The more you post the more obvious it is that hardly know anything about the game. Nor do you understand GS. Why dont you use the weight for each position? It widens the skill gap for a start and then you have players nearer 100, rather than capped at 80. There is no positive leaving it at 100.
Your ratings aren't based on solid data. What was your control? You used the best tactics and maybe set pieces? You would rather have a centre mid on the wings than prime Messi or Robben!! You'd rather have Kane and other slow strikers up front over Mbappe. Its insane you think you've done well. Full backs, 10,'s, wingers and fast strikers dont need jumping reach at all!!
Thanks for the percentages ratings, they were a great laugh.
Frimpong is 5'6 and fast. Is that not very short in fm24?
test attributes in isolation + hundreds of possible attribute combinations over thousands of games > record best performing combination of attributes > translate to Genie Scout weightings
not GS weightings > GS Ratings > record winning combination of attributes
So you are confused when you believe my ranking of Mbappe is tied to how well I understand Genie Scout's formulae for hidden attributes.
The translation into weightings works accurately for FM26 scoring system, it is specifically a Genie Scout problem. What FM26 scoring system lacks is the ability to weight hidden attributes.
It is also not a matter of just work out what formula Genie Scout is using and then take that into account. Say it was that personality attributes are weighted at 50% of visible attributes. Ok, then we could just put 80 for pressure instead of 40. It is complicated, and perhaps even completely unworkable. The best way to use Genie Scout right now is to weight the visible attributes, and put filters on the hiddens. Expand
Bozo, bozo, bozo. I'm not confused haha. Previously, prior to your latest ratings, someone posted to say GS was doing something to skew the ratings. You linked their post in the last reply to me. But we know that was because you were entering scores for the hidden attributes. Now in premier league 1 that isn't the case. So why did you quote their post?
So the reason Mbappe scores so lowly is because of your testing. But anyone knows Mbappe is the best fast striker and certainly better than all the other strikers you rank above him. No one is choosing the many strikers you rate above him. He is only beaten by Haaland.
You severely undervalue speed and that's why he scores so lowly. It's your ratings, it has nothing to do with GS. I hope that clears up your confusion. You also overrate many attributes. You can literally set fast striker to 100/100 speed, 70 dribbling, 50 anticipation, 40 balance, 30 agility and works rate, 40 finishing and that's about it. Mbappe will be the top fast striker. Jumping reach should be 0. I'm sure I've missed one or two but that's about it.
Someone else also tried to inform you here, to which you responded that the bottom line for you is your motivation to 'blame the person who made the file'.
This is why I will not be responding to any more Mbappe rubbish from you. Expand
hahaha. Classic Bozo. So no answer then. What I said is true. Your ratings are awful as some people are starting to realise.....
Maybe Im just very lucky to I can get Mbappe to be the best fast striker in GS and you cant?
Whats also funny is we know, at least you should, that someone pointed out the ratings were wrong using the old file you posted. But that was because you didn't understand how to use hidden attributes in GS. It has no relevance at all to your premier league garbage file. Does it?
This pretence that something is up with genie scout when the ratings severely undervalue speed is embarrassing. You could literally change speed to 100 for both and it would increase the players score a fair bit.
He's not even close to the near perfect player. He will do well for his CA because he's 18/18 speed. Near perfect would see a big increase in dribbling, anticipation and agility and balance. The player also doesn't need jumping reach. Some of the best 10's and wingers ive ever had were under 5 for jumping reach.
Not including his hidden attributes has nothing to do with the score and its deceitful to claim it is. Its also funny. You've still never answered why Mbappe scores so poorly using Premier league 1.0 ratings. But you always avoid questions and go full lockjaw.
being rated at 64, seems unfair. He's a beast, only downside I see is his determination. If I follow these ratings, he won't make the bench in the Portuguese league, where I'm still dominating by far with a team with avg rating way lower than the best in the league.
