tam1236 said: What is "Game preset training 1" in this xls sheet?
I connected all attributes (not only main but even not important) with level of importance , using https://fm-arena.com/thread/13685-current-24-4-latest-version-full-attribute-test-52000-match-samples/ - just took 0,1 of grow 1-20 as 1 point (I know it's not linear), make some excel magic and most effective, when all attributes weighted, are (all quickness focus): 1. Handling, Shot Stopping, Attacking, Physical, Chance Conversion, Aerial Defence, Ground Defence and Distribution 2. Game preset training 1 - I don't know what it is 3. [Physical][Quickness][Attacking]x3 4. [Quickness][Attacking][Transition Restrict] 5. [Physical][Match Practice][Chance Conversion]
Not so easy. As far as I know You get just best coach level and work level and that's all . If you have 100 coaches with 4 stars you are worse then one four-and-half star coach assisted by one-star nobody. Expand
The "205 Game preset training 1" is [Overall][Defending][Attacking][Set Piece Routines][Outfield][Recovery]x2
Recently, I have been busy , For this 205, I haven't have time completed its testing (with a small sample size), so it might be either better or worse than it actually is.
Your idea is very good. Multiply (the degree of influence of the attribute) by (the growth value of each attribute), and then add them up. This will give you a total Score that measures the improvement in "maximizing player". Sort this score to obtain "the best training schedule for maximizing player in the short term".
You will see the list sorted by Scores. The ones selected are all training schedules with significant improvements in CA.
Its advantages are: 1. It maximizes the CA (Competitive Advantage) of the players in the short term, making their market value higher. 2. It maximizes the "combat effectiveness" of the players in the short term. This is very effective if there is an urgent need for game results. 3. It quickly fills the PA, avoiding the situation where the full potential cannot be realized.
Its disadvantages are: The difference between "PA" and "current CA" has a significant impact on growth. 2. That is, a faster increase in CA will also deplete this difference more quickly, leading to a significant decline in growth in subsequent years. 3. When a player is proficient in multiple positions simultaneously, this depletion process will occur more rapidly (I can't think of an immediate explanation right now, but if you can roughly understand it, that would be great).
Due to these limitations, I am very hesitant about how to choose a "universal" training schedule that can accommodate all kinds of situations.
Mark said: I think I am getting closer to the best balance with your tests so thank you so much. Here is the next iteration:
Handling, Shot Stopping, Physical x 2, Chance Conversion, Aerial Defence, Ground Defence and One on Ones
Once again reducing the Decisions component and increasing the Acc and Pace
If you could test this when you get a chance i would very much appreciate it
Thanks Expand
OK. I'll do it when I have some free time next time. Handling, Shot Stopping, Physical x 2, Chance Conversion, Aerial Defence, Ground Defence and One on Ones
juliius said: @harvestgreen22 Out of interest could you run some tests where there is quickness in the actual schedule, for example the the recent quickness, match practice, 2xattacking. But instead of quickness as the individual focus have it on aerial? i would like to see how much jumping reach can potentially be gained in comparison with how much acc and pace you lose Expand
My translator couldn't translate what you said, and then I tried to read it, but I also couldn't understand it. Do you mean this? "quickness, match practice, 2 x attacking "+ [Addtional Focus Strengh (Strengh,Jumping reach)]
Alternatively, you could simply list the "conditions" + the "training schedule" . Then I can copy it directly and test it.
It looks like maybe the best schedule for all the team (!) is 1xGK unit : One on Ones or Distribution (problem with reflexes) great pace, acc, good aerial reach and dribbling>0 That's little bit strange, because a description of this unit, like all GK units, is: GK do 1-on-1 and the rest of the team do role_specific_schedule. But maybe I'm wrong and this one has other system, and of course "reality" is not equal FM description .
Did You set roles for players for this tests ? Or left it empy (from position) Expand
ZaZ said: Something like that. I am actually using 1-2-1-2-1-2 now, but results are barely the same. Keep in mind that assumes double intensity at high condition, and focus on quickness. Also, should remove recovery sessions. The idea is "1x endurance", then "6x attacking", with full rest after matches.
Note: Check their table if you want to customize your training for some specific goal. Expand
I almost always have two matches a week. Will I be able to fit six attacking training sessions in? I've scheduled speed training for all players (except goalkeepers). Should youth team training sessions be scheduled like this?
GabBau said: I almost always have two matches a week. Will I be able to fit six attacking training sessions in? I've scheduled speed training for all players (except goalkeepers). Should youth team training sessions be scheduled like this? Expand
Two matches per week are four busy days (match day, and following day for rest). That leaves 3 days a week that can do 2x attacking each.
Keep in mind there are very similar training schedules presented by the author of this thread, or even better for your needs. Some of them might be even easier to fit in the calendar.
ZaZ said: Two matches per week are four busy days (match day, and following day for rest). That leaves 3 days a week that can do 2x attacking each.
Keep in mind there are very similar training schedules presented by the author of this thread, or even better for your needs. Some of them might be even easier to fit in the calendar. Expand
I can barely get through your English here, and you want me to also understand Korean?
