Prysiu said: Outstanding work on this extensive testing! Here are the key findings for those, who struggle to read this 😉

Core Discovery: Attribute Mechanics

- Attributes = "Propensity (attempts)" + "Success Rate"
- Higher attributes make players attempt actions MORE OFTEN, not just better
- This can HARM team performance when players ignore tactical instructions to do what they prefer

Why Higher Attributes Can Be Negative
- Player with high Passing will attempt more passes (even when inappropriate)
- Player with high Finishing will "steal" shooting opportunities from better-positioned teammates
- Success rate improves, but overall team performance may decline
- Explains the "red results" where attribute increases hurt win rates

AI Manager META Hierarchy
Strongest (META-level AI):
- Marco Rose (RB Leipzig)
- Diego Simeone (Atletico Madrid)
- Stefano Pioli (AC Milan)

Weakest:
- Pep Guardiola
- Most other "famous" managers

Critical Finding: Some AI managers are using actual META tactics and are extremely difficult to beat

Preset Tactics Performance
- ALL preset tactics perform poorly against strong AI managers
- Even the best preset (GegenPress 4231) only draws with the WORST AI managers
- Using presets puts you at massive disadvantage against META AI managers

Extreme META Requirement
- Without "extreme META" settings (like "Get Stuck In", you lose 10-20% more than you win against top AI
- Small tactical compromises lead to being "overwhelmed" by strong opponents
- Every instruction matters at the highest level

Match Management Reality

- "Player Control" vs "Holiday" shows identical xG and actual goals
- More shot animations in player control, but same statistical outcomes
- Only real difference: team morale boost from "Shouting"
- Without shouting, manual control provides zero statistical advantage

Hidden Attributes Impact

- "Important Matches" significantly affects xG to actual goals conversion
- "Consistency" confirmed as highly effective attribute
- Position proficiency differences (even 18 vs 20) meaningfully impact performance

Revolutionary Implications

- Attribute stacking isn't always beneficial - can create tactical disobedience
- META tactics are mandatory against strong AI, not optional
- AI difficulty varies drastically based on manager tactical setup
- Manual control is largely cosmetic without morale management
- Every tactical detail matters at competitive levels

This research explains why "logical" attribute increases sometimes hurt performance and why certain AI teams feel impossibly difficult while others are pushovers. Exceptional scientific approach to testing FM24 mechanics! Expand

My question is, if your team is struggle using the top FM Arena tactic (424) and are behind on xG, what impact is there if you to another meta tactic (say 4231) at half time.

recoba said: You might already know this but FYI the potential AMLR is only a guess made by genie scout. And I often see it estimate players way higher with their potential than what actually happens. It often estimates players already in their early 20s with not so great professionalism reaching their potential, which rarely happens. Expand

I think Genie Scout is a great tool and I still use my Genie Scout ratings. I believe there are 2 main issues with Genie Scout and I use my own calculations to correct for these.

The first is the positional rating out of 20. Genie Scout uses a very low adjustment for this and we know from FM Arena testing that the Genie Scout adjuctment is far too low.

Here is my previous information on this subject
Adjustment for Positional Rating

After looking at the percentage impact in the FM Arena Attributes testing table for Playing Position Rating over the last few years, it worked out to be very close to 2.5% per point or 1/40th. Then I calculated what Genie Scout uses for a reduction, which is quite a minor adjustment. I took a download of around 1000 wingers and looked at the differences in ratings against their positional ratings out of 20. Moving from 1/40th to 1/46th was the nearest to the adjustment.

Here is the formula for Excel =A1*(1-(20-B1)/46)

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.

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

In summary, you will need to allow for the adjustment for their positional rating out of 20 ie you need to multiply their GS Rating by 100% minus the difference between 20 and their positional rating multiplied by 2.17%. For example if their GS rating is 50% and their positional rating is 19, it is 20 - 19= 1 multiplied by 2.17% is 2.17%. Take this off 100% = 97.83% multiplied by 50.00% is 48.91%.

The second is the potential rating. I havent posted about this previously but after reading much information on the subject I use the following.

Adjustment for Potential Rating

For an outfield player, if the players age is under 19 I use the Genie Scout Potential Rating (PR). Otherwise I do an adjustment. Here is my Excel calc. IF(AGE<19,GSPsnPotRating,IF(AGE<26,(26-AGE)/8*(GSPsnPotRating-GSPsnsRating)+GSPsnRating,GSPsnRating))*(1-((20-PR)/IF(PR<11,1,2))/46).

It is slightly different for GKs. But I am sure people can adapt this to meet their needs.

I hope this helps someone.