Can someone clarify this Premier League 1.0 ratings? I was using Orion's and Bafici's rating's a while back, what is everyone's opinion on theese ratings? Expand
It seems you have already realised the answer....... If a ratings system doesn't put Mbappe in the top 20 players or strikers, something is wrong? Ngolo Kante is a better right winger than Yamal(at his peak)? I dont think so.
btw the player you posted is ok. He'd tear up tier two leagues and do well in some top leagues. But he's not a champions league player for me. Yes he would while you're still building a team, but he's not top class.
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: From memory I set them to age 20, and they were age 23 at the end of the loan test.
It's worth saying a few extra things here. I picked this age for two reasons:
1) Age 14-18 is too young for both loans and loan tests. At that age, training takes precedence over match experience (U18s/reserve friendlies largely suffice). Your own training facilities and staff are also likely going to be better than the team you're loaning to, and your training regime certainly will be better. As a player goes beyond 18, the development increasingly skews strongly towards competitive (high reputation) match experience instead of training.
2) I think age 20 is probably the typical age we would start looking to loan out a player, as they're about to be too old for the reserves and/or want to start matches, but not good enough to sell or play.
Combining this info, we can infer that training facilities only matter a little for your loan club. It also means you should probably hold off on loaning out players until they're at least 20. Expand
You can still loan players out under 18. I've loaned plenty of players to lower inactive leagues and seen great results. Under 18's still benefit from playing. And if your under 18/19's squad is bloated, as can be if you're wonderkid hoarding, then the gametime elsewhere will help. Some players are just ready and it wont do them any harm at all.
20 is too old to start loaning. If you need the homegrown status then loaning out isn't the way to go obviously, but in general 18+ is fine and useful. That said some, but not all, players will still improve a lot staying in the youth squad from 18-19. But once they're 19 thats it really. They need gametime.
Loaning is useful in many ways. It was another funny subject that some experts claimed was useless. One of the other main benefits is for those players you cant sell, or cant sell for their value. Loan them out for one season at a decent level and once they retun you will be able to sell them for a decent amount. Or put in the old after 5 matches clause.
The quick summary is that matches played and division being inactive are the two most critical factors that you should target when loaning players out.
Beyond that there are some things to keep in mind:
- CA growth is hard capped by the division reputation. Your loan club choice should therefore be a delicate balance between their division reputation and the likelihood the player will play matches. It's probably best to go on the safe side and drop a division than risk not being played. - Club reputation also plays a role, but should be a secondary consideration to division reputation (the influence on CA growth is roughly a 30/70 split, but the club rep difference within a division will only amount to ~5% or less difference anyway) - Morale, rating, opposition quality, probably all have zero or close to zero impact on growth - CA-PA gap remains one of the strongest growth factors, after matches played - Although not tested specifically, it's clear that training facilities (and other club aspects) matter only a bit - A player can improve roughly ~20 CA in one season, so your player's CA should probably be at least ~20 under the division rep hardcap - In England the worst team seems to have its hardcap around ~40-50, so even the worst teams will still enable growth in some players provided their starting CA is low enough
Rough Guide:
140 CA player - Loan to inactive foreign league where possible, or no lower than England Div 2 88 CA player - Loan to inactive foreign league where possible, or no lower than England Div 7 and no higher than England Div 4 30 CA player - Can be loaned to even the worst club in the country and will still grow, so limit to 'Lower Division' clubs
Generally speaking it seems more forgiving placing the player in too low a division than one too high. A 88 CA player should ideally be in Switzerland Div 1 or England Div 4, but England Div 7 would still permit a season of maximum growth while guaranteeing his match experience.
The foreign clubs below I have handpicked as what should be some of the best performers. The only surprise is that the Scottish club did poorly, even when inactive, and I'm not sure why. So I would avoid Scotland for loaning players out.
Lower CA when the division is active is a sign that the division is highly competitive, which is bad from a loan perspective. What we want is high reputation but low competition (increased chance of matches played). If you had to choose an active division to loan to, I would choose South Korea Div 1. But inactive is simply best.
