olimorris said: Ah, I hadn't explored ZAZ Blue enough to realise that. But you're absolutely right, alter the dictionary values (in the attribute weightings section) in the notebook. If it doesn't make sense, let me know on here or via a GitHub issue and I can take a look. Expand
I did spend a bit of time deriving and testing position scores for positions not originally included in the ZaZ Blue tests. I did also do extensive testing of tactics using different structures and they still seemed to work. So I do believe the ykykyky balanced ratings are ok for all positions. My only doubt would be on the GK position.
In terms of roles vs positions, I think this has been covered off pretty extensively, positions are far more important. If your player doesn't have the role it doesn't seem to impact. This may change in coming releases as the match engine undergoes major changes, however the the current version still seems to work with the ratings we have been using since the development of the ykykyky and MDW genie scout ratings.
olimorris said: Yeah would be really interesting to see that comparison. In my notebook it's possible to have multiple weightings dictionaries defined. You can then select which one to use and run the notebook to generate the output for each.
Would value your feedback on the tool so far. I'm mulling over turning it into a web based tool if enough people value its output. Expand
I am tied up with other FM stuff at the moment, so unfortunately haven't had the chance to look at your work. It does sound like something very beneficial to the community. I do have one question, ideally the tool would have the offset for the positional rating which I don't think you can download. I have always calculated this manually for my teams and key scouted players. Do you somehow derive this?
Hi @Zippo , is there any way we can get access to the set piece routines for the FM24 Hall of fame tactics. This would allow analysis on what is working and potentially lead us to better tactics
Hoping someone can help to differentiate the best (actually useful) attributes for two different DM roles. It seems that Volante is definitely a widely used role, but so is DM (Def) - just curious what a good balance/mix of attributes actually is given the importance to Pace/Acc vs Tackling/Marking if I actually want a good DM (Def) to close down games or alternate roles a bit. Or is it just no matter what, even for DM (Def) just get Pacey DMs with decent Jumping Reach and call it a day?
Thanks! Expand
I prefer to select the position rather than role. The key attributes for all DM roles are firstly Work Rate, then Pace and Stamina, then Passing, Decisions, Positioning, Teamwork, and Acceleration. Then train them in the role you will be using them the most ie Volante or DM De, and give them addition focus training of Defensive Positioning. This will give you the best result in my opinion.
Middleweight165 said: @Mark I'm still using your ratings for GS. Would you change anything to your ratings? Could you explain in laymans terms how your ratings work? What is the benefit of me using your ratings and not just focusing on those top key attributes identified here? Expand
I am sorry, I am overseas at the moment and have a trip across the Simpson Desert when I get back so wont be able to respond thoroughly. If you go back to The original thread for my ratings I think it explains the logic. Otherwise I will try and answer this in 4 or 5 weeks when I am back.
Rhumble said: Ahhhh ive been doing it slightly wrong , thanks for explaining the proper way , i think ive been treating the 2.17 not as a percentage and just subtracting it.
How have you found ykykyk balanced on FM23 , is it still relevant or was it primarily for zaz4.0 tactic on FM22, ive only just got round to buying FM23 and im a bit unsure which rating to use, which one are you using and are there any big differences between fm22 and fm23 when using genie scout Expand
I don't think there are any major changes to the way attributes are treated. And I don't think there will be for the next iteration either. FM25 will be interesting. They make play with the attributes then.
I flick between my own and ykykyky and think they are still both working well.
Tavares82 said: Who is the best? and mark what filter are you currently using? Expand
Firstly I do not use filters. To be honest I don't have the time nor the inclination to calculate this for everyone that wants to know. I have 9 grandkids. I am time poor. If you look at the early posts it will tell you the weightings for each position. You can then do the calculations.
The key attributes from the ykykyky balanced rating for DM in order are (these are the ones at 60 points or above):
90 work rate 70 pace 70 stamina 65 passing 65 decisions 65 positioning 65 teamwork 65 acceleration 60 composure
-the program might already deduct some points because of position rating, the drop off from DL to WBL is too big otherwise
-if you train and play him at left back he'll get to 20/20 for position
-not sure the % are transferable between positions, what I mean is 66% at LB might be relatively worse than 65% at CB Expand
Responses below:
If you read back through the posts you will see I have tested, calculated and allowed for the reduction FM Genie Scout applies.
