Thanks for the answers. Regarding ZaZ, i agree of course. My question was more of a mathematical in nature. I wanted to know if each position is weighted equally, which is true.
My method is a bit different, but the result is the same. All position are weighted equally.
And that raises the question: How much does each position contribute to the result? For example is it more important to have a 70% rated striker or a 70% rated full back? (lets say this are the values we get with -25 for under 50)
And you can expand this further. Lets say you have a player natural at ST and W position. He scores 75% on W and 70% on ST. Do you use him as W? We cant be sure really. It may be actually more beneficial to use him as ST, if ST has more weight in getting you a win.
Regarding Tactical True CA, i am struggling to understand what does it show. If i have two players with tactical CA for given position at 120, but player A has CA of 130 and player B has CA of 110, what do we get from this infomation?
Anyway. I don't want to hijack your thread. Thanks again for all the time you both and of course fm-arena, for the time you have spent to give us a better understanding of the mechanics of this game.
Hello Mark and ZaZ! Congrats on the great work. You are providing invaluble analysis and insight to the game.
Regarding this whole conversation about important attributes, i've been using excel to mimic the work of genie scout, because i dont want to see the players CA, PA and hidden stats. I just want to compare my own players and find the best of them for each position and the best position for each one of them. Of course, feel free to suggest me a different way, with hidden CA and PA.
For now I export player attributes from fm print screen option, and then paste them in an specificly made excel file, and then i have the positional ratings for each on of them nice and fast. Few seconds for the whole team for every postion.
The question I have is regarding weight for each position. How do you actually calulate that?
In my mind my assumption is that a player with, lets say 10 in each attribute, should have an equal score in every position. And then, with the purpose to have numbers in the range of 0-100, i make the appropiate divisons to balance the numbers.
I.e. lets take DC position with Chinese version and zaz -25 for under 50 modifications. The total sum of the weights is 995. To make it 100 in need to devide by 9.95. So 9.95 is the balance number for this position. For FST is 7.85 etc.
Then I take players attributes and multiply them with the approriate weights for each position. Then take the sum of the result and divide it with the weight number for the position. In case of DC, i divide by 9.95 and so on. Then i divide by 20, so i can have a range of 0-100 in the result.
And this way i get the positional rating.
As a result a player with 10 in each attribute, would get 50% for all positions. A player with 20 in every attribute would get 100% for all positions.
My method is a bit different, but the result is the same. All position are weighted equally.
And that raises the question: How much does each position contribute to the result? For example is it more important to have a 70% rated striker or a 70% rated full back? (lets say this are the values we get with -25 for under 50)
And you can expand this further. Lets say you have a player natural at ST and W position. He scores 75% on W and 70% on ST. Do you use him as W? We cant be sure really. It may be actually more beneficial to use him as ST, if ST has more weight in getting you a win.
Regarding Tactical True CA, i am struggling to understand what does it show. If i have two players with tactical CA for given position at 120, but player A has CA of 130 and player B has CA of 110, what do we get from this infomation?
Anyway. I don't want to hijack your thread. Thanks again for all the time you both and of course fm-arena, for the time you have spent to give us a better understanding of the mechanics of this game.
Regarding this whole conversation about important attributes, i've been using excel to mimic the work of genie scout, because i dont want to see the players CA, PA and hidden stats. I just want to compare my own players and find the best of them for each position and the best position for each one of them. Of course, feel free to suggest me a different way, with hidden CA and PA.
For now I export player attributes from fm print screen option, and then paste them in an specificly made excel file, and then i have the positional ratings for each on of them nice and fast. Few seconds for the whole team for every postion.
The question I have is regarding weight for each position. How do you actually calulate that?
In my mind my assumption is that a player with, lets say 10 in each attribute, should have an equal score in every position. And then, with the purpose to have numbers in the range of 0-100, i make the appropiate divisons to balance the numbers.
I.e. lets take DC position with Chinese version and zaz -25 for under 50 modifications. The total sum of the weights is 995. To make it 100 in need to devide by 9.95. So 9.95 is the balance number for this position. For FST is 7.85 etc.
Then I take players attributes and multiply them with the approriate weights for each position. Then take the sum of the result and divide it with the weight number for the position. In case of DC, i divide by 9.95 and so on. Then i divide by 20, so i can have a range of 0-100 in the result.
And this way i get the positional rating.
As a result a player with 10 in each attribute, would get 50% for all positions.
A player with 20 in every attribute would get 100% for all positions.
Is this the correct way to do this?