Results (3 year loans):
88 CA 200 PA, Inactive
England Div 2 (Preston) = 102 CA England Div 3 (Blackpool) = 97 CA England Div 4 (Doncaster) = 134 CA England Div 5 (Eastleigh) = 114 CA England Div 6 (Worthing) = 100 CA England Div 7 (Chesham) = 107 CA England Lower Div (Bagshot) = 88 CA
Switzerland Div 1 (Zurich) = 149 CA Australia Div 1 (Melbourne City FC) = 135 CA USA Div 1 (St Louis CITY) = 144 CA Norway Div 1 (Stabaek) = 139 CA South Korea Div 1 (Pohang) = 148 CA Scotland Div 1 (Hearts) = 102 CA
88 CA 200 PA, Active
England Div 2 (Preston) = 96 CA England Div 3 (Blackpool) = 90 CA England Div 4 (Doncaster) = 110 CA England Div 5 (Eastleigh) = 114 CA England Div 6 (Worthing) = 114 CA England Div 7 (Chesham) = 105 CA England Lower Div (Bagshot) = 88 CA
Switzerland Div 1 (Zurich) = 94 CA Australia Div 1 (Melbourne City FC) = 116 CA USA Div 1 (St Louis CITY) = 96 CA Norway Div 1 (Stabaek) = 141 CA South Korea Div 1 (Pohang) = 141 CA Scotland Div 1 (Hearts) = 92 CA
88 CA 200 PA, Active, Full Detail
England Div 2 (Preston) = 111 CA England Div 3 (Blackpool) = 91 CA England Div 4 (Doncaster) = 127 CA England Div 5 (Eastleigh) = 113 CA England Div 6 (Worthing) = 117 CA England Div 7 (Chesham) = 107 CA England Lower Div (Bagshot) = 88 CA
Switzerland Div 1 (Zurich) = 92 CA Australia Div 1 (Melbourne City FC) = 90 CA USA Div 1 (St Louis CITY) = 95 CA Norway Div 1 (Stabaek) = 118 CA South Korea Div 1 (Pohang) = 132 CA Scotland Div 1 (Hearts) = 91 CA
140 CA 200 PA, Inactive
England Div 2 (Preston) = 159 CA England Div 3 (Blackpool) = 149 CA England Div 4 (Doncaster) = 140 CA England Div 5 (Eastleigh) = 140 CA England Div 6 (Worthing) = 140 CA England Div 7 (Chesham) = 140 CA
Switzerland Div 1 (Zurich) = 181 CA Australia Div 1 (Melbourne City FC) = 183 CA USA Div 1 (St Louis CITY) = 159 CA Norway Div 1 (Stabaek) = 170 CA South Korea Div 1 (Pohang) = 170 CA Scotland Div 1 (Hearts) = 163 CA
20 CA 200 PA, Inactive
England Lower Div (Bagshot) = 40 CA
100 CA 130 PA, Inactive
England Div 2 (Preston) = 109 CA England Div 3 (Blackpool) = 100 CA England Div 4 (Doncaster) = 105 CA England Div 5 (Eastleigh) = 100 CA England Div 6 (Worthing) = 99 CA England Div 7 (Chesham) = 100 CA
Switzerland Div 1 (Zurich) = 110 CA Australia Div 1 (Melbourne City FC) = 117 CA USA Div 1 (St Louis CITY) = 110 CA Norway Div 1 (Stabaek) = 110 CA South Korea Div 1 (Pohang) = 110 CA Scotland Div 1 (Hearts) = 109 CA
50 CA 80 PA, Inactive
England Lower Div (Bagshot) = 50 CA Expand
Did you say how old these players were?
They really struggle to keep control on their own game. The buff in 23 was way too big and then they either forgot or didn't know how to balance it out for 24.
What about players that already reached 20/20 pace and acceleration? I remember reading something about it somewhere, some time ago, but can't remember the consensus. Is it worth it to keep Quickness as individual training? Expand
You stop training quickness immediately. You will be wasting PA otherwise. Switch to something else useful for that position, or leave it blank
MeanOnSunday said: He left Chelsea and is in lower leagues now so probably you don’t have a large enough database. Personally I don’t rate him; he’s fast but if a 20 yo leaves Chelsea and has only played professionally at league 2 level then he’s not who I would buy for a top club. Expand
I don think he's after him in real life. I have no idea what he's like in 26 but in 24 he was one of the best buys in the game.