I use different versions of tactics depending on the opposition. Best 424 and 4231 are the top tactics in FM Arena. Change from Attacking to Balanced for BAL, ENE is Energy God of Chaos which I think is available on FM Arena, I move the AM forward to PF Support if I am using a 424. The CTRL approach is the variation from the main tactic.



You will note the home and away columns calculate my starting approach against each side. I do vary the approach during the game depending on how it is going.

I have recruited players to use in the 2 main tactics which is why they rate higher than the other formations for me.

Prysiu said: Hi, I wonder if you - after almost a year - found anything interesting, changed approach, have new insights for us all. Do you still use MDW24 rating file? Do you still play FM with the same passion? Expand

I played out that save until 2030. Moved to Millwall, and then Spurs, after the last post following approaches from those clubs. Stopped December last year when it was apparent that FM25 wasn't coming out. Decided to start an English pyramid save. Went with Didcot just to fill in time.

I followed the FM Arena forums. Some interesting ideas during the last few months.

Do I still use the MDW24 rating file? Yes

Do I still play with the same passion? Hell yeah.

I went back through much of the stuff we have been reading about training and best attributes for players by role.

I am using the training suggestions even though we are only a part time club. After moving up to VNS and then getting promoted to VNL, I found that the part time status and wage restrictions meant I was struggling to get any decent players to join. I then looked at a simple rating system for lower leagues using key attributes for each position and have used this to buy players and to rate opposition. I now study the weaknesses of oppositions based on this rating, scouting and tactics that work against the normal tactic the opposition usually uses. I adapt my tactics based on these factors. After 10 games we are on 21 points running second. I generally target 2 points per game so happy with that given we are favourites to be demoted.

I have managed to spend a lot of time thinking about how to get information on FM25 when it comes out, hopefully during beta, so that I can quickly get on top of the next game.

Lets see what happens. At present I will just continue to play this game and see if I can get to managing an EPL side by the time they release FM25. A bit time poor, so it is a slow process.

AlexH said: So I tried a thing.  It may be working.  In an attempt to construct a roster optimized to the attribute testing results, I did the following (please note, I’ll be using terms like “per player” or “per match” or “per year” - these are more terms of convenience than a literal expectation, more on that later):

1) Took the Goal Diff for each attribute (positive and negative) and divided it by 12 to get Goal Diff per point of attribute
- 12 comes from the difference between the “8” and the “20” used in the testing itself. 
- Acceleration had a Positive or Offensive Goal Diff of 49 going from 8 to 12, so each “point” is worth 4.08
2) Divided that by 380 (10 players, 38 matches) to arrive at per point, per match, per player. 
- Result is a number (for acceleration and offensive positions, the number was .0107).

I decided to use this number to compare players based on attributes as another “weighting” exercise.  While it allows one to compare two players, after experimentation, it was easier for me to consume and compare when against an “average” - I decided to use a player with “12” as that average player. 

So now I can compare the aggregate player attributes for (only) those attributes with clear, demonstrable impact in the attribute testing simulations (acceleration, pace, dribbling, anticipation, Jumping Reach, etc.) and create something closer to baseballs “Wins Above Replacement” using a player with all 12s in the attributes that matter. 

For any one player explaining in terms of a spreadsheet -

The player is a row, the attributes are columns. 

The cells at the intersection are the player’s attribute # from FM24. 

There is another column that is a sum of each attribute multiplied against the attribute contribute (per point, per match, per player) in #2 above - I call this # Goals per Match (or Goals Prevented per Match for defense).

I multiply that # by 38 to get the aggregate Goals per Season.

I then subtract Goals Per Season for the player from the Goals Per Season for an “all 12” player to get my “Goals Above Replacement” (GAR) for Attacking Midfielders and Attackers/Strikers - or goals prevented (GPAR) for DL/DR/DC.  I took the a similar approach for GK.

For DM - I compiled both the DMs GAR and their GPAR multiplied by -1 to create an aggregate positive number of Goal Contributions Above Replacement (a goal saved is a goal earned).


Ya Boi Eren Dinkci, in my save at age 25, is 3.4 Goals per year greater than a player with all 12s.  Even with the haircut.

My man Phil Neumann, in my save at age 30, is 03.75 Goals Prevented per year greater than a player with all 12s. 

Bradley Ibrahim as a 23 year old DM in my save is about 5.2 GCAR.

Some observations -

1) These numbers don’t include the impact of the formation (obviously).  I’ve been using a meta 424 in the 3 saves I’ve been experimenting with this effort - it would be interesting to see what an “all 12s” 424 team produces and somehow compensate for that (not sure how).

2) I combined this in my XLS (I play on iPad so I my experience is console-ish) against my old ykykyk weights - there are differences in quality (Lucas Bretelle as a DM, for example, tends to have high ykykykyk based weights in my saves - surprised at how “meh” he scored in GCAR. 

