Update after Group 11. Started Group 12 and hopefully I will finish in the morning
Finishing the 12th season Fire dropped down slightly. The teams at the top that have done 12 seasons are so very close, remembering the margin of error is around 6 points. Roll the Dice is in both the finally 2 Groups and Perfect is in the final Group.
I have downloaded your tactic for testing. As I said, I still have 3 groups after the current one to test. I will then look at any emerging tactics to test. Yours will be included. I cant give you an estimated time yet.
A quick update from my testing. I have now added the new 3 tactics from @ZaZ and another high download tactic from FM Base. So that brings it to 18 tactics.
The advice from FM Arena on margin of error for their testing was as follows:
12 seasons up to 6.6 points from true score 8 seasons up to 8.4 points from true score 4 seasons up to 11.6 points from true score
These are based on 38 match seasons and mine are 46 match seasons. Clearly their testing is much more precise than anything that I can all do. But I am hoping that mine will be reasonable with 12 seasons of testing, so that is what I am aiming for. This equates to 552 matches. I wont be testing the bottom 2 sides as I think they are too far behind to make it to the top. This means 13 groups of 4 teams with 4 tests each group. I am currently up to testing group 10 first test season.
The results to date are below. Overall matches played is listed, with the remainder of the stats based on a per season average for a 46 game season. Of interest is ZaZ Fire 0.3 goals for and percentage of matches won. Also Roll the Dice defensive stat. The best of the 12 seasons completed teams is still 4231 SIU.
A quick update. First round of testing against the top 2 tactics, ZaZ Fire 0.3 moved to the top and Perfect moved 2nd, just. It was the only time I had the 4 teams finish top 4 in all 4 tests. In fact the previous record was just 2 out of the 4. These are very competitive tactics, with @ZaZ looking the best. I will do another test tomorrow and see if this early form holds up.
Hi All. I thought I would have a bit of a play with some of the tactics that others are doing well with on this site as well as a few that have high downloads off FMBase. Ended up with 9 tactics and then added 3 of my old ones to see how they stack up. I divided the tactics into 3 Groups of 4 and then cycled them through 4 teams in Vanarama National South. So that meant 4 tests for each group so they all used each of the 4 teams. The 4 teams selected were ranked as the bottom 4 by Genie Scout in that Division and the season preview in FM23 ranked them 16 to 19th. So all pretty close and not rated much chance - St. Albans, Braintree, Oxford City and Hungerford.
Following the first round of testing I then seeded them and reran the tests. So I now have 368 games for each tactic. Results are below. The next step is running the top 2 tactics against the new ZaZ Fire 0.3 and Perfect by super korean to see how those two stack up. To make it fair the second run will be against mid table tactics.
They were all pretty good considering my expectations for these teams. The top 4 tactics were outstanding with not much between them through the whole process.
OpticFawn said: @ZaZ whenever I sign youngsters, they barely improve with your training session, one of my players increased who was aged 18 at the time, +1 in a few attributes like 4 years, what am I doing wrong?
P.s. I setup the rest and everything. Expand
FM Arena did some work on this and advised us earlier, in this thread at post #17 on page one, of some of their findings. See link below.
I dont quite understand how you can find value. Why wouldn’t you just use positional rating and buy the highest rated player you can afford? Expand
Sure. I looked at 2 tables, the Cost of Attribute Table by position and the ykykyky positional rating weightings. I only looked at attributes that were 50 or higher in the ykykyky positional rating weightings and then divided this score by the corresponding value on the Cost of Attribute Table. This then gave a value rating, higher the better.
My expectation of this score is that if a player has high values for these value scores their rating will be better value than those that are higher in the high cost attributes. I use these in the filters and it seems to be working, although I haven't done comparisons against those with that are higher in the high cost attributes. And I always include acceleration in my filters, other than for DM or GK.
Middleweight165 said: Hey @Mark Does the positional rating on GS not take into account the position value or is it just inaccurate? Why is your calculation necessary?
I'm looking at a player who has a position value of 1 and a positional rating of 66.9%, so using your calculation, his true positional value is 39.3%. Is that correct? Expand
Your calculation is correct. Of course you can improve your players position value and therefore their positional rating by training them and playing them in the position.
GS have a very minor adjustment for positional value, it is around 0.35% per point. My values are derived from the FM Arena testing over the last 2 years, and I believe they are much closer to the mark.
Middleweight165 said: @Mark am i right in saying that if I want a players true positional rating, in its simplest form, I need to reduce the GS positional rating by 2.17 for every point under 20? Expand
It is by 2.17%. For example you have a player rated 18/20 for a position and GS shows 56.84%. The calculation is 56.84% - (56.84% x (2.17% x 2)) = 54.37%
Jamolisim said: @Mark Does your chart on page 1 you show (not FM scout one) work for LLM as well or are ratings weighted differently? Thank you in advance for your response. Expand
I only play LLM. It works across the board but it is harder to find players at lower levels. You need to reduce your expectations
Evanscam97 said: Thanks anyway mark. I admittedly went down an excel rabithole yesterday evening and set up a quick "best xi" picker based off stats pulled from GS Arena, using the YK Ratings and Position scores and your formula to derive true positional rating...
Pulling the data from GS is very awkward, however. Cant find a simple way to copy and paste the data and exporting doesn't give the position data (x/20) for whatever reason. Having to screenshot and use a "picture to table" conversion. Expand
Yes, unfortunately that aspect is manual. I haven't been able to find the info in the game itself to be able to download it and it is one of many fields not downloadable thru third party applications due to FM licencing.