Rain said: You brought up your boyfriend in a post that didn't involve him. I'd say that's exactly what rent free means Expand
Haha. Sorry I forget you all seemingly share one brain. You @ me and I replied. I said genie scout wasn't bugged in another thread, so that does that mean I'm rent free in your head? Why are you @ me in a thread I'm not in? Rent free!!!
What's the homophobic comment about? Who is my boyfriend?
GeorgeFloydOverdosed said: We all have egos, and I'm saying we can fall for the trap of pumping it up on the praise (positive appraisals) of those who wouldn't have a clue. It also makes you vulnerable to being torn down later on by the same people. He successfully requested his own FM24 megapack thread to be closed because one of his patreon subscribers shattered his ego.
Honestly, what he's doing isn't that difficult, I could do it. And I reckon I'd do it better. And as a point of comparison, I've said that EBFM is just next level to me, I can't really do (or be bothered to do at least) my testing as good as he did.
If it was $50/month, I wouldn't bother. All it would do is compromise your integrity. $2500/month though? Not gonna lie, that's pretty tempting. Even Judas sold out Jesus for less than that. Expand
More mad rantings. You aren't a good tester. Your findings are wrong. You have closed the skill gap with players. Are you still claiming Mbappe isn't in the top 20 and Kante is a better winger than Yamal because genie scout is bugged? Because we both know that isn't the reason. We know that before using negative scores and mental attributes was a problem. But that isn't the case with your premier league file.
Claiming you could do all these things better but you can't be bothered. That's how kids talk at school. No one in their right mind is paying you for your genie scout ratings. You are testing attributes using the best tactics and set pieces? You can take over the worst team in any league using those and do well with no transfers at all.
Rain said: @keithb I thought there was no issues with genie scout? Expand
Its minor, like a rounding error. This post is hysterical.
I wasn't aware it was doing this, but its not the reason Bozo Lockjaw doesn't have Mbappe in the top 20 players and thinks Ngolo Kante is a better right winger than Yamal. Thats because his file is awful and actually says speed isn't that important.
You can use genie scout with the correct weightings and it will sill have the top 10 players for each position correct, they just might be in the wrong order. But hopefully you can use your own eyes, and brain if its there, to see who might turn out to be the best.
Rain said: And yet you have not brought one productive thing to the conversation. I would think someone who is so obsessed would actually want to prove what he is saying, but here we are listening to the same thing over and over instead of bringing something to the table. Always funny when people play the victim when they get called out lmao.
Of course you don't think there's anything wrong with genie scout because you haven't actually tried anything else and compared. Lightning literally told you he had the same issue as well and you just brush it aside because it doesn't fit your narrative and you want to continue this gag. Expand
Deary me the intellect is rather low on here. I have brought many things to the table. For example I said stamina was important, which Bozo ridiculed me for but now says is important. And I have shown the ratings to be very wrong, but maybe you also think Mbappe is meh?? Bozo's ratings reduce the skill gap in players and severely undervalues speed.
I have used phython extensively which is far superior to genie scout, so wrong again. Setting my own ratings and using 7x for speed. The reason people think genie scout is broken is because the input is wrong as I have already said. But if people dont understand what the problem is, its a worry. If you put diesel into a petrol car you blame the car for not working?? Lockjaw already corrected the problems for the latest file. Maybe he realised, maybe he didn't. I think he did, but he just likes to hide behind the falsehood its bugged. Yet thousands used it with no problem?
Rain said: Are you genuinely retarded? You sit around waiting for him to post and instead of making your own thread on your findings you just spam this thread and annoy EVERYONE else who's reading. Half the posts on each page are you just spewing bs for no reason. Get a life already. Expand
No I'm not retarded. What a mean thing to say. I'm not spewing any bullshit and my posts are for a very good reason as I've already explained. Maybe you have a mental disability and can't read very well? I'm exposing the truths about the dreadful testing carried out by Bozo. One day Bozo says a certain attribute isn't needed, the next he says it's important. A complete charlatan.
