harvestgreen22 said: OK, I'll take note of it. Handling, Shot Stopping, Attacking, Physical, Chance Conversion, Aerial Defence, Ground Defence and Distribution I'll try when I'm free.
I think it's fine. You can do it this way.
My thought: Currently, we actually don't know for sure whether "Recovery" will truly have the effect of "reducing injuries" (I haven't conducted any tests, and it seems no one has either for FM24/26)
However, compared to "rest", "Recovery" can slow down the decline in "Match Sharpness".And more "Match Sharpness" has been shown through tests conducted by another player previously to be effective in reducing injuries. That's all right then.
Regarding "Recovery" itself, it only makes very minor adjustments to the distribution of attributes. Therefore, the aspect of attribute distribution can be disregarded.
roles trained —— Are you referring to choosing a new position to train on the player's personal page? I think if there is a need to train on a new position, then choosing it is fine.
Once it is selected, there will be a slight adjustment to the distribution of attributes (I think this is a bad thing because he will definitely waste some attributes on relatively "useless" ones), this is not good. At the same time, it can also improve the proficiency in the new position, this is useful. There are both good and bad
" - 2x Physical + Match Practice " Excel 3 , sequence 110 , It should be fine. You can take a look at the others and compare them. " - 2x Physical + 2x Match Practice + Attack + Defend + Set Pieces " I haven't tested this yet. I'll give it a try later.
Then, I have never tried to mix different training schedules (in the tests, the same one is always used), but based on speculation, it might be the weighted average of the two.
" add set pieces because I believe (and that might be just my fantasy) that players score more from set pieces when they train that session " ————I'm not sure about this either. I haven't tried it, and it's also difficult to quantify (we haven't found the statistical item "goals scored from free kicks". I think it might be impossible to test it forever.
" I would also like to suggest, if possible, to post pictures of the expected resulting player with each routine " ————-- If it's just "1 season", then you can find the corresponding page in my Excel file, for example, - 2x Physical + Match Practice His serial number in excel is 110. You should be able to find a "110" sub-page in "Excel 2".
Inside, at the top are the initial attributes and CA. The middle section , contains All attributes and CA of all 11 players after each test. At the bottom, the average values of these players are calculated.
These data should be sufficient, but if they are to be recorded in the form of pictures, it would be very troublesome.
Then you can see that the initial conditions of this test were deliberately set in a certain way. It was set up with a high growth rate condition to highlight the differences between the training sessions: the players were 18 years old, very young, the training facilities and coaches were excellent, Professionalism had 12 points above the average, and the difference between CA and PA was quite significant. All of this will widen the differences in the effects.
" having a player with 19 in pace and acceleration and good values in other attributes can be better than a speedster with 20 pace and acceleration and 1 in the rest "
Your idea is fine. Here's how my idea of solve :
1. Open Excel 3, look at "Number 117", "Number 171, 172, 173,... 176". These are different "Additional Focus" items. By choosing different "Additional Focus", it significantly boosts the growth of the corresponding options. This "Additional Focus" is a mandatory attribute allocator. Therefore, it is possible to selectively supplement a player's weaknesses at certain stages, or strengthen his Advantageous (other than pace/acceleration).
2. look at "Number 176" - "Number 177, 178, 179, 180" "Number 186" - "Number 191, 192, 193, 194" This thing is suitable for different ages. You will see that when players are younger, their total growth is greater. As one gets older, the number of negative items increases.
3. "Number 176" - "Number 181, 182, 183, 184" If there is no "Additional Focus", this portion of the allocation will be distributed to all attributes.
My idea is, 4. If you play in the high-level league and have good enough players available for training without the urgency to sell, then choose a training program that will allow all attributes to increase slightly.
For example, "No. 186", his Decision is low, Technique is low, First touch is low, and he doesn't waste too much CA. Meanwhile, attributes such as Dribbling, Finishing, Concentration, and Jumping reach are all increasing at a decent rate.
As the players' age increases, the aforementioned growth will gradually decrease as shown in the " "sequence number 176" - sequence number 177, 178, 179, 180"" of the table. And this remaining margin is sufficient to ensure that these attributes of the players do not fall below zero (decrease) or continue to rise slightly.
When the "Additional Focus" of this player has reached an adequate level, for example, if you think a pace of 18 is sufficient, then change to a different "Additional Focus". After that, the growth rate of the pace will significantly decrease but it will still continue to grow.