Depending on my squad I would probably play him at left back as well to see if he develops.
The "balanced" part of the ratings file was trying to get the position ratings comparable across positions. It isn't exact because of the scales they use for calculations. But it is pretty close. I have noticed wingers are favored and I have thought about rescaling.
Rhumble said: His position score for left back is 17 , for every point below 20 it's 2.17 off the percentage , so 3 times 2.17 is 6.48, his left back percentage is 66.00% so you have to take off 6.48, which is 59.52, this is his actual percentage for left back because of being 3 below a perfect natural position of 20, therefore the central defender score of 64% is the highest percentage.
This was how it was worked out for fm22 I'm sure it's the same, hopefully @Mark can put me right if it's not the same for fm23 Expand
Pretty close. The 6.51% (3 x 2.17% is 6.51%) off 100% or multiply by 93.49%. So the left back would be 66.00% x 93.49% (100% - 6.51%) = 61.70%. Still below the 64.60% of the centre back.
If the first tactic isn't getting the results I am after I swap. Or if I am playing against a good side I choose the more defensive of the 2 tactics which is mostly the backup.
CBP87 said: How is the tactical familiarity with the swapping of the tactics pal? I know its terms of instructions that the team will be familiar but in terms of roles how are they getting on? do you see a drop in rating? Could a right sided DW suddenly play a Left IW the next game? Sorry for the questions, I'm intrigued though as I think you're on to something here Expand
I think if you train the 3 main tactics in terms of familiarity they will be fine. I train them in roles of the main tactic and in additional focus for the one I decide is best. It seems to work for me
I have been thinking about the last changes to the testing environment here at FM Arena. The new system takes the best of the AI tactics and plays them against the tactic being tested. I wondered what would be the best tactic against each of the AI tactics.
Those who have read any of my thoughts on this and other sites will know I like to run with 3 tactics that are easy to move between. With this in the back of my mind I decided to look at the Hall of Fame. I picked a couple of tactics based on good goal scoring and defence and then a 4-2-4, a 4-4-2 wide diamond and the 4-1-2-3 wide that dominated early.
The AI tactics in the FM Arena test environment are 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3, 4-4-2 and 5-2-3. The results are points conceded.
So I am using the following tactics. Bombyte (Tweak) 4-2-4, Re-Cookie VI 4-4-2 wide diamond, and Cookie Shooter 4-1-2-3. I also sometimes use the Paradox Bomb 4-4-2 with 2 DM. Base is Re-Cookie VI, moves to Cookie Shooter by DM to ST, moves to Bombyte Tweak by AM to DM and wingers forward, and moves to Paradox Bomb by AM to DM. I would prefer just 3 tactics but can handle 4 as Paradox Bomb isn't used very often.
Against
4-2-3-1 I use Cookie Shooter with back up from Paradox Bomb
4-3-3 I use Re-Cookie VI with backup from Bombyte Tweak
4-4-2 I use Re-Cookie VI with backup from Bombyte Tweak
5-2-3 I use Bombyte Tweak with backup from Re-Cookie
Feel free to give it a try and let me know your thoughts. Hopefully helps someone.
Petrades said: On Genie Scout: is a 83% player with 16/20 better than a 81% player 20/20 position ability? Expand
See post #233 on page 8. The 83% player with 16/20 drops to around 75.78%, so the other player is better. But if you keep using the 83% player and training him there he will pass the other player when his rating gets to 19/20.
This tactic is working really well. I selected Bournemouth in the EPL and Kettering in the Vanarama North. Both sides were expected to fight against relegation.
They both performed well above expectations with Kettering winning the VNN and Bournemouth performing admirably in the EPL making it into the European comps for the following season by finishing 6th.
I am really interested to see how such a different tactic performs in the FM Arena test environment. I have received Vujevic's permission to get this tested here.
Lapidus said: For example, if you train a pure striker to play also AM and Winger then when he reaches his PA then his attributes will be lower than if he stayed a pure striker.