I don't sit around waiting for Lockjaw to post. Initially I replied to say he'd missed out some important attributes for a full back and their reply was an attempt to ridicule me. I have a right to reply. And it's continued that way,along with making up things I said in a pathetic attempt at deflection from their own failures. Others have explained the testing and results are faulty also. Bozo claims genie scout doesn't work as well. All of these things are the hallmark of someone who doesn't know what they're doing and as I rightfully said a complete charlatan.
That said I'm off on holiday today and won't be looking at this. When I return I'm sure Bozo Lockjaw will have changed their mind once again. It's a recurring theme you see. New tests show different results. And so on.
Your ratings aren't based on solid data. What was your control? You used the best tactics and maybe set pieces? You would rather have a centre mid on the wings than prime Messi or Robben!! You'd rather have Kane and other slow strikers up front over Mbappe. Its insane you think you've done well. Full backs, 10,'s, wingers and fast strikers dont need jumping reach at all!!
Thanks for the percentages ratings, they were a great laugh.
Frimpong is 5'6 and fast. Is that not very short in fm24?
This is what we get from pseudo experts.
test attributes in isolation + hundreds of possible attribute combinations over thousands of games > record best performing combination of attributes > translate to Genie Scout weightings
not GS weightings > GS Ratings > record winning combination of attributes
So you are confused when you believe my ranking of Mbappe is tied to how well I understand Genie Scout's formulae for hidden attributes.
The translation into weightings works accurately for FM26 scoring system, it is specifically a Genie Scout problem. What FM26 scoring system lacks is the ability to weight hidden attributes.
It is also not a matter of just work out what formula Genie Scout is using and then take that into account. Say it was that personality attributes are weighted at 50% of visible attributes. Ok, then we could just put 80 for pressure instead of 40. It is complicated, and perhaps even completely unworkable. The best way to use Genie Scout right now is to weight the visible attributes, and put filters on the hiddens.
Bozo, bozo, bozo. I'm not confused haha. Previously, prior to your latest ratings, someone posted to say GS was doing something to skew the ratings. You linked their post in the last reply to me. But we know that was because you were entering scores for the hidden attributes. Now in premier league 1 that isn't the case. So why did you quote their post?
So the reason Mbappe scores so lowly is because of your testing. But anyone knows Mbappe is the best fast striker and certainly better than all the other strikers you rank above him. No one is choosing the many strikers you rate above him. He is only beaten by Haaland.
You severely undervalue speed and that's why he scores so lowly. It's your ratings, it has nothing to do with GS. I hope that clears up your confusion. You also overrate many attributes. You can literally set fast striker to 100/100 speed, 70 dribbling, 50 anticipation, 40 balance, 30 agility and works rate, 40 finishing and that's about it. Mbappe will be the top fast striker. Jumping reach should be 0. I'm sure I've missed one or two but that's about it.
Someone else also tried to inform you here, to which you responded that the bottom line for you is your motivation to 'blame the person who made the file'.
This is why I will not be responding to any more Mbappe rubbish from you.
hahaha. Classic Bozo. So no answer then. What I said is true. Your ratings are awful as some people are starting to realise.....
Maybe Im just very lucky to I can get Mbappe to be the best fast striker in GS and you cant?
Whats also funny is we know, at least you should, that someone pointed out the ratings were wrong using the old file you posted. But that was because you didn't understand how to use hidden attributes in GS. It has no relevance at all to your premier league garbage file. Does it?
He's not even close to the near perfect player. He will do well for his CA because he's 18/18 speed. Near perfect would see a big increase in dribbling, anticipation and agility and balance. The player also doesn't need jumping reach. Some of the best 10's and wingers ive ever had were under 5 for jumping reach.
Not including his hidden attributes has nothing to do with the score and its deceitful to claim it is. Its also funny. You've still never answered why Mbappe scores so poorly using Premier league 1.0 ratings. But you always avoid questions and go full lockjaw.
being rated at 64, seems unfair. He's a beast, only downside I see is his determination. If I follow these ratings, he won't make the bench in the Portuguese league, where I'm still dominating by far with a team with avg rating way lower than the best in the league.