Just kidding. I'm just a little confused, and your message seemed the clearest to me.
juliius said: I've been thinking of trying to give every player aerial as a focus for half a season and half a season on quickness to see if i achieve a better balance on it. Expand Are you using aerial or strength individual focus? Anyway I've tried a few times on FM24 and results were very underwhelming.
harvestgreen22 said: My translator couldn't translate what you said, and then I tried to read it, but I also couldn't understand it. Do you mean this? "quickness, match practice, 2 x attacking "+ [Addtional Focus Strengh (Strengh,Jumping reach)]
Alternatively, you could simply list the "conditions" + the "training schedule" . Then I can copy it directly and test it. Expand
Of course. What i mean is pretty much what you said.
Quickness, match practice, 2x Attacking + Focus on strength
harvestgreen22 said: You will see the list sorted by Scores. The ones selected are all training schedules with significant improvements in CA. Its advantages are: (...) Its disadvantages are: (...) Due to these limitations, I am very hesitant about how to choose a "universal" training schedule that can accommodate all kinds of situations. Expand Yes, exactly. Simple match score ranking is good if You have loads of youngsters with great potential and big PA-CA. That is You play as something like Barcelona. On the other hand the problem with just Quickness schedule is , that it leaves unused big part of PA if You have better newgens.
And that's why : B. There is a factor to use: CA gain divided by match score (the less the better) which tells us how effectively PA is changed into match score . For example Quickness (alone) training has this factor quite low (11.68 after *10k), but Resistance and Endurance lower. And lowest (=most effective using PA-CA points) is Match Review training which, by the way, gives biggest acceleration+pace gain (AP=7.18) what is strange to me Using this factor You can decide how fast You want to gain CA and also how efficiently to change PA into match score. For example [Physical][Tactical] has decent Match Score grow and decent change effectiveness (14.55) but only good acc+pace (AP=6.04) grow so I would rather choose [Physical][Quickness][Transition Restrict] (14.18, AP=6.50)
But if one : C. calculates match score for GK table and make a mark on general table, it turns out, that [Physical][Tactical] is quite a bad schedule for goalkeepers. (But still better than just Quickness). All becomes very complicate but if you care about GK - [Physical][Quickness][Resistance][Aerial Defence] is nice for GK and fairly effective in PA match score conversion (14.07, AP 6.09). or similar [Physical]x2[Chance Conversion] (14.04, 6.19)
tam1236 said: Yes, exactly. Simple match score ranking is good if You have loads of youngsters with great potential and big PA-CA. That is You play as something like Barcelona. On the other hand the problem with just Quickness schedule is , that it leaves unused big part of PA if You have better newgens.
And that's why : B. There is a factor to use: CA gain divided by match score (the less the better) which tells us how effectively PA is changed into match score . For example Quickness (alone) training has this factor quite low (11.68 after *10k), but Resistance and Endurance lower. And lowest (=most effective using PA-CA points) is Match Review training which, by the way, gives biggest acceleration+pace gain (AP=7.18) what is strange to me Using this factor You can decide how fast You want to gain CA and also how efficiently to change PA into match score. For example [Physical][Tactical] has decent Match Score grow and decent change effectiveness (14.55) but only good acc+pace (AP=6.04) grow so I would rather choose [Physical][Quickness][Transition Restrict] (14.18, AP=6.50)
But if one : C. calculates match score for GK table and make a mark on general table, it turns out, that [Physical][Tactical] is quite a bad schedule for goalkeepers. (But still better than just Quickness). All becomes very complicate but if you care about GK - [Physical][Quickness][Resistance][Aerial Defence] is nice for GK and fairly effective in PA match score conversion (14.07, AP 6.09). or similar [Physical]x2[Chance Conversion] (14.04, 6.19)
276 - 313: Divided into players operating in two separate groups, the "attack group" and the "defense group"
Mark said: I think I am getting closer to the best balance with your tests so thank you so much. Here is the next iteration:
Handling, Shot Stopping, Physical x 2, Chance Conversion, Aerial Defence, Ground Defence and One on Ones
Once again reducing the Decisions component and increasing the Acc and Pace
If you could test this when you get a chance i would very much appreciate it
Thanks Expand
juliius said: @harvestgreen22 Out of interest could you run some tests where there is quickness in the actual schedule, for example the the recent quickness, match practice, 2xattacking. But instead of quickness as the individual focus have it on aerial? i would like to see how much jumping reach can potentially be gained in comparison with how much acc and pace you lose Expand
tam1236 said: Yes, exactly. Simple match score ranking is good if You have loads of youngsters with great potential and big PA-CA. That is You play as something like Barcelona. On the other hand the problem with just Quickness schedule is , that it leaves unused big part of PA if You have better newgens.