I don't say that training additional positions is a bad thing, I just wanted to point out that it isn't "for free" and there's a price for it. People should understand it. Expand
Fair enough. The screenshots above were from 2 16yo players. Hunter had starting CA at 30 and starting PA at 128 and is an AMC. I trained Hunter as a DM as I don't usually use an AMC in my tactics. Bell had a starting CA of 36 and PA of 118 and is a winger. Bell is a winger and is training as a winger. After the 10 weeks Hunter had a CA of 31 and PA of 128. Slight increase in CA but PA the same. Bell was still 36 and 118.
However, if you look at the screenshots, Hunter's PA attributes had risen 1 point for 3 attributes and 2 points for another. Hunter had no reductions. Bell's PA attributes had also changed slightly with two rising a point and two dropping a point. I know this is a very small sample but I find it interesting. If I get a chance at some point I will do some testing.
Learning a new position is always a trade off form some attributes levels. Not always it's a big trade off but still.
You can't train players additional positions "for free" in FM, if it was possible then you would want to train them as many additional positions as possible. Expand
All of my players who were learning new positions increased CA quicker than those that weren't. I haven't done extensive testing, it is just an observation.
I did spend a bit of time deriving and testing position scores for positions not originally included in the ZaZ Blue tests. I did also do extensive testing of tactics using different structures and they still seemed to work. So I do believe the ykykyky balanced ratings are ok for all positions. My only doubt would be on the GK position.
In terms of roles vs positions, I think this has been covered off pretty extensively, positions are far more important. If your player doesn't have the role it doesn't seem to impact. This may change in coming releases as the match engine undergoes major changes, however the the current version still seems to work with the ratings we have been using since the development of the ykykyky and MDW genie scout ratings.
Would value your feedback on the tool so far. I'm mulling over turning it into a web based tool if enough people value its output.
I am tied up with other FM stuff at the moment, so unfortunately haven't had the chance to look at your work. It does sound like something very beneficial to the community. I do have one question, ideally the tool would have the offset for the positional rating which I don't think you can download. I have always calculated this manually for my teams and key scouted players. Do you somehow derive this?
Hoping someone can help to differentiate the best (actually useful) attributes for two different DM roles. It seems that Volante is definitely a widely used role, but so is DM (Def) - just curious what a good balance/mix of attributes actually is given the importance to Pace/Acc vs Tackling/Marking if I actually want a good DM (Def) to close down games or alternate roles a bit. Or is it just no matter what, even for DM (Def) just get Pacey DMs with decent Jumping Reach and call it a day?
Thanks!
I prefer to select the position rather than role. The key attributes for all DM roles are firstly Work Rate, then Pace and Stamina, then Passing, Decisions, Positioning, Teamwork, and Acceleration. Then train them in the role you will be using them the most ie Volante or DM De, and give them addition focus training of Defensive Positioning. This will give you the best result in my opinion.
I am sorry, I am overseas at the moment and have a trip across the Simpson Desert when I get back so wont be able to respond thoroughly. If you go back to The original thread for my ratings I think it explains the logic. Otherwise I will try and answer this in 4 or 5 weeks when I am back.
They are from the FM Arena testing results
How have you found ykykyk balanced on FM23 , is it still relevant or was it primarily for zaz4.0 tactic on FM22, ive only just got round to buying FM23 and im a bit unsure which rating to use, which one are you using and are there any big differences between fm22 and fm23 when using genie scout
I don't think there are any major changes to the way attributes are treated. And I don't think there will be for the next iteration either. FM25 will be interesting. They make play with the attributes then.
I flick between my own and ykykyky and think they are still both working well.
Firstly I do not use filters. To be honest I don't have the time nor the inclination to calculate this for everyone that wants to know. I have 9 grandkids. I am time poor. If you look at the early posts it will tell you the weightings for each position. You can then do the calculations.
The key attributes from the ykykyky balanced rating for DM in order are (these are the ones at 60 points or above):
90 work rate
70 pace
70 stamina
65 passing
65 decisions
65 positioning
65 teamwork
65 acceleration
60 composure
-the program might already deduct some points because of position rating, the drop off from DL to WBL is too big otherwise
-if you train and play him at left back he'll get to 20/20 for position
-not sure the % are transferable between positions, what I mean is 66% at LB might be relatively worse than 65% at CB
Responses below:
If you read back through the posts you will see I have tested, calculated and allowed for the reduction FM Genie Scout applies.