Can someone clarify this Premier League 1.0 ratings? I was using Orion's and Bafici's rating's a while back, what is everyone's opinion on theese ratings?
It seems you have already realised the answer....... If a ratings system doesn't put Mbappe in the top 20 players or strikers, something is wrong? Ngolo Kante is a better right winger than Yamal(at his peak)? I dont think so.
btw the player you posted is ok. He'd tear up tier two leagues and do well in some top leagues. But he's not a champions league player for me. Yes he would while you're still building a team, but he's not top class.
It's worth saying a few extra things here. I picked this age for two reasons:
1) Age 14-18 is too young for both loans and loan tests. At that age, training takes precedence over match experience (U18s/reserve friendlies largely suffice). Your own training facilities and staff are also likely going to be better than the team you're loaning to, and your training regime certainly will be better. As a player goes beyond 18, the development increasingly skews strongly towards competitive (high reputation) match experience instead of training.
2) I think age 20 is probably the typical age we would start looking to loan out a player, as they're about to be too old for the reserves and/or want to start matches, but not good enough to sell or play.
Combining this info, we can infer that training facilities only matter a little for your loan club. It also means you should probably hold off on loaning out players until they're at least 20.
You can still loan players out under 18. I've loaned plenty of players to lower inactive leagues and seen great results. Under 18's still benefit from playing. And if your under 18/19's squad is bloated, as can be if you're wonderkid hoarding, then the gametime elsewhere will help. Some players are just ready and it wont do them any harm at all.
20 is too old to start loaning. If you need the homegrown status then loaning out isn't the way to go obviously, but in general 18+ is fine and useful. That said some, but not all, players will still improve a lot staying in the youth squad from 18-19. But once they're 19 thats it really. They need gametime.
Loaning is useful in many ways. It was another funny subject that some experts claimed was useless. One of the other main benefits is for those players you cant sell, or cant sell for their value. Loan them out for one season at a decent level and once they retun you will be able to sell them for a decent amount. Or put in the old after 5 matches clause.
The quick summary is that matches played and division being inactive are the two most critical factors that you should target when loaning players out.
Beyond that there are some things to keep in mind:
- CA growth is hard capped by the division reputation. Your loan club choice should therefore be a delicate balance between their division reputation and the likelihood the player will play matches. It's probably best to go on the safe side and drop a division than risk not being played.
- Club reputation also plays a role, but should be a secondary consideration to division reputation (the influence on CA growth is roughly a 30/70 split, but the club rep difference within a division will only amount to ~5% or less difference anyway)
- Morale, rating, opposition quality, probably all have zero or close to zero impact on growth
- CA-PA gap remains one of the strongest growth factors, after matches played
- Although not tested specifically, it's clear that training facilities (and other club aspects) matter only a bit
- A player can improve roughly ~20 CA in one season, so your player's CA should probably be at least ~20 under the division rep hardcap
- In England the worst team seems to have its hardcap around ~40-50, so even the worst teams will still enable growth in some players provided their starting CA is low enough
Rough Guide:
140 CA player - Loan to inactive foreign league where possible, or no lower than England Div 2
88 CA player - Loan to inactive foreign league where possible, or no lower than England Div 7 and no higher than England Div 4
30 CA player - Can be loaned to even the worst club in the country and will still grow, so limit to 'Lower Division' clubs
Generally speaking it seems more forgiving placing the player in too low a division than one too high. A 88 CA player should ideally be in Switzerland Div 1 or England Div 4, but England Div 7 would still permit a season of maximum growth while guaranteeing his match experience.
The foreign clubs below I have handpicked as what should be some of the best performers. The only surprise is that the Scottish club did poorly, even when inactive, and I'm not sure why. So I would avoid Scotland for loaning players out.
Lower CA when the division is active is a sign that the division is highly competitive, which is bad from a loan perspective. What we want is high reputation but low competition (increased chance of matches played). If you had to choose an active division to loan to, I would choose South Korea Div 1. But inactive is simply best.
