saycarramrod said: @Mark Have you redone your Genie Scout ratings from the above? If so, could you share? I found them very helpful.
Thanks! Expand
I have indeed updated the GS ratings - see below. I use a 300 scale instead of 100 because you cant use decimal places. GS recalculates it back to 100. That's why the numbers are slightly different to me table.
@Gracolas I have spent a bit of time refining the weightings and testing them and now think I have the most important attributes for each position. I have only included the ones above 6% in for each position otherwise it becomes a bit too large to fathom. But here goes
Most of the attacking positions only have a few attributes that have a major impact, but the central and defensive positions appear to be a bit more complex in terms of the attributes that matter. Hope this helps someone.
I am now rebuilding my squads for next season. Playing 3 different teams in vastly different comps in my current save. Holstein Kiel in Bundasliga 2, just promoted to the top league, A League side Macarthur, won this year and now in Asian Champions League, and St Albans, won Vanarama South and up to Vanarama National next season. This save has been going a while so started with many slow players, restructured when the attributes testing table came out and now realigning with the table above.
From what I have read and favored in my sides, I reckon Handling and Reflexes are the most important followed by Jumping Reach and Command of Area. There are others that are less important but you can include if you want - Communication, One On Ones, Bravery, Concentration, Decisions, Positioning, Agility, Kicking
Decided to do another run and just focus on St Albans and ensure all the players that didn't meet the criteria were gone and at least get some decent back up, with all players in the squad meeting the criteria I explained above. Went on Holiday on 1 August. St Albans was rated last in the league by Genie Scout with a rating of 45.6, next worse was 50.0. End of the season we were 6 points behind the second last team in the ratings on Genie Scout but we were premiers. Reckon ZaZ Blue also helps - thanks @ZaZ
I think the rating system I explained above works well.
How about Max Baxter, our worst Genie Scout rated player with a season rating of 7.15.
I have now done a bit of experimenting and think that the green and blue attributes above are the ones that matter for each position. Yes, if you have a player like Haaland who has exceptional stats across the board he will still be great, but like @ZaZ we generally start with lower leagues and are looking at where we can find decent players for not much money.
My first test failed for 2 of the teams because the board blocked letting players go and stopped trades coming in for 2 of the teams. This meant I carried players with bad stats into the holiday saves. The other was Leyton Orient where the Board still stopped some players leaving. Was still the best test I have had for Leyton using ZaZ Blue.
In all cases I intentional lowered the ratings for the sides picking the lowest rating players that met the criteria. I am inclined to go up a point on all the calculations, but think this approach is the way to go.
I came across an old thread on sigames from FM14 where a user had calculated the cost of all attributes on current ability by position, which is pretty much giving the value of each attribute to each position. The interesting thing was how highly Pace and Acceleration were even back then. It made me think that perhaps the attribute weighting had not changed much over the years.
There have been many questions on FM Arena forums asking about attributes required by position, and it also interests me when searching for players. The attributes testing table here certainly is a great starting point, but it is an average over all the positions. I decided I would take the old weightings and try and derive from them the importance of each key attribute to each position. Clearly my assumption is that the attribute weightings haven’t changed substantially. If I am wrong, it still has been a bit of fun.
I selected the attributes from the best 10 or 12 from the attributes table, and checked them against the ones that sigames ones. There were 9 that seemed to be very high in both, so I have used them. I took the sigames weightings of each position and calculated the average for each attribute. And then calculated a multiplier for each position for each attribute. The rate was then applied to the proportional change from the attributes table.
I then calculated the proportion of the total for each attribute for each position to see which ones mattered the most.
Reading back, all that sounds like drivel. Anyhow, here are the results:
I have grouped (colour coded) the attributes by above 15%, 10-15%, 5-10% and doesn’t matter. I can hear you say “What does that mean for searching for players?”. All good to know which attributes matter, but how do we determine the value of each attribute we need for each position.
My theory here is to look at the league averages for these 9 attributes. Then calculate the search values using the table above. Base value is league average rounded up to the next number ie 10.2 is 11. All attributes where the attribute value on the table is above 15% use the base value. For the attribute values 10-15% subtract 1 from the attribute table. For the attribute values 5-10% subtract 2 from the attribute table. Those below 5% don’t count.
