Middleweight165
@ZaZ after this discussion with you and zippo about retraining, it's an absolute no brainer to retrain Ws and FBs to the opposite side because theres no negatives
ZaZ said: I have added a new piece of information to the first post:
"Use Focus Play Down the Left/Right whenever you have an advantage on that side, (when your opponent has a weakness on that side, or when one of your flanks is clearly stronger than the other). Do not bother with Focus Play Through The Middle, as it does not give any benefit even when your opponent has a weak midfield."


Should I just change this in the tactical overview before each match?
Mark said: Your calculation is correct. Of course you can improve your players position value and therefore their positional rating by training them and playing them in the position.

GS have a very minor adjustment for positional value, it is around 0.35% per point. My values are derived from the FM Arena testing over the last 2 years, and I believe they are much closer to the mark.


Thanks!

Can you expand a bit further on you trying to get value for your money that you described in this post https://fm-arena.com/find-comment/14024/

I dont quite understand how you can find value. Why wouldn’t you just use positional rating and buy the highest rated player you can afford?
@Zippo Thanks for the clear explanation, fully understood
ZaZ said: No, it doesn't cost any points to retrain position. However, it seems to consider the CA from the most expensive position. If you go to the Editor and set a ST to have 20 in CM, it will keep the CA from ST, because it's higher. If you do the other way around (set a CM to 20 in ST), it changes the CA to that of a ST.

However, the difference isn't so big and the benefit of having Blue + Green far outweighs any loss of 3 or 5 in PA (having higher CA doesn't affect the current ability, it just means you reach PA faster).

About positional and general rating, the first is considering the ability on the position, while the second is considering only attributes.


Why does Current Ability change if the position value changes? I would assume the CA remained the same if you changed a players position in the editor. Why would that then mean losing potential ability points?

Edit - I read this comment of yours in another thread (https://fm-arena.com/find-comment/13884/), It's clear now

Is there a positional value you wouldnt go below when retraining a CM to ST? I'm assuming 1 would take too long. Is there a cutoff value?
@ZaZ I would have to use the 1st option as I instant result most games and I would assume the assistant manager wouldnt solve it.

I wasn't aware there were different ratings, general and positional. Looking into this has just made me more confused :) I will continue my questions in @Mark thread because I think it's most suitable there

Is there a position value I shouldn’t go below because it will either take too long or it will cost too many attribute points, I’m assuming retraining position cost attribute points?
Hey @Mark Does the positional rating on GS not take into account the position value or is it just inaccurate? Why is your calculation necessary?

I'm looking at a player who has a position value of 1 and a positional rating of 66.9%, so using your calculation, his true positional value is 39.3%. Is that correct?
Mark said: I have a couple of things to note. FM Arena said that their previous testing had a margin of error and that their new testing regime removed most of this. I don't think the results above is outside the previous testing. FM Genie Scout did have a small adjustment for position that was their attempt to allow for positional unfamiliarity.

I worked with the proportional differences from the last 2 years and the impacts identified in testing and came up with a formula for giving the real rating for position.

So here goes. In the formula A1 is the location of the rating you want to manipulate and B1 is the location of the position score out of 20. It seems to work out very close to the testing numbers that FM Arena came up with.

Download the data for the player or players you are interested in to excel and then enter the positional score out of 20 for each position and then use this formula to give you their real positional rating:

=A1*(1-(20-B1)/46)

This is about 2.17% reduction for each point under 20.

Hope this helps.


@Mark am i right in saying that if I want a players true positional rating, in its simplest form, I need to reduce the GS positional rating by 2.17 for every point under 20?
ZaZ said: It's not very practical to hire someone skilled in multiple positions, because the combination CM+ST is not very common. Instead, if you start training to a completely new position during pre-season, it usually takes five to ten official matches to reach accomplished rating (dark green color). I feel like it's fine to have this downtime in order to have an easy transition between Blue and Green, because those tactics complement each other and are useful in different situations.