Depending on my squad I would probably play him at left back as well to see if he develops.
The "balanced" part of the ratings file was trying to get the position ratings comparable across positions. It isn't exact because of the scales they use for calculations. But it is pretty close. I have noticed wingers are favored and I have thought about rescaling.
This was how it was worked out for fm22 I'm sure it's the same, hopefully @Mark can put me right if it's not the same for fm23
Pretty close. The 6.51% (3 x 2.17% is 6.51%) off 100% or multiply by 93.49%. So the left back would be 66.00% x 93.49% (100% - 6.51%) = 61.70%. Still below the 64.60% of the centre back.
I would just go with a strong tactic like 4-2-4 Bombyte Tweak
If the first tactic isn't getting the results I am after I swap. Or if I am playing against a good side I choose the more defensive of the 2 tactics which is mostly the backup.
I think if you train the 3 main tactics in terms of familiarity they will be fine. I train them in roles of the main tactic and in additional focus for the one I decide is best. It seems to work for me
Those who have read any of my thoughts on this and other sites will know I like to run with 3 tactics that are easy to move between. With this in the back of my mind I decided to look at the Hall of Fame. I picked a couple of tactics based on good goal scoring and defence and then a 4-2-4, a 4-4-2 wide diamond and the 4-1-2-3 wide that dominated early.
The AI tactics in the FM Arena test environment are 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3, 4-4-2 and 5-2-3. The results are points conceded.
So I am using the following tactics. Bombyte (Tweak) 4-2-4, Re-Cookie VI 4-4-2 wide diamond, and Cookie Shooter 4-1-2-3. I also sometimes use the Paradox Bomb 4-4-2 with 2 DM. Base is Re-Cookie VI, moves to Cookie Shooter by DM to ST, moves to Bombyte Tweak by AM to DM and wingers forward, and moves to Paradox Bomb by AM to DM. I would prefer just 3 tactics but can handle 4 as Paradox Bomb isn't used very often.
Against
4-2-3-1 I use Cookie Shooter with back up from Paradox Bomb
4-3-3 I use Re-Cookie VI with backup from Bombyte Tweak
4-4-2 I use Re-Cookie VI with backup from Bombyte Tweak
5-2-3 I use Bombyte Tweak with backup from Re-Cookie
Feel free to give it a try and let me know your thoughts. Hopefully helps someone.
It has been working well for me.
See post #233 on page 8. The 83% player with 16/20 drops to around 75.78%, so the other player is better. But if you keep using the 83% player and training him there he will pass the other player when his rating gets to 19/20.
They both performed well above expectations with Kettering winning the VNN and Bournemouth performing admirably in the EPL making it into the European comps for the following season by finishing 6th.
I am really interested to see how such a different tactic performs in the FM Arena test environment. I have received Vujevic's permission to get this tested here.
FM19 TFF link
I don't say that training additional positions is a bad thing, I just wanted to point out that it isn't "for free" and there's a price for it. People should understand it.
Fair enough. The screenshots above were from 2 16yo players. Hunter had starting CA at 30 and starting PA at 128 and is an AMC. I trained Hunter as a DM as I don't usually use an AMC in my tactics. Bell had a starting CA of 36 and PA of 118 and is a winger. Bell is a winger and is training as a winger. After the 10 weeks Hunter had a CA of 31 and PA of 128. Slight increase in CA but PA the same. Bell was still 36 and 118.
However, if you look at the screenshots, Hunter's PA attributes had risen 1 point for 3 attributes and 2 points for another. Hunter had no reductions. Bell's PA attributes had also changed slightly with two rising a point and two dropping a point. I know this is a very small sample but I find it interesting. If I get a chance at some point I will do some testing.
Learning a new position is always a trade off form some attributes levels. Not always it's a big trade off but still.
You can't train players additional positions "for free" in FM, if it was possible then you would want to train them as many additional positions as possible.
All of my players who were learning new positions increased CA quicker than those that weren't. I haven't done extensive testing, it is just an observation.