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. Expand
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. Expand
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. Expand
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?
ZaZ said: Yeah, I train to get the position rating, because that has high influence on performance. Dark green is good enough to play matches without hindering the team but becoming natural (light green) will increase performance further. Expand
Thanks, I'll give it a try.
Do you have any tips for keeping match load/fatigue down? I'm using you rest recommendations and your training but my players are getting injured because the match load is Heavy. I am playing 2 matches a week and rotating every player but the match load, fatigue and injury risk is always high
ZaZ said: In my experiments, there was barely any change on win rate when training players in different positions. I tested with wingbacks and wingers in opposite sides, and two CMs training as AM and ST. I also didn't notice any difference in performance for those players training in different position. It is also easier to build a squad when you don't need to worry about what side your winger or wingback plays. The main advantage, however, is that Green is better than Solid Blue, allowing you to use two very strong tactics for different situations. Expand
Thanks for the reply. So as long as there positional circle indicator is at least dark green I'm ok? I read in another of your replies, you train your CMs in AM and ST, is that simply to get the positional rating to dark green? If the players are already green in both positions is it irrelevant which position they train in?
ZaZ said: Added a variant of Green for easy transition from/to Blue.
Green 5.0 (Blue Transition) is an alternative to Solid Blue 4.0 to hold a score. It changes the left AF and the SS to CM, becoming very efficient once you train those players on that position (don't worry with tactical familiarity for position/role/duty, the effect is minimum). A good strategy is to start matches with Blue, then switch to Green when you have a one goal lead. The other strategy is to start with Green, then switch to Blue if you concede a one goal lead, or if you have a draw after half time. Either of those strategies allow you to make full use of the advantages of Blue (high attack) and Green (high defense), maximizing your chance of winning. Expand
@ZaZ why do you say the effect of tactical familiarity for pos/role/duty is minimal? Doesn't it lower the effectiveness of the tactic?
Xeno94 said: Having a lot of fun with the 433 DM CM(A) tactic. Changed the IF -> IW and had them stay wider which seemed to help. F9 really involved in link up whilst still being a top scorer.
I'm sure there could be a better tweak with one of the CM roles, or perhaps the mentality of IWB Expand
Do you think this change is better than the original?
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. Expand
I'm catching up on this thread so lots of questions all at once
If I have 2 players, A with a rating of 80% and a positional score of 20 and B with a rating of 85% and a positional rating of 18. Player B's adjusted scorer rating is around 80.5%, on paper he would perform better? I know the margins are very small so might not result in real world better performance
@Mark Do you know what the GS potential rating is based on? I signed some young players whose potential rating was over 90% but now this has dropped. Looking at it more closely it seems to fluctuate. Why is this?
ZaZ said: I just watched after reading your message. His results are very similar to mine, so there is nothing to change in my training schedule right now. Keep in mind that players taking longer time to recover with training doesn't make a difference since I recommend setting players to "no pitch or gym work". Expand
Yeah thats what I thought the conclusion would be. Interesting you came to the same conclusions before he has done the further testing
ZaZ said: Green is very similar to this tactic, which scored 6.4. It's nearly as good as Blue, but worse in attack and better in defense. I believe Green is better than Solid Blue, but the difference shouldn't matter much if your team is very strong. In my experiments, Solid Blue conceded as little as Green, but Green had higher win rate. Expand
I think due to the tactical familiarity I'll stick with the Blues. I do like the Green formation more though, most realistic in my opinion. The videos on the channel of the video you linked are really interesting, thanks again
ZaZ said: Added a variant of Green for easy transition from/to Blue.
Green 5.0 (Blue Transition) is an alternative to Solid Blue 4.0 to hold a score. It changes the left AF and the SS to CM, becoming very efficient once you train those players on that position (don't worry with tactical familiarity for position/role/duty, the effect is minimum). A good strategy is to start matches with Blue, then switch to Green when you have a one goal lead. The other strategy is to start with Green, then switch to Blue if you concede a one goal lead, or if you have a draw after half time. Either of those strategies allow you to make full use of the advantages of Blue (high attack) and Green (high defense), maximizing your chance of winning. Expand
Is Green superior to Blue @ZaZ ? I'm currently running Blue - Solid Blue - Light Blue combo. Is there a reason I would change this?
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?
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?
I have it on automatic. Do I still need to manually rest players at some times?
I think I probably just hit a bad patch, it solved itself without too much intervention
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?
Thanks, I'll give it a try.
Do you have any tips for keeping match load/fatigue down? I'm using you rest recommendations and your training but my players are getting injured because the match load is Heavy. I am playing 2 matches a week and rotating every player but the match load, fatigue and injury risk is always high
Thanks for the reply. So as long as there positional circle indicator is at least dark green I'm ok? I read in another of your replies, you train your CMs in AM and ST, is that simply to get the positional rating to dark green? If the players are already green in both positions is it irrelevant which position they train in?
Green 5.0 (Blue Transition) is an alternative to Solid Blue 4.0 to hold a score. It changes the left AF and the SS to CM, becoming very efficient once you train those players on that position (don't worry with tactical familiarity for position/role/duty, the effect is minimum). A good strategy is to start matches with Blue, then switch to Green when you have a one goal lead. The other strategy is to start with Green, then switch to Blue if you concede a one goal lead, or if you have a draw after half time. Either of those strategies allow you to make full use of the advantages of Blue (high attack) and Green (high defense), maximizing your chance of winning.
@ZaZ why do you say the effect of tactical familiarity for pos/role/duty is minimal? Doesn't it lower the effectiveness of the tactic?
I'm sure there could be a better tweak with one of the CM roles, or perhaps the mentality of IWB
Do you think this change is better than the original?
I took off LW, got beaten 3-0 so it was the start of a process of elimination
What about False 9?
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.
I'm catching up on this thread so lots of questions all at once
If I have 2 players, A with a rating of 80% and a positional score of 20 and B with a rating of 85% and a positional rating of 18. Player B's adjusted scorer rating is around 80.5%, on paper he would perform better? I know the margins are very small so might not result in real world better performance
Yeah thats what I thought the conclusion would be. Interesting you came to the same conclusions before he has done the further testing
I think due to the tactical familiarity I'll stick with the Blues. I do like the Green formation more though, most realistic in my opinion. The videos on the channel of the video you linked are really interesting, thanks again
Green 5.0 (Blue Transition) is an alternative to Solid Blue 4.0 to hold a score. It changes the left AF and the SS to CM, becoming very efficient once you train those players on that position (don't worry with tactical familiarity for position/role/duty, the effect is minimum). A good strategy is to start matches with Blue, then switch to Green when you have a one goal lead. The other strategy is to start with Green, then switch to Blue if you concede a one goal lead, or if you have a draw after half time. Either of those strategies allow you to make full use of the advantages of Blue (high attack) and Green (high defense), maximizing your chance of winning.
Is Green superior to Blue @ZaZ ? I'm currently running Blue - Solid Blue - Light Blue combo. Is there a reason I would change this?