I think its the attribute distribution which is my concern. If I take my CM who's positional rating on GS is 83 and his FS rating is 73. Even if he trains in the ST position and gets accomplished his positional rating will still be the same won't it? So by moving him to ST position during the game, the overall quality of my team will drop by 10 pts
@ZaZ Thanks mate, I didn't realise that guy was also doing videos on other channels so I'll check them out.

I wanted to ask you more about the Blue/Green combo tactic. I'm going to start a new save today and try it. Obviously you think its worth doing but does the drop in quality of player not diminish the effectiveness of the tactic?

For example, in my previous save I was using @Geek Positive Tika Taka + your Green and Green Light and I could build a squad with quality players in each position. I think its rare to find a player with a high positional score for CM and ST (maybe 90 and 79 respectively), so does that not drop the quality of the team overall?

I tend to use Instant Result so I'm not able to sub in players if formation changes using a match plan

Now thinking about it, maybe Green 5.0 and Positive Tika Taka aren't much different
Zippo said: We've tested them and found that it's not worth bothering

This was my understanding but @ZaZ isn't usually someone who adds something like this on a feeling, which is why I was interested in where the idea came from
Nikko said: Do what? :)

Move the players from U18 to U23, sell players who aren't good enough for the 1st team, etc
ZaZ said: I have added a new piece of information to the first post:
"Use Focus Play Down the Left/Right whenever you have an advantage on that side, (when your opponent has a weakness on that side, or when one of your flanks is clearly stronger than the other). Do not bother with Focus Play Through The Middle, as it does not give any benefit even when your opponent has a weak midfield."


Is this an opposition instruction? Is this something you have tested @ZaZ ?
Nikko said: Picking eligible players for matches is the only duty AI has in that case

If I'm not mistaken you also can delegate the training of U18 and U23 to the assistant manager

The assistant manager doesn't do any transfers and he doesn't move players between U18, U23 and the main team. He just picks players for matches and that's all.


So you do that?
Nikko said: Yes, I delegate it to the assistant manager

As I said, U18s and U23s teams are completely irrelevant to me


How does this work out in the long term? Does the AI move players who are too old for the U18 to the U23s? What happens when players are too old for the U23s, does the AI sell them?

This is my concern, that the AI will turn the club into chaos
Nikko said: I never manage U18s and U23s because I find it's too boring.

If I see a massively talented U18s player then I put him straight into my main team

I don't bother with developing average U18 players


Do you let the AI manage those teams?
Nikko said: The reputations of U18s and U23s leagues aren't high enough to allow players reaching their full potential playing in them.

To reach their full potential players must play in very high reputable leagues as English Premier League, La Liga and other similar league.

The same rules apply to real life football, Messi would never become the person who he is now if he played only 5-10 matches for Barcelona in La Liga every season. So to reach their full potential players must play as many competitive matches as possible.


Yeah I understand this. How do you manage your U18s and U23s?
keithb said: Have you changed all your players training intensity to automatic? I know some people before forgot to do that. Re the fatigue you need to manually rest the player when he returns to training, otherwise the auto settings override the week rest.

I have it on automatic. Do I still need to manually rest players at some times?
ZaZ said: Match load is influenced only by matches in the previous two weeks (or something like that). It is not affected by training or resting. That means if your match load is heavy, then you either have to rotate more, or live with it. It's normal to happen around the middle of the season, when you have multiple tournaments to play.

I think I probably just hit a bad patch, it solved itself without too much intervention
My usual tactic is to not sign players for the U18s and remove the U23s from their respective league. This means that both teams end up filled with fake players. I ignore the U18s and arrange friendlies for the U23s to keep first team players fit

The obvious problem this causes is the development of club grown players. I usually avoid this by signing 18 year olds and putting them straight into my 1st team but they never reach their potential because they dont play enough

I've never let the AI control the U18 and U23 teams because I dont trust them and think it will end up chaotic.

What are peoples experience with this? Does it work?