ta2199 said: Hi, I just want to confirm about that because I have found out why some of my player doesn't increase his CA entire season. I was using different training from ZAZ, Kinito and EBTS and using automatic rest (only normal intensity for full health players). And the weird things is while most of the team is doing fine. Some players won't increase a single point or just 1 point even though they was playing like 30 matches per season and base on the point in the OP they should be improve and It was making me really frustrate. And just recently I found out that this is because I set no intensity player on good and ok condition players. They didn't participate in training. So to solved this you just need to manually set that player who having problem improving his attributes to normal intensity. I think many other people is also facing this issue because on page 2 or page 3 there is already a guy asking about this. Expand
Very strange because i use EvidenceBF, i use automatic rest like you, and i have no problem with development. The training is only a part of the development, if your player have a bad combinaison of professionalism and ambition, it's totally logical to not develop.
Middleweight165 said: This is what I am trying to understand. Why would I choose Marks over just focusing on the key attributes? What approach is that? More realistic or better? Expand
To be honest, it's not better. But it's more realistic because you follow more attributes.
Second point to be honnest, it was said a lot of time here, if you made a Rating which include Pace, Acc, Anticipation and 4-5 good attributes, you will find top players for the META, not for the general game.
In my Rating Haaland is 10 points ahead form the rest, it seems always realistic
Middleweight165 said: @Mark I'm still using your ratings for GS. Would you change anything to your ratings? Could you explain in laymans terms how your ratings work? What is the benefit of me using your ratings and not just focusing on those top key attributes identified here? Expand
If you want to follow key attributes, you don't need multiples ratings. For example, i made my own GS rating only with 9-10 attributes, and it gives me great results. The aim is to give energy on top key attributes.
If you want to play the game with a different approach, with all the attributes (but some of them are 100% useless), take Mark GS to find players.
Pumpkin said: that's with no automatic resting those three sessions are the most three effective sessions and the more a player trains the more impact they get from training Expand
Some tests give proofs that's not the reality. I have a 100% development with a light schedule, and players fit for matches.
It's not my work, it's the fantastic work of Youtubers.
sponsorkindest said: Damn, the time I have wasted analyzing and buying players. @Zippo : if it’s possible, please run a sim with just acceleration and pace at 20 for everyone and jumping reach at 20 only for defenders and every other attribute at 1. That will highlight how broken football manager is. Expand
stefanopt said: It would be interesting to test this and try and figure out the importance of CA vs Pace/Acc. So, what I mean is, we could try to have a team of players with like 150CA and one with 130CA but with X times more Pace/Acc and see which one does better. We could also do this with a higher/smaller difference in CA, so that we know what is better to recruit, if a player with 120CA and 18 pace/acc or 1 with 150CA and 14 pace/acc for example Expand
Good idea, to test it with some improvements.
But i already have an idea, if the difference is just 10 or 20 points of CA, the team with PAC ACC +2 will win
Lights123 said: Appreciate all your contributions in these threads Mark, wonder if I can ask a question for clarity. The way I currently have the editor setup is to have each individual position+potential as an option and I sort by those based on either 50/25 under or ykykyk balanced - an example being the below image Here I go based off Winger - Inside Forward, sort by potential and I see Andres Dos Santos is the best rated in the game, so I go into the preview for the player and positions
Based on what you said, the fact it shows 20 for AMR is great because that matches with inside forward/winger but if it shows 10 - that would mean he could only ever reach that potential shown on the overall player view if I specifically trained him for it? Expand
Genie Scout take in consideration the note of each position. Mark give the advice of note position because it give an impact of the % in GS. In fact, you can know a definitive note for a player if his position note/20 is at 20. If it stay at 16, the % will obviously drop down because the player don't know the position at a perfection point.
if you don't play with the strongest team in the league and if we take take a standard season of 38 matches then there's like 25 pts RNG so you really won't notice that 4 points difference, it will be overwhelmed with the RNG Expand
If i can give you my opinion, it's just how you see all this results. For me in a testing league with froze elements, i think 4 points is very efficient.