And that's why : B. There is a factor to use: CA gain divided by match score (the less the better) which tells us how effectively PA is changed into match score . For example Quickness (alone) training has this factor quite low (11.68 after *10k), but Resistance and Endurance lower. And lowest (=most effective using PA-CA points) is Match Review training which, by the way, gives biggest acceleration+pace gain (AP=7.18) what is strange to me Using this factor You can decide how fast You want to gain CA and also how efficiently to change PA into match score. For example [Physical][Tactical] has decent Match Score grow and decent change effectiveness (14.55) but only good acc+pace (AP=6.04) grow so I would rather choose [Physical][Quickness][Transition Restrict] (14.18, AP=6.50)
But if one : C. calculates match score for GK table and make a mark on general table, it turns out, that [Physical][Tactical] is quite a bad schedule for goalkeepers. (But still better than just Quickness). All becomes very complicate but if you care about GK - [Physical][Quickness][Resistance][Aerial Defence] is nice for GK and fairly effective in PA match score conversion (14.07, AP 6.09). or similar [Physical]x2[Chance Conversion] (14.04, 6.19)
326 Handling, Shot Stopping, Physical x 2, Chance Conversion, Aerial Defence, Ground Defence and One on Ones 327 [Quickness][Match Practice][Attacking]x2
This is my current selected and conclusion:
The larger the amount of CA that is increased, the more inefficient attributes there will be. Therefore, increasing the CA will lead to a relatively poorer quality .
(1) Least growth but highest quality:
85 [回顾录像] [Match Review] The maximum increase in Acceleration Pace, or if the overall potential of the players is low CA growth: 17.40
43 （休息）无训练 [Rest] The maximum increase in Acceleration Pace, or if the overall potential of the players is low CA growth: 17.53
82 [恢复] [Recovery] Desired to use "85 or 43", but upon discovering a high incidence of injuries , as an alternative to the first two options. arranged several "[Recovery]" CA growth: 17.76
(2) Moderate growth, high quality:
317 [身体]x2[把握机会][攻击] [Physical]x2[Chance Conversion][Attacking] A balanced training (not in a hurry to enhance CA) CA growth: 30.71 Special note: "攻击组 All member in attack group", all non-goalkeeper players should be placed in the attack group.
276 [边路进攻] [Attacking Wings] as an alternative if discovering a high incidence of injuries CA growth: 29.17 Special note: "攻击组 All member in attack group", all non-goalkeeper players should be placed in the attack group.
(3) High growth, medium-high quality:
339 [速度][练习赛][攻击] [Quickness][Attacking][Match Practice] A balanced training (with a certain requirement for rapid improvement in CA) CA growth: 35.72 Note: If there are many injuries or the player lacks of March-Sharpness, add several "[Recovery]". (This is the one we recommended before.)
(4) very High growth , moderate quality:
331 [身体][练习赛][攻击][防守] [Physical][Match Practice][Attacking][Defending] If you need to increase the CA value as quickly as possible, use this . CA growth: 39.62
One more word: I didn't pay attention to the training results of the goalkeepers, but the training outcomes of the goalkeepers have been recorded in the Excel file (check the "Goalkeepers" page)
For the majority of the tests, I use [Additional Focus Agility and Balance] for goalkeepers . Because Agility is one of the most effective attributes.
276 - 313: Divided into players operating in two separate groups, the "attack group" and the "defense group"
excel(part 7, the newest )
326 Handling, Shot Stopping, Physical x 2, Chance Conversion, Aerial Defence, Ground Defence and One on Ones 327 [Quickness][Match Practice][Attacking]x2
This is my current selected and conclusion:
The larger the amount of CA that is increased, the more inefficient attributes there will be. Therefore, increasing the CA will lead to a relatively poorer quality .
(1) Least growth but highest quality:
85 [回顾录像] [Match Review] The maximum increase in Acceleration Pace, or if the overall potential of the players is low CA growth: 17.40
43 （休息）无训练 [Rest] The maximum increase in Acceleration Pace, or if the overall potential of the players is low CA growth: 17.53
82 [恢复] [Recovery] Desired to use "85 or 43", but upon discovering a high incidence of injuries , as an alternative to the first two options. arranged several "[Recovery]" CA growth: 17.76
(2) Moderate growth, high quality:
317 [身体]x2[把握机会][攻击] [Physical]x2[Chance Conversion][Attacking] A balanced training (not in a hurry to enhance CA) CA growth: 30.71 Special note: "攻击组 All member in attack group", all non-goalkeeper players should be placed in the attack group.
276 [边路进攻] [Attacking Wings] as an alternative if discovering a high incidence of injuries CA growth: 29.17 Special note: "攻击组 All member in attack group", all non-goalkeeper players should be placed in the attack group.
(3) High growth, medium-high quality:
339 [速度][练习赛][攻击] [Quickness][Attacking][Match Practice] A balanced training (with a certain requirement for rapid improvement in CA) CA growth: 35.72 Note: If there are many injuries or the player lacks of March-Sharpness, add several "[Recovery]". (This is the one we recommended before.)
(4) very High growth , moderate quality:
331 [身体][练习赛][攻击][防守] [Physical][Match Practice][Attacking][Defending] If you need to increase the CA value as quickly as possible, use this . CA growth: 39.62
Be sure not to forget the additional focus. Expand
Hello guys, sorry if not 100% relevant... but is it possible for 'most' players to become natural or very, very close to...by playing in a certain position, but not having individual training set.
Im not talking a cb who is red or nothing, becoming a amc (i dont know... perhaps is possible for youth player