3) Totally helps financially.  I was comparing a player named Connor Bradley for DR against one named Pierre Nadjombe.  Similar scores, but the cost per GPAR was crazy in favor of Nadjombe.  Even though Connor does seem to have better overall attribute numbers - many of them just don’t matter.

4) I don’t believe at all that if Dango Ouattara is a 27 goal per 38 matches player.  I’m sure in some distribution of outcomes, he could be - but that number is useful because I can peg it against an all 12 (23.3 per 38).  The labels I use and numbers shouldn’t be thought of as literal expectations.

5) In terms of lineup construction, it really helps to compare lineup A vs. lineup B vs. lineup C (etc.) when planning / scheduling tournaments vs. league play and creating depth.


6) Similar roster construction benefits and lineup comparison benefits when players could be multiple roles.  Both Dinkci (AMR/STC) and Neumann (DR/DC) mentioned above qualify at different positions and have (albeit subtly) different GAR/GPAR scores for the positions.  But over 38 matches, I’d like to believe that .3 GAR would be a difference that justifies Dinkci at AMR vs. STC.

Anyhow, happy to share more if anyone cares.  It’s a fun hobby. Expand

What are the attributes you are using for GAR and GPAR calculations?

Gerrard said: I have seen them live but often listen to the Tribute Band when playing FM
https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=strange%20kinda%20woman%20deep%20purple%20tribute&mid=2D04CB3972F506961E212D04CB3972F506961E21&ajaxhist=0 Expand

Loving Strange Kinda Woman

Gerrard said: I have seen them live but often listen to the Tribute Band when playing FM
https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=strange%20kinda%20woman%20deep%20purple%20tribute&mid=2D04CB3972F506961E212D04CB3972F506961E21&ajaxhist=0 Expand

Nice. I saw them live in Sydney many years back and George Harrison came on and played with them duelling with Ritchie Blackmore.

Gerrard said: BASED ON EF 424 IF P105 AC TACTIC
AND EF 424 IF HP P102 AC
Double pivot 42112 high tempo short passing Expand

I am loving the deep purple vibe

Trololo said: Can someone help me understand how to import the list of players into the excel file...?
or is there a youtube tutorial for this ?

I downloaded the Excel file, and the 4 views, I go to FM, Squad tab of my team because I would like to analyze my squad first.
I import the "Meta Own Team" view into FM, I select all the players and do CTRL P and text file.

This is the view I have in the IMPORT tab and I have nothing in CALCULATION, am I doing something wrong ? Expand

For Importing select Data from Text, Select All file types, Select the File, Use "|" as qualifier. Should them align all the fields to columns. Hope this makes sense

rossbalch said: Is it worth having multiple routines set up rather than just the one do we think? Expand

Personal choice. Some people add multiple attacking corner set ups. I cant recall seeing multiples of others.

If you use Load Routines it should bring them all across - yes

crazyfmguy93 said: @Mark you did not change any attribute rate, only change for some weight for position from MDW22. is that right? Expand

Thats correct. MDW22 were educated guesses based on rating results for best players that year. MDW24 used ratings for players with 15 for all attributes.

Zippo said: Methodology
We test each attribute one by one at 2 states, at value "8" and at value "20" then after increasing the value from "8" to "20 we measure the difference for the result.




*Physical*
Pace: Increasing this attribute from "8" to "20" improves the result
("Points" +64) | (Goals For +45) | (Goals Against -59)

Acceleration: Increasing this attribute from "8" to "20" improves the result
("Points" +64) | (Goals For +49) | (Goals Against -48)

Strength: Increasing this attribute from "8" to "20" improves the result
("Points" +10) | (Goals For +7) | (Goals Against -5)

Agility: The attribute hasn't been tested yet.

Balance: The attribute hasn't been tested yet.

Jumping Reach: The attribute hasn't been tested yet.

Natural Fitness: The attribute hasn't been tested yet.

Stamina: The attribute hasn't been tested yet.





*Mental*
Anticipation: Increasing this attribute from "8" to "20" improves the result
("Points" +18) | (Goals For +15) | (Goals Against -10)

Work Rate: Increasing this attribute from "8" to "20" improves the result
("Points" +12) | (Goals For +6) | (Goals Against -10)

Concentration: Increasing this attribute from "8" to "20" improves the result
("Points" +9) | (Goals For +4) | (Goals Against -8)

Determination: Increasing this attribute from "8" to "20" improves the result
("Points" +6) | (Goals For +4) | (Goals Against -5)

Aggression: Increasing this attribute from "8" to "20" doesn't make any difference for the result.

Bravery: Increasing this attribute from "8" to "20" doesn't make any difference for the result.