Results (3 year loans):
88 CA 200 PA, Inactive
England Div 2 (Preston) = 102 CA
England Div 3 (Blackpool) = 97 CA
England Div 4 (Doncaster) = 134 CA
England Div 5 (Eastleigh) = 114 CA
England Div 6 (Worthing) = 100 CA
England Div 7 (Chesham) = 107 CA
England Lower Div (Bagshot) = 88 CA
Switzerland Div 1 (Zurich) = 149 CA
Australia Div 1 (Melbourne City FC) = 135 CA
USA Div 1 (St Louis CITY) = 144 CA
Norway Div 1 (Stabaek) = 139 CA
South Korea Div 1 (Pohang) = 148 CA
Scotland Div 1 (Hearts) = 102 CA
88 CA 200 PA, Active
England Div 2 (Preston) = 96 CA
England Div 3 (Blackpool) = 90 CA
England Div 4 (Doncaster) = 110 CA
England Div 5 (Eastleigh) = 114 CA
England Div 6 (Worthing) = 114 CA
England Div 7 (Chesham) = 105 CA
England Lower Div (Bagshot) = 88 CA
Switzerland Div 1 (Zurich) = 94 CA
Australia Div 1 (Melbourne City FC) = 116 CA
USA Div 1 (St Louis CITY) = 96 CA
Norway Div 1 (Stabaek) = 141 CA
South Korea Div 1 (Pohang) = 141 CA
Scotland Div 1 (Hearts) = 92 CA
88 CA 200 PA, Active, Full Detail
England Div 2 (Preston) = 111 CA
England Div 3 (Blackpool) = 91 CA
England Div 4 (Doncaster) = 127 CA
England Div 5 (Eastleigh) = 113 CA
England Div 6 (Worthing) = 117 CA
England Div 7 (Chesham) = 107 CA
England Lower Div (Bagshot) = 88 CA
Switzerland Div 1 (Zurich) = 92 CA
Australia Div 1 (Melbourne City FC) = 90 CA
USA Div 1 (St Louis CITY) = 95 CA
Norway Div 1 (Stabaek) = 118 CA
South Korea Div 1 (Pohang) = 132 CA
Scotland Div 1 (Hearts) = 91 CA
140 CA 200 PA, Inactive
England Div 2 (Preston) = 159 CA
England Div 3 (Blackpool) = 149 CA
England Div 4 (Doncaster) = 140 CA
England Div 5 (Eastleigh) = 140 CA
England Div 6 (Worthing) = 140 CA
England Div 7 (Chesham) = 140 CA
Switzerland Div 1 (Zurich) = 181 CA
Australia Div 1 (Melbourne City FC) = 183 CA
USA Div 1 (St Louis CITY) = 159 CA
Norway Div 1 (Stabaek) = 170 CA
South Korea Div 1 (Pohang) = 170 CA
Scotland Div 1 (Hearts) = 163 CA
20 CA 200 PA, Inactive
England Lower Div (Bagshot) = 40 CA
100 CA 130 PA, Inactive
England Div 2 (Preston) = 109 CA
England Div 3 (Blackpool) = 100 CA
England Div 4 (Doncaster) = 105 CA
England Div 5 (Eastleigh) = 100 CA
England Div 6 (Worthing) = 99 CA
England Div 7 (Chesham) = 100 CA
Switzerland Div 1 (Zurich) = 110 CA
Australia Div 1 (Melbourne City FC) = 117 CA
USA Div 1 (St Louis CITY) = 110 CA
Norway Div 1 (Stabaek) = 110 CA
South Korea Div 1 (Pohang) = 110 CA
Scotland Div 1 (Hearts) = 109 CA
50 CA 80 PA, Inactive
England Lower Div (Bagshot) = 50 CA
Did you say how old these players were?
They really struggle to keep control on their own game. The buff in 23 was way too big and then they either forgot or didn't know how to balance it out for 24.
Went back to FM24 and this was a major tim saver. One question tho:
What about players that already reached 20/20 pace and acceleration?
I remember reading something about it somewhere, some time ago, but can't remember the consensus. Is it worth it to keep Quickness as individual training?
You stop training quickness immediately. You will be wasting PA otherwise. Switch to something else useful for that position, or leave it blank
I don think he's after him in real life. I have no idea what he's like in 26 but in 24 he was one of the best buys in the game.
