White Europe said: second season with Salernitana, we won double. As you can see we invested in Pace a lot, but after testing attributes for last few days i also think that tactic is very important too, and also investing in at least few other attributes then just pace, acceleration is vital.
saycarramrod said: @Mark@ZaZ I know you guys have a lot of experience using Genie Scout and modifying the ratings files on it - a quick question: if hypothetically I wanted to modify the ykykyk balanced or ZaZ ratings file to more heavily rate Pace and Acceleration (or any of the other ~7 or so attributes with most impact) is it as simple as just changing them to 100 in the ratings file in each individual position or is there some greater math behind them that other attribute ratings would need to be lowered for them to be increased? Expand
Increase it to 100 will give more weight, and reducing or removing less important attributes will increase the other weights even further.
Maths are simple. Let's say you have 5 attributes with wights, like below. Acceleration 100 Pace 100 Dribbling 80 Anticipation 60 Finishing 60
That's a total of 400 points, so Pace will be 25% of the score of a player. Then, let's say you remove Anticipation, Dribbling and Finishing (reduce them to zero weight). Now, Pace will be 50% of the score of a player, becoming even more important for the score.
It's not exactly that simple, but the logic is the same.
Mick1 said: Is ZaZ training the most effective? I'm having a few consecutive injuries Expand
Like @Pumpkin said, the training assumes you use automatic rest. The schedule he posted, with daily match practice, is more effective, but it uses a glitch that was not intended by the devs.
Pip said: @ZaZ or anyone, where would you suggest putting your best or fastest strikers in this? Expand
Middle player will get more opportunities, because he participates from attacks from left, right and middle. So, it's better to have the best striker there.
Guidito said: You always deliver my friend @ZaZ - thanks a million. Follow up question - did you notice any effect in training a player for a position that is not currently in the tactic?
Example - I have a promising winger from my intake. My tactic plays with DWs but im afraid if I start training my newgen as DW, some points will go to attributes like 'tackling'. I should train him as a W for example, so attributes go to dribbling or crossing. But im afraid the fact that im training them on a different role will impact how much they feel familiar with my tactic - get my point? Expand
I cannot say anything about the impact in win rate for training as W instead of DW, but I believe it should be negligible. Therefore, training as W will probably give a more focused growth than playing as DW for what you want. Keep in mind that this is micro-optimization and will probably have very little impact in performance, and some experiments would be needed to confirm if it actually has much influence on growth or not.
Sorry for the late answer, have been really busy recently. I made the experiment training DL as DR and AMR as AML, and it didn't have any noticeable effect in win rate. On the other hand, it increased my options for each of those positions, allowing me to use better players and actually increase my win rate.
For example, let's say you are searching for a DL, and you cannot find any good one, but instead you find a very good DR. You can just train him as DL.
A second example is when you have two DL and two DR in your squad. Let's say you have them like this: DL (180 CA) DL (179 CA) DR (160 CA) DR (158 CA)
If you train them in their normal positions, then your first team will have one side with 180 CA, and the other with 160 CA. However, if you train your wingbacks to play in both sides, then you can use the 180 and 179, which is clearly better.
Keep in mind that it takes some time to get them to accomplished, and even more to make them natural in those positions. It depends on their versatility hidden attribute, so it can take as short as the pre-season and a couple of matches, or as long as the whole season. My advice is to train them in the reverse position, use them in their natural position, and switch their sides when you have a comfortable lead (like winning 3-0 and 20 minutes to end the match) to make them learn the position faster.
Kamas1 said: Why do some players not develop at all? for example, I have a 21 year old defense (95 CA). He plays every game, his morale is high, he trains well, but he hasn't improved a single point all season. What it comes from? I will add that I run a team in the 2 bundesliga Expand
It probably has to do with the level of matches. Players from lower division "cap" at certain point of growth, which is usually when they want to leave the team to play on higher divisions. The best solution is to get promoted.
Pumpkin said: that's with no automatic resting those three sessions are the most three effective sessions and the more a player trains the more impact they get from training Expand
Yeah, that schedule is made to be used with automatic resting. In short, instead of resting the entire team after matches, you rest only those that got tired on matches, allowing you to have an overall higher growth.
- Determination to get things from the board. - People Management to increase morale with player talk. - Motivating to get good shouts and pep talk. - Level of Discipline to get less players complaining. - One coaching category at your choice, like Fitness (for training pace and acceleration).
StewG said: I'd say it's working just fine. I'll never get an easier run, but I hadn't won the World Cup with Scotland since Champ Man 01/02 so I will take it Expand
Chriswin4 said: Thanks mate, although from what I can see on Genie Scout, Yildirim is actually done developing, I think he's reached his prime. Expand
If you ask me personally, I would hire Chris Geiles. He is fast, good finisher, young, and his current salary is half of Robbie Lee, so he might come with a cheaper impact in your budget.