This way, it aligns with what you said. While the player gains considerable Advantageous, they can also make up for their weaknesses. Then, throughout the entire career of the player, the allocation of "No. 186" has sufficient room for the player to maintain their attributes without being too wasteful of them.
When you believe that a player's situation makes it appropriate not to use "Additional Focus", you can choose to remove "Additional Focus" as in "Number 176" - "Number 181, 182, 183, 184", and allow the distribution to be evenly distributed.
I think the effect of this method should be the same as the one you require. The drawback might be that from time to time you need to check what "Additional Focus" the players should use. Expand
Have you tried optimizing the roles trained? Sometimes I need to train players to a new position, and it is possible to pick roles that focus on the desirable attributes since they are only used to define attributes trained.
Personally, my training schedule is: - 2x Physical + Match Practice (for two matches a week) - 2x Physical + 2x Match Practice + Attack + Defend + Set Pieces (one match in the week) - Quickness focus - Everyone trains roles with good highlighted attributes for their position
I don't know exactly how that compares to the ones in the list. Probably worse pace and acceleration potential, but I usually prefer to profit more on sales to be able to afford more high quality fast young players, allowing me to reach 18-20 pace and acceleration anyway. I add set pieces because I believe (and that might be just my fantasy) that players score more from set pieces when they train that session (again, I didn't test this, it is just my observation, which might be very wrong).
Anyway, I would like to know if someone can test if Set Pieces actually have any influence in goals from set pieces (using some quality set piece routine, obviously). I would also like to suggest, if possible, to post pictures of the expected resulting player with each routine, starting from a fast young player (like 12 pace and acceleration at the age of 16, or 14 of each at 18, which is pretty realistic). I think it would be good because, sometimes, having a player with 19 in pace and acceleration and good values in other attributes can be better than a speedster with 20 pace and acceleration and 1 in the rest, making many of the training schedules judged "inferior" become viable instead.
Same as 1.55, but with IFs playing wide, because playing narrower didn't work well with Whipped Crosses. This test uses Low Crosses, and is a reference point to compare with the version with Whipped Crosses (giving a last chance to that team instruction).
In real life football, players usually receive passes with the opposite foot of where the ball comes from, using their body to protect against opponents. That means if you are in the left side and get a pass from the right side, you get the ball on your good foot, which is usually in a better position for a dribble or pass. However, FM does not have that realism, so it makes much less of a difference in the game.
treath said: Zaz, i'm playing with 1.46 version but i made these tweaks myself, i guess this version will get better results.
Besides i still sticking with low crosses, but i add take more risks OCBs, Shoot Less for wingbacks, i add too sit narrower for inside forward and i really do not know if it is a coincidence or not but after i add Hold up the ball instruction for Shadow Striker my team bang more and a lot of goals.
Shadow striker itself score more and give more assists, there is a game he made 3 assists and score 2 goals, that not happen never before this instruction. Maybe after your currents tests you should add this.
-----
In defence there is a difference in Argus for my team made sense, that is set off the step up more instruction and make balanced...at least watching the games it seems i suffer less from long balss and killing passes. Expand
Thanks! I will try some of those tomorrow and see how it goes.
Giving a new chance to Whipping Crosses. For this version, I also added take more risks to OCBs, since they have more options for passes from the back than other positions, and shoot less often to wingbacks, since they have the lowest accuracy because they mostly shot from outside of area. Those instructions have been successfully tested in Argus, and they make sense.
max 737 said: There is something major wrong with this FM26, I get knocked out of Carabao cup first round at home 1-2. I have 14 shots on target and score only 1 goal and they have only 2 shots on target and they score both the two goals. And this happens repeatedly. This is absolutely unrealistic for me. And this never happens on my side but always with the opponent's. How is this possible? Because of this no tactic works properly. I may have to stop playing this game Expand
FM has always been like that. There is no way to fix it other than deep prayer.
treath said: ZaZ, watching games i found the performance of my shadow striker very bad, does not participate well, score some goals but....
Did you test other roles in the AMC position like Atackind Mid or Channel Midfield?? The SS really outperformed all other roles? (i read somewhere that the channel forward is the best if you play with striker) Expand
I tested other roles, and SS seems to be the best right now. AM is close, but the others did not perform very well. I can investigate the role again after my current batch of tests.