Haha. Sorry I forget you all seemingly share one brain. You @ me and I replied. I said genie scout wasn't bugged in another thread, so that does that mean I'm rent free in your head? Why are you @ me in a thread I'm not in? Rent free!!!
What's the homophobic comment about? Who is my boyfriend?
Honestly, what he's doing isn't that difficult, I could do it. And I reckon I'd do it better. And as a point of comparison, I've said that EBFM is just next level to me, I can't really do (or be bothered to do at least) my testing as good as he did.
If it was $50/month, I wouldn't bother. All it would do is compromise your integrity. $2500/month though? Not gonna lie, that's pretty tempting. Even Judas sold out Jesus for less than that.
More mad rantings. You aren't a good tester. Your findings are wrong. You have closed the skill gap with players. Are you still claiming Mbappe isn't in the top 20 and Kante is a better winger than Yamal because genie scout is bugged? Because we both know that isn't the reason. We know that before using negative scores and mental attributes was a problem. But that isn't the case with your premier league file.
Claiming you could do all these things better but you can't be bothered. That's how kids talk at school. No one in their right mind is paying you for your genie scout ratings. You are testing attributes using the best tactics and set pieces? You can take over the worst team in any league using those and do well with no transfers at all.
Jesus weren't real mate.
I was on holiday. Sorry I didn't reply to you immediately and made one other post in that time. Again you don't understand what rent free means.
If you can buy Udogie for cash upfront then you can stretch the money to buy both.
If you need a centre back look at Akomeah.
You @ me. Thats not really how rent free works. Its ironic you said I was retarded.
Its minor, like a rounding error. This post is hysterical.
I wasn't aware it was doing this, but its not the reason Bozo Lockjaw doesn't have Mbappe in the top 20 players and thinks Ngolo Kante is a better right winger than Yamal. Thats because his file is awful and actually says speed isn't that important.
You can use genie scout with the correct weightings and it will sill have the top 10 players for each position correct, they just might be in the wrong order. But hopefully you can use your own eyes, and brain if its there, to see who might turn out to be the best.
No one in their right mind is paying for a file which doesn't have Mbappe in the top 20 players. And you say other people have ego's.
Of course you don't think there's anything wrong with genie scout because you haven't actually tried anything else and compared. Lightning literally told you he had the same issue as well and you just brush it aside because it doesn't fit your narrative and you want to continue this gag.
Deary me the intellect is rather low on here. I have brought many things to the table. For example I said stamina was important, which Bozo ridiculed me for but now says is important. And I have shown the ratings to be very wrong, but maybe you also think Mbappe is meh?? Bozo's ratings reduce the skill gap in players and severely undervalues speed.
I have used phython extensively which is far superior to genie scout, so wrong again. Setting my own ratings and using 7x for speed. The reason people think genie scout is broken is because the input is wrong as I have already said. But if people dont understand what the problem is, its a worry. If you put diesel into a petrol car you blame the car for not working?? Lockjaw already corrected the problems for the latest file. Maybe he realised, maybe he didn't. I think he did, but he just likes to hide behind the falsehood its bugged. Yet thousands used it with no problem?
No I'm not retarded. What a mean thing to say. I'm not spewing any bullshit and my posts are for a very good reason as I've already explained. Maybe you have a mental disability and can't read very well? I'm exposing the truths about the dreadful testing carried out by Bozo. One day Bozo says a certain attribute isn't needed, the next he says it's important. A complete charlatan.
I don't sit around waiting for Lockjaw to post. Initially I replied to say he'd missed out some important attributes for a full back and their reply was an attempt to ridicule me. I have a right to reply. And it's continued that way,along with making up things I said in a pathetic attempt at deflection from their own failures. Others have explained the testing and results are faulty also. Bozo claims genie scout doesn't work as well. All of these things are the hallmark of someone who doesn't know what they're doing and as I rightfully said a complete charlatan.
That said I'm off on holiday today and won't be looking at this. When I return I'm sure Bozo Lockjaw will have changed their mind once again. It's a recurring theme you see. New tests show different results. And so on.