By way of example, Vanarama South, the averages from my save are as follows:
Here is a table of the minimum search values based on the calculation above for each attribute for each position:
So there it is. Next step is to use my current test save, cull all the players that don’t meet the criteria above in terms of attribute value, buy in cheap players that do, so we have a squad of 20 ie one reserve for each position. I will post results when I get a chance to set that up.
Here is my most recent tactic that is really working well. I have tried it across a few leagues and it is averaging 2.125 points per game with a great defensive average of just 0.85 goals against per game.
Zippo said: I don't know maybe you can play your players anywhere in attack only if you are Barca and only when you play vs amateurs otherwise I don't think it would be a smart thing to do. For example, when we test ZaZ - Blue 3.0 with 'Ineffectual' position rating instead 'Natural' position rating for all positions then the PPG drop from 2.1 to 1.2, which means the rating drops from 7.2 to 4.0. Expand
Ok, I just bought a Natural Striker with Pace 15 (League Ave (LA) 10.2), Acc 13 (LA 10.3), Agility 13 (LA 9.7), and Dribbling 10 (LA 6.8). These are the best I currently have and as you can see well above the League Average. His Genie Scout Position rating for Striker is 50.0 and is listed as Natural in Training. There is no striker in ZaZ Blue 3.0 which is what I am using.
Here are his position ratings against the relevant attacking positions - AM C 41.6 and Makeshift, M C 39.8 and Ineffectual, ML 41,4 and Ineffectual, and MR 41.4 and Ineffectual.
Here are my current best rated against each position:
AM C Genie Scout rated 45.5, Natural, Pac 10, Acc 9, Agi 8, Dri 8 M C rated 52.3, Natural, Pac 4, Acc 4, Agi 7, Dri 7 M L rated 49.3, Natural, Pac 11, Acc 13, Agi 11, Dri 7 M R rated 51.3, Natural, Pac 12, Acc 13, Agi 10, Dri 8
I also got a new Accomplished M L and M R (Genie position ratings for both 44.7) with Pac 16, Acc 15, Agi 9, Dri 10
So, given your calcs above I would rate the Striker better than my AM C and M C and my new winger better than the existing M L and M R, even though they are not Natural to the positions.
That means that if you have a player with much higher stats for those 4 attributes than the league average, you could play them anywhere in attack, regardless of their role ratings
So a Striker who is unconvincing in the AM C position, but who is 20% better on their important attributes (Pace, Acc, Agility and Dribbling) will be as good if not better than a Natural AM C
I am loving all this discussion. I, like many, find all these discussions very helpful. My question relates to positions. I keep finding cheap Strikers with very good Pace, Acc, Agility and Dribling but no AMC ability. I am trying to retrain them as AMC SS, but do you think they are worthwhile playing straight away as AMC SS?
ZaZ said: Maybe CM and SS are fighting for the same space. How does it go if you ask both SS to stay wider? Expand
I have the CM staying wider. looking at firming up the defence and giving some of the attackers more freedom to roam. Looking solid so far. Got some better results so far. Still looking to tweak it further.
Better than Johan Cruyff hey @ZaZ. Not too bad for my first attempt. Working on an update at the moment. Think I know where there are a few problems with this tactic but time will tell
The Weight rating is 100, but if you add each of the attribute weightings they total 300.
Just input it as per the pictures
Thanks!
I have indeed updated the GS ratings - see below. I use a 300 scale instead of 100 because you cant use decimal places. GS recalculates it back to 100. That's why the numbers are slightly different to me table.
GK
DRL
DC
WBRL
DM
MC
Wing
AMC
Fast Striker
Target Striker
Glad you found it useful
Enjoy
Most of the attacking positions only have a few attributes that have a major impact, but the central and defensive positions appear to be a bit more complex in terms of the attributes that matter. Hope this helps someone.
I am now rebuilding my squads for next season. Playing 3 different teams in vastly different comps in my current save. Holstein Kiel in Bundasliga 2, just promoted to the top league, A League side Macarthur, won this year and now in Asian Champions League, and St Albans, won Vanarama South and up to Vanarama National next season. This save has been going a while so started with many slow players, restructured when the attributes testing table came out and now realigning with the table above.
For the folks that play with Genie scout, may you share your weights by position?