I know in game you can go far away from this, but the starter pack is (for me) obviously better.
but it's just an opinion, everyone play FM as he likes
I just want to confirm about that because I have found out why some of my player doesn't increase his CA entire season.
I was using different training from ZAZ, Kinito and EBTS and using automatic rest (only normal intensity for full health players). And the weird things is while most of the team is doing fine. Some players won't increase a single point or just 1 point even though they was playing like 30 matches per season and base on the point in the OP they should be improve and It was making me really frustrate.
And just recently I found out that this is because I set no intensity player on good and ok condition players. They didn't participate in training.
So to solved this you just need to manually set that player who having problem improving his attributes to normal intensity. I think many other people is also facing this issue because on page 2 or page 3 there is already a guy asking about this.
Very strange because i use EvidenceBF, i use automatic rest like you, and i have no problem with development. The training is only a part of the development, if your player have a bad combinaison of professionalism and ambition, it's totally logical to not develop.
I mean how to slow down the fall of pace and acceleration attributes as much as possible. What player parameters affect this?
I don't want to make a mistake, but IMO the key attributes is NATURAL FITNESS, it slow down the effects
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/msqjptnvsq23zf33hxa4p/Flo.grf?rlkey=bo0at2nn09zirnv2s9npaw9r8&dl=0
To be honest, it's not better. But it's more realistic because you follow more attributes.
Second point to be honnest, it was said a lot of time here, if you made a Rating which include Pace, Acc, Anticipation and 4-5 good attributes, you will find top players for the META, not for the general game.
In my Rating Haaland is 10 points ahead form the rest, it seems always realistic
If you want to follow key attributes, you don't need multiples ratings.
For example, i made my own GS rating only with 9-10 attributes, and it gives me great results.
The aim is to give energy on top key attributes.
If you want to play the game with a different approach, with all the attributes (but some of them are 100% useless), take Mark GS to find players.
Some tests give proofs that's not the reality. I have a 100% development with a light schedule, and players fit for matches.
It's not my work, it's the fantastic work of Youtubers.
Absolutely not. Too much sessions, 7 are the max to be most effective.
schedules and coaches in picture
potential is 130 CA
Advice:
Change your training schedule
@Zippo Agree, we need it
Totally agree
Good idea, to test it with some improvements.
But i already have an idea, if the difference is just 10 or 20 points of CA, the team with PAC ACC +2 will win
You're welcome
7 steps by week, and a lot of rest is the key.
Here I go based off Winger - Inside Forward, sort by potential and I see Andres Dos Santos is the best rated in the game, so I go into the preview for the player and positions
Based on what you said, the fact it shows 20 for AMR is great because that matches with inside forward/winger but if it shows 10 - that would mean he could only ever reach that potential shown on the overall player view if I specifically trained him for it?
Genie Scout take in consideration the note of each position. Mark give the advice of note position because it give an impact of the % in GS.
In fact, you can know a definitive note for a player if his position note/20 is at 20.
If it stay at 16, the % will obviously drop down because the player don't know the position at a perfection point.
if you don't play with the strongest team in the league and if we take take a standard season of 38 matches then there's like 25 pts RNG so you really won't notice that 4 points difference, it will be overwhelmed with the RNG
If i can give you my opinion, it's just how you see all this results. For me in a testing league with froze elements, i think 4 points is very efficient.
I know in game you can go far away from this, but the starter pack is (for me) obviously better.
but it's just an opinion, everyone play FM as he likes
I'd say a 4 points difference is nothing, just look at these tests:
https://fm-arena.com/thread/2980-game-changing-player-attributes/
https://fm-arena.com/thread/3293-what-it-takes-to-dominate-epl-with-bournemouth/
As you can see FM is more about having the best attributes than having the best tactic
It's exact, but if you start to develop players with the best tactic in equal conditions, so you start with 4 points in front of everyone