Delicious said: Yo, a question you said that the "reliable set pieces on corner defend" were better then this one? Just asking because i am gonna test some set pieces and i wanted to know if i have to re-test reliable or not. Expand
To be fair, they are too close to draw any conclusion. Would need @Zippo to help testing that, because I don't think the results can be measured well with normal tests. There is a big difference between optimal and normal set pieces, but between two good set pieces, the difference is minimal.
Based on this tactic. Since players are holding the ball better than before, I removed the instruction to Distribute Quickly and set attacking throw-ins to deliver short.
As you can see we invested in Pace a lot, but after testing attributes for last few days i also think that tactic is very important too, and also investing in at least few other attributes then just pace, acceleration is vital.
great tactic!
Gratz, and thanks for showing your results!
Increase it to 100 will give more weight, and reducing or removing less important attributes will increase the other weights even further.
Maths are simple. Let's say you have 5 attributes with wights, like below.
Acceleration 100
Pace 100
Dribbling 80
Anticipation 60
Finishing 60
That's a total of 400 points, so Pace will be 25% of the score of a player. Then, let's say you remove Anticipation, Dribbling and Finishing (reduce them to zero weight). Now, Pace will be 50% of the score of a player, becoming even more important for the score.
It's not exactly that simple, but the logic is the same.
Like @Pumpkin said, the training assumes you use automatic rest. The schedule he posted, with daily match practice, is more effective, but it uses a glitch that was not intended by the devs.
Middle player will get more opportunities, because he participates from attacks from left, right and middle. So, it's better to have the best striker there.
Follow up question - did you notice any effect in training a player for a position that is not currently in the tactic?
Example - I have a promising winger from my intake.
My tactic plays with DWs but im afraid if I start training my newgen as DW, some points will go to attributes like 'tackling'. I should train him as a W for example, so attributes go to dribbling or crossing.
But im afraid the fact that im training them on a different role will impact how much they feel familiar with my tactic - get my point?
I cannot say anything about the impact in win rate for training as W instead of DW, but I believe it should be negligible. Therefore, training as W will probably give a more focused growth than playing as DW for what you want. Keep in mind that this is micro-optimization and will probably have very little impact in performance, and some experiments would be needed to confirm if it actually has much influence on growth or not.
Sorry for the late answer, have been really busy recently. I made the experiment training DL as DR and AMR as AML, and it didn't have any noticeable effect in win rate. On the other hand, it increased my options for each of those positions, allowing me to use better players and actually increase my win rate.
For example, let's say you are searching for a DL, and you cannot find any good one, but instead you find a very good DR. You can just train him as DL.
A second example is when you have two DL and two DR in your squad. Let's say you have them like this:
DL (180 CA)
DL (179 CA)
DR (160 CA)
DR (158 CA)
If you train them in their normal positions, then your first team will have one side with 180 CA, and the other with 160 CA. However, if you train your wingbacks to play in both sides, then you can use the 180 and 179, which is clearly better.
Keep in mind that it takes some time to get them to accomplished, and even more to make them natural in those positions. It depends on their versatility hidden attribute, so it can take as short as the pre-season and a couple of matches, or as long as the whole season. My advice is to train them in the reverse position, use them in their natural position, and switch their sides when you have a comfortable lead (like winning 3-0 and 20 minutes to end the match) to make them learn the position faster.
Kamas1 said: Why do some players not develop at all? for example, I have a 21 year old defense (95 CA). He plays every game, his morale is high, he trains well, but he hasn't improved a single point all season. What it comes from? I will add that I run a team in the 2 bundesliga
It probably has to do with the level of matches. Players from lower division "cap" at certain point of growth, which is usually when they want to leave the team to play on higher divisions. The best solution is to get promoted.
Pumpkin said: that's with no automatic resting those three sessions are the most three effective sessions and the more a player trains the more impact they get from training
Yeah, that schedule is made to be used with automatic resting. In short, instead of resting the entire team after matches, you rest only those that got tired on matches, allowing you to have an overall higher growth.
what about prefered foot on both winger
WL = Left Footed
WR = Right Footed
or it doesn't matter at all?
Foot doesn't matter, I usually even train my wingers to play on both sides so I have extra options.
Pace and Acceleration for everyone.
- People Management to increase morale with player talk.
- Motivating to get good shouts and pep talk.
- Level of Discipline to get less players complaining.
- One coaching category at your choice, like Fitness (for training pace and acceleration).
The rest are dump attributes.
Thanks. :-)
Match engine is the same, but good luck there!
Awesome result!
If you ask me personally, I would hire Chris Geiles. He is fast, good finisher, young, and his current salary is half of Robbie Lee, so he might come with a cheaper impact in your budget.
Two points for avoiding one or two red cards a season seems reasonable.
Just asking because i am gonna test some set pieces and i wanted to know if i have to re-test reliable or not.
To be fair, they are too close to draw any conclusion. Would need @Zippo to help testing that, because I don't think the results can be measured well with normal tests. There is a big difference between optimal and normal set pieces, but between two good set pieces, the difference is minimal.