If it helps, you don't need to include any ratings below 10
Evanscam97 said: Hi there Mark, Been lurking for a while now, appreciate all that you (and the other great people on here) do for the community! Was just curious as I looked at the above post - Is there any way to change the positions that GS uses for these formations? I.e in the 4-1-3-2, switching TS (Default) to FS, and MC x3 to AM R/C/L etc in line with the @ZaZ formation for example.
Purely the lazy side of me would find it useful at a glance for seeing Best XI (Unless there another way in GS that I am unaware of) as well as the weakest members of the Best XI
Thanks again mate Expand
I cant see any easy way to do this. There is no functionality I can see in GS to facilitate it. You can maybe look for other structures that use the position you are after and see which players are picked.
johnconnerson said: Are the Potential positional ratings worth looking at when scouting young players? Or am I better off looking at something else?
Does the 'Probability Of Development' mean anything? Expand
I always look at current first. I do look at agility difference and potential ability when looking at younger players but cant say I have looked at Probability of Development.
Finishing the 12th season Fire dropped down slightly. The teams at the top that have done 12 seasons are so very close, remembering the margin of error is around 6 points. Roll the Dice is in both the finally 2 Groups and Perfect is in the final Group.
I have downloaded your tactic for testing. As I said, I still have 3 groups after the current one to test. I will then look at any emerging tactics to test. Yours will be included. I cant give you an estimated time yet.
Roll the Dice thread
It is at post number 5 on this thread
The advice from FM Arena on margin of error for their testing was as follows:
12 seasons up to 6.6 points from true score
8 seasons up to 8.4 points from true score
4 seasons up to 11.6 points from true score
These are based on 38 match seasons and mine are 46 match seasons. Clearly their testing is much more precise than anything that I can all do. But I am hoping that mine will be reasonable with 12 seasons of testing, so that is what I am aiming for. This equates to 552 matches. I wont be testing the bottom 2 sides as I think they are too far behind to make it to the top. This means 13 groups of 4 teams with 4 tests each group. I am currently up to testing group 10 first test season.
The results to date are below. Overall matches played is listed, with the remainder of the stats based on a per season average for a 46 game season. Of interest is ZaZ Fire 0.3 goals for and percentage of matches won. Also Roll the Dice defensive stat. The best of the 12 seasons completed teams is still 4231 SIU.
I am only half way through the testing with ZaZ Fire 0.3.
Following the first round of testing I then seeded them and reran the tests. So I now have 368 games for each tactic. Results are below. The next step is running the top 2 tactics against the new ZaZ Fire 0.3 and Perfect by super korean to see how those two stack up. To make it fair the second run will be against mid table tactics.
They were all pretty good considering my expectations for these teams. The top 4 tactics were outstanding with not much between them through the whole process.
Table Update
Group 10 Update
Group 11 Update
Group 12 Update
FINAL TABLE
Fair enough
What does your leaderboard for tactics look like at the moment @Eric
P.s. I setup the rest and everything.
FM Arena did some work on this and advised us earlier, in this thread at post #17 on page one, of some of their findings. See link below.
Development Training Info
Can you expand a bit further on you trying to get value for your money that you described in this post https://fm-arena.com/find-comment/14024/
I dont quite understand how you can find value. Why wouldn’t you just use positional rating and buy the highest rated player you can afford?
Sure. I looked at 2 tables, the Cost of Attribute Table by position and the ykykyky positional rating weightings. I only looked at attributes that were 50 or higher in the ykykyky positional rating weightings and then divided this score by the corresponding value on the Cost of Attribute Table. This then gave a value rating, higher the better.
My expectation of this score is that if a player has high values for these value scores their rating will be better value than those that are higher in the high cost attributes. I use these in the filters and it seems to be working, although I haven't done comparisons against those with that are higher in the high cost attributes. And I always include acceleration in my filters, other than for DM or GK.
So not really tested but an assumption.
I'm looking at a player who has a position value of 1 and a positional rating of 66.9%, so using your calculation, his true positional value is 39.3%. Is that correct?
Your calculation is correct. Of course you can improve your players position value and therefore their positional rating by training them and playing them in the position.
GS have a very minor adjustment for positional value, it is around 0.35% per point. My values are derived from the FM Arena testing over the last 2 years, and I believe they are much closer to the mark.
It is by 2.17%. For example you have a player rated 18/20 for a position and GS shows 56.84%. The calculation is 56.84% - (56.84% x (2.17% x 2)) = 54.37%
I only play LLM. It works across the board but it is harder to find players at lower levels. You need to reduce your expectations
Pulling the data from GS is very awkward, however. Cant find a simple way to copy and paste the data and exporting doesn't give the position data (x/20) for whatever reason. Having to screenshot and use a "picture to table" conversion.
Yes, unfortunately that aspect is manual. I haven't been able to find the info in the game itself to be able to download it and it is one of many fields not downloadable thru third party applications due to FM licencing.
If it helps, you don't need to include any ratings below 10
Been lurking for a while now, appreciate all that you (and the other great people on here) do for the community! Was just curious as I looked at the above post - Is there any way to change the positions that GS uses for these formations? I.e in the 4-1-3-2, switching TS (Default) to FS, and MC x3 to AM R/C/L etc in line with the @ZaZ formation for example.
Purely the lazy side of me would find it useful at a glance for seeing Best XI (Unless there another way in GS that I am unaware of) as well as the weakest members of the Best XI
Thanks again mate
I cant see any easy way to do this. There is no functionality I can see in GS to facilitate it. You can maybe look for other structures that use the position you are after and see which players are picked.
I use @ZaZ ones. They appear to be the best now
Does the 'Probability Of Development' mean anything?
I always look at current first. I do look at agility difference and potential ability when looking at younger players but cant say I have looked at Probability of Development.
I use Fast Striker calculations for False 9.