Flair: Increasing this attribute from "8" to "20" doesn't make any difference for the result.

Decisions: Increasing this attribute from "8" to "20" doesn't make any difference for the result.

Teamwork: Increasing this attribute from "8" to "20" doesn't make any difference for the result.

Vision: Increasing this attribute from "8" to "20" doesn't make any difference for the result.

Off The Ball: Increasing this attribute from "8" to "20" doesn't make any difference for the result.

Positioning: Increasing this attribute from "8" to "20" doesn't make any difference for the result.

Composure: Increasing this attribute from "8" to "20" doesn't make any difference for the result.

Leadership: The attribute hasn't been tested yet.






*Technical*
Corners: The attribute hasn't been tested yet.

Crossing: The attribute hasn't been tested yet.

Dribbling: The attribute hasn't been tested yet.

Finishing: The attribute hasn't been tested yet.

First Touch: The attribute hasn't been tested yet.

Free Kick Taking: The attribute hasn't been tested yet.

Heading: The attribute hasn't been tested yet.

Long Shots: The attribute hasn't been tested yet.

Long Throws: The attribute hasn't been tested yet.

Marking: The attribute hasn't been tested yet.

Passing: The attribute hasn't been tested yet.

Penalty Taking: The attribute hasn't been tested yet.

Technique: The attribute hasn't been tested yet. Expand

I know this is probably too big an ask, but given all the discussion on the site about the different impact on positions, I wonder if there was any chance to break the attribute tests up into 5 groupings:

DRL
DC
DM
AMRL
AMC/ST

This would have 2 players in each grouping and prove once and for all if the attributes change dramatically by position.

As I have said before, you guys do such a great job for this community and I have enormous respect for your work regardless of whether you are able to accommodate my request.

harvestgreen22 said: My current personal choices:

1.Extreme way to increase Physical class stats

[Rest]+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
or
[Recovery]x7+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]

Explanation:
"Recovery" is actually a variant of rest. If there is any other training, "rest" will be invalid, but "recovery" will not, "recovery" is counted as a training, so it can be used as a "weight" to pull the weight of "Pace" and "Acc" and so on to make it closer to the "rest" CA distribution,
so the following 7 x recovery are added. It is used to pull the weight of the CA assigned to the Physical stats to pull up
(The disadvantage of recovery is that it slightly increases the weight of a less useful physical attribute, such as strength, but this disadvantage can be ignored)


2.Increase moderate levels of CA , as fewer invalid attributes as possible, and as many high value attributes as possible

[Quickness]+[Attacking Shadow Play]+[Recovery]x7+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
or
[Quickness]+[Attacking Direct]+[Recovery]x7+[Addtional Focus Quickness]


3. Add as much CA as possible , while fewer invalid attributes as possible, and as many high value attributes as possible

[Quickness]+[Match Practice]+[Attacking]+[Recovery]x7+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
or
[Physical]+[Match Practice]+[Attacking]+[Recovery]x7+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]



Excel Training English 2
edit 27/12/2024 :
https://pixeldrain.com/u/R3imL2wX Expand

I trend to play lower league and part time teams. Training is only 4 sessions per week. Can i just drop the 7 recovery sessions.

Rhumble said: IM giving this a go ,, If they score, it says be more Expansive , should that be more Expressive ? if not what do you mean by more expansive ? Expand

I think it is Expressive as you say

kvasir said: Hey, @Mark. Any chance we get Han's last routines tested?

Thank you for all the effort! Expand


Yarema said: Speaking of which. I haven't gone through every single routine in here so maybe it's included somewhere. Has Workthespace world cup corner routine been tested? Everyone seems to be using it lately Expand

Sorry guys but I don't have the database anymore. Was preparing for FM25 so cleaned up a fair bit of stuff.

Waccoe said: Quick question can i upload a tactic to the forum for testing that is not mine. I have asked the author on another site if i can share it and he said go ahead no worries. Expand

no problems. You just need to say it isn't yours and name the author

C:\Users\[YOUR USER NAME]\Documents\Sports Interactive\Football Manager 2024\views

max 737 said: Is Blue or Azure V3 the best set piece schedule? Expand

As per the opening post, I have Blue on top but not a lot between the top 6 routines

sa said: I need to try out this tactic, terrorist anti-football is something I've been looking for for ages now. Only 42 goals conceded in 400 games? That's 1.05 goals conceded per 10 games, awesome tactic for defending a lead.

Edit: nah, just tried using it with Arsenal we're conceding every game especially against teams like Burnley and Luton. Only a couple draws. Bit disappointing, expected more from this. Expand

The results are given as an average for 38 games. The 400 games is how many it was tested over. So the 42 conceded works out to be 1.1 goals per match.