticed you said that dirtiness is much worse than injury proneness, however in the genie scout rating file injury proneness's value is -47 while dirtiness is only -14. Why is that?
2. Where did you find the data for how much hidden attributes like pressure and professionalism affect performance so much? for pressure to be as important as 37% of pace seems really high to me so I was curious.
Pressure is easier to explain, I refer you this post I made on it. Additionally, inadequate 'pressure' is more common than inadequate 'professionalism', which more explains why professionalism is given a fairly low value.
Unfortunately I do not remember why I set injury proneness so high relative to dirtiness, but I do remember it was intentional.
I generally start with considering how much pace/acc I would be willing to sacrifice for it. '-47' implies the following: 15.2 pace/15.2 acc/1 injprone = 20 pace/20 acc/20 injprone.
There is some simple bias towards having a low injury team factored into that, but as to why dirtiness is relatively so lowly valued it could be that similar to professionalism vs. pressure, high injury proneness is common while high dirtiness is rare.
I suppose another contributing factor could have been that I re-evaluated injury proneness in light of the fact that match sharpness actually matters quite a lot. And yet another would be that high dirtiness tends to matter only insofar as the player has high aggression I believe, so that cuts it to ~50% straight away, while injury proneness acts alone. But honestly, I just can't recall the reasoning I had at the time.
If I'm thinking about this correctly, you should only judge based on the position (i.e. ST) rating rather than role (i.e. Pressing Forward) rating. This is because role rating would only take into account certain attributes, rather than the full set of attributes that have been actually tested to matter. For instance, the game says mezzala role doesn't need pace, but testing showed pace matters a lot even for mezzala role player.
As a side note, I would caution anyone not to put say values for your ST target man in the AMC section of the ratings file, as FM Genie Scout from memory takes into account positional proficiency. So you would end up with inferior STs with 18+ AMC proficiency at the top of your ST target man list. You could use 'sweeper' position for the purpose, because no player has sweeper proficiency.
Thank you for your response! It’s crazy how much work you put into these ratings
And thank you to @MeanOnSunday for your response too.
I got a couple questions.
1. I noticed you said that dirtiness is much worse than injury proneness, however in the genie scout rating file injury proneness's value is -47 while dirtiness is only -14. Why is that?
2. Where did you find the data for how much hidden attributes like pressure and professionalism affect performance so much? for pressure to be as important as 37% of pace seems really high to me so I was curious.