Here is what I use for the main positions (UPDATED)
GK
Centre Back
Full Back
Wing Back
Defensive Midfield
Centre Midfield
AMC
Winger
Fast Striker
Target Striker
good luck - he has thousands of tactics but they aren't as good as ZaZ Blue and Phoenix. The latest are supposedly here Knaps tactics FM21
I think the rating system I explained above works well.
How about Max Baxter, our worst Genie Scout rated player with a season rating of 7.15.
My first test failed for 2 of the teams because the board blocked letting players go and stopped trades coming in for 2 of the teams. This meant I carried players with bad stats into the holiday saves. The other was Leyton Orient where the Board still stopped some players leaving. Was still the best test I have had for Leyton using ZaZ Blue.
In all cases I intentional lowered the ratings for the sides picking the lowest rating players that met the criteria. I am inclined to go up a point on all the calculations, but think this approach is the way to go.
There have been many questions on FM Arena forums asking about attributes required by position, and it also interests me when searching for players. The attributes testing table here certainly is a great starting point, but it is an average over all the positions. I decided I would take the old weightings and try and derive from them the importance of each key attribute to each position. Clearly my assumption is that the attribute weightings haven’t changed substantially. If I am wrong, it still has been a bit of fun.
I selected the attributes from the best 10 or 12 from the attributes table, and checked them against the ones that sigames ones. There were 9 that seemed to be very high in both, so I have used them. I took the sigames weightings of each position and calculated the average for each attribute. And then calculated a multiplier for each position for each attribute. The rate was then applied to the proportional change from the attributes table.
I then calculated the proportion of the total for each attribute for each position to see which ones mattered the most.
Reading back, all that sounds like drivel. Anyhow, here are the results:
I have grouped (colour coded) the attributes by above 15%, 10-15%, 5-10% and doesn’t matter. I can hear you say “What does that mean for searching for players?”. All good to know which attributes matter, but how do we determine the value of each attribute we need for each position.
My theory here is to look at the league averages for these 9 attributes. Then calculate the search values using the table above. Base value is league average rounded up to the next number ie 10.2 is 11. All attributes where the attribute value on the table is above 15% use the base value. For the attribute values 10-15% subtract 1 from the attribute table. For the attribute values 5-10% subtract 2 from the attribute table. Those below 5% don’t count.
By way of example, Vanarama South, the averages from my save are as follows:
Here is a table of the minimum search values based on the calculation above for each attribute for each position:
So there it is. Next step is to use my current test save, cull all the players that don’t meet the criteria above in terms of attribute value, buy in cheap players that do, so we have a squad of 20 ie one reserve for each position. I will post results when I get a chance to set that up.
Here are some results
Ok, I just bought a Natural Striker with Pace 15 (League Ave (LA) 10.2), Acc 13 (LA 10.3), Agility 13 (LA 9.7), and Dribbling 10 (LA 6.8). These are the best I currently have and as you can see well above the League Average. His Genie Scout Position rating for Striker is 50.0 and is listed as Natural in Training. There is no striker in ZaZ Blue 3.0 which is what I am using.
Here are his position ratings against the relevant attacking positions - AM C 41.6 and Makeshift, M C 39.8 and Ineffectual, ML 41,4 and Ineffectual, and MR 41.4 and Ineffectual.
Here are my current best rated against each position:
AM C Genie Scout rated 45.5, Natural, Pac 10, Acc 9, Agi 8, Dri 8
M C rated 52.3, Natural, Pac 4, Acc 4, Agi 7, Dri 7
M L rated 49.3, Natural, Pac 11, Acc 13, Agi 11, Dri 7
M R rated 51.3, Natural, Pac 12, Acc 13, Agi 10, Dri 8
I also got a new Accomplished M L and M R (Genie position ratings for both 44.7) with Pac 16, Acc 15, Agi 9, Dri 10
So, given your calcs above I would rate the Striker better than my AM C and M C and my new winger better than the existing M L and M R, even though they are not Natural to the positions.
Averaging better than 2 points per match and under the no bringing in players set up.
Here are the results for the Vanarama South and North comps with best and worst sides.
Can we get a test of this major update please @Zippo
I have the CM staying wider. looking at firming up the defence and giving some of the attackers more freedom to roam. Looking solid so far. Got some better results so far. Still looking to tweak it further.
Good results with reasonable teams and lowly rated teams
Can you please test @Zippo