Handling, Shot Stopping, Attacking, Physical, Chance Conversion, Aerial Defence, Ground Defence and Distribution
I'll try when I'm free.
I think it's fine. You can do it this way.
My thought:
Currently, we actually don't know for sure whether "Recovery" will truly have the effect of "reducing injuries" (I haven't conducted any tests, and it seems no one has either for FM24/26)
However, compared to "rest", "Recovery" can slow down the decline in "Match Sharpness".And more "Match Sharpness" has been shown through tests conducted by another player previously to be effective in reducing injuries. That's all right then.
Regarding "Recovery" itself, it only makes very minor adjustments to the distribution of attributes. Therefore, the aspect of attribute distribution can be disregarded.
roles trained
—— Are you referring to choosing a new position to train on the player's personal page?
I think if there is a need to train on a new position, then choosing it is fine.
Once it is selected, there will be a slight adjustment to the distribution of attributes (I think this is a bad thing because he will definitely waste some attributes on relatively "useless" ones), this is not good.
At the same time, it can also improve the proficiency in the new position, this is useful.
There are both good and bad
"
- 2x Physical + Match Practice
"
Excel 3 , sequence 110 , It should be fine. You can take a look at the others and compare them.
"
- 2x Physical + 2x Match Practice + Attack + Defend + Set Pieces
"
I haven't tested this yet. I'll give it a try later.
Then, I have never tried to mix different training schedules (in the tests, the same one is always used),
but based on speculation, it might be the weighted average of the two.
"
add set pieces because I believe (and that might be just my fantasy) that players score more from set pieces when they train that session
"
————I'm not sure about this either. I haven't tried it, and it's also difficult to quantify
(we haven't found the statistical item "goals scored from free kicks"
I think it might be impossible to test it forever.
"
I would also like to suggest, if possible, to post pictures of the expected resulting player with each routine
"
————-- If it's just "1 season", then you can find the corresponding page in my Excel file,
for example, - 2x Physical + Match Practice
His serial number in excel is 110.
You should be able to find a "110" sub-page in "Excel 2".
excel(part 2 , old)
https://mega.nz/file/QZNVgQzK#xOTiw1heWmVtIDRDDPiUZqzbBnqYAbVi14RYX0W3CoQ
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/NzTu56KH
excel(part 3, the newest , update a lot)
https://mega.nz/file/8JlW2LKb#NZyQ-gdnlcXu3Iun8-l5I-_c7wRmikgAvjOZjEsTvCg
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/oa8Y2Z4U
Inside, at the top are the initial attributes and CA.
The middle section , contains All attributes and CA of all 11 players after each test.
At the bottom, the average values of these players are calculated.
These data should be sufficient,
but if they are to be recorded in the form of pictures, it would be very troublesome.
Then you can see that the initial conditions of this test were deliberately set in a certain way.
It was set up with a high growth rate condition to highlight the differences between the training sessions:
the players were 18 years old, very young, the training facilities and coaches were excellent, Professionalism had 12 points above the average, and the difference between CA and PA was quite significant.
All of this will widen the differences in the effects.
And, if you mean to observe the continuous effect over "multiple seasons", this requires replacing with other test leagues.
I had done it in another earlier test:
https://fm-arena.com/thread/14015-under-preset-conditions-training-for-4-years-with-a-specified-growth-strategy-and-then-watching-the-player-s-attributes-and-ca-growth/
I haven't gotten any good ideas from this test yet
"
having a player with 19 in pace and acceleration and good values in other attributes can be better than a speedster with 20 pace and acceleration and 1 in the rest
"
Your idea is fine. Here's how my idea of solve :
1.
Open Excel 3,
look at "Number 117", "Number 171, 172, 173,... 176".
These are different "Additional Focus" items.
By choosing different "Additional Focus", it significantly boosts the growth of the corresponding options.
This "Additional Focus" is a mandatory attribute allocator.
Therefore, it is possible to selectively supplement a player's weaknesses at certain stages, or strengthen his Advantageous (other than pace/acceleration).
2.
look at "Number 176" - "Number 177, 178, 179, 180"
"Number 186" - "Number 191, 192, 193, 194"
This thing is suitable for different ages.
You will see that when players are younger, their total growth is greater.
As one gets older, the number of negative items increases.
3.
"Number 176" - "Number 181, 182, 183, 184"
If there is no "Additional Focus", this portion of the allocation will be distributed to all attributes.
My idea is,
4.
If you play in the high-level league and have good enough players available for training without the urgency to sell,
then choose a training program that will allow all attributes to increase slightly.
For example, "No. 186",
his Decision is low, Technique is low, First touch is low, and he doesn't waste too much CA.
Meanwhile, attributes such as Dribbling, Finishing, Concentration, and Jumping reach are all increasing at a decent rate.
As the players' age increases, the aforementioned growth will gradually decrease as shown in the " "sequence number 176" - sequence number 177, 178, 179, 180"" of the table.
And this remaining margin is sufficient to ensure that these attributes of the players do not fall below zero (decrease) or continue to rise slightly.
When the "Additional Focus" of this player has reached an adequate level, for example, if you think a pace of 18 is sufficient, then change to a different "Additional Focus". After that, the growth rate of the pace will significantly decrease but it will still continue to grow.
This way, it aligns with what you said. While the player gains considerable Advantageous, they can also make up for their weaknesses.
Then, throughout the entire career of the player, the allocation of "No. 186" has sufficient room for the player to maintain their attributes without being too wasteful of them.
When you believe that a player's situation makes it appropriate not to use "Additional Focus", you can choose to remove "Additional Focus" as in "Number 176" - "Number 181, 182, 183, 184", and allow the distribution to be evenly distributed.
I think the effect of this method should be the same as the one you require. The drawback might be that from time to time you need to check what "Additional Focus" the players should use.
Thank you!
Personally, my training schedule is:
- 2x Physical + Match Practice (for two matches a week)
- 2x Physical + 2x Match Practice + Attack + Defend + Set Pieces (one match in the week)
- Quickness focus
- Everyone trains roles with good highlighted attributes for their position
I don't know exactly how that compares to the ones in the list. Probably worse pace and acceleration potential, but I usually prefer to profit more on sales to be able to afford more high quality fast young players, allowing me to reach 18-20 pace and acceleration anyway. I add set pieces because I believe (and that might be just my fantasy) that players score more from set pieces when they train that session (again, I didn't test this, it is just my observation, which might be very wrong).
Anyway, I would like to know if someone can test if Set Pieces actually have any influence in goals from set pieces (using some quality set piece routine, obviously). I would also like to suggest, if possible, to post pictures of the expected resulting player with each routine, starting from a fast young player (like 12 pace and acceleration at the age of 16, or 14 of each at 18, which is pretty realistic). I think it would be good because, sometimes, having a player with 19 in pace and acceleration and good values in other attributes can be better than a speedster with 20 pace and acceleration and 1 in the rest, making many of the training schedules judged "inferior" become viable instead.
But i will stick with it in my save, i like it watching the games.
Thanks ZaZ
You are welcome, and thanks for the suggestions.
Yes, I just use the same for the entire year, and add friendlies when there is no match.
Same + AWB: Shoot Less Often + OCB: Take More Risks + IF: Stay Narrower
It doesn't make much of a difference in my opinion (didn't test it), but I usually put in the same side as foot.
https://fm-arena.com/thread/13508-training-is-fake-it-just-assigns-attributes-not-grows-attributes-results-based-on-a-large-number-of-tests/page-12/
Besides i still sticking with low crosses, but i add take more risks OCBs, Shoot Less for wingbacks, i add too sit narrower for inside forward and i really do not know if it is a coincidence or not but after i add Hold up the ball instruction for Shadow Striker my team bang more and a lot of goals.
Shadow striker itself score more and give more assists, there is a game he made 3 assists and score 2 goals, that not happen never before this instruction. Maybe after your currents tests you should add this.
-----
In defence there is a difference in Argus for my team made sense, that is set off the step up more instruction and make balanced...at least watching the games it seems i suffer less from long balss and killing passes.
Thanks! I will try some of those tomorrow and see how it goes.
FM has always been like that. There is no way to fix it other than deep prayer.
Sad for the loss, but thanks for testing!
Did you test other roles in the AMC position like Atackind Mid or Channel Midfield?? The SS really outperformed all other roles?
(i read somewhere that the channel forward is the best if you play with striker)
I tested other roles, and SS seems to be the best right now. AM is close, but the others did not perform very well. I can investigate the role again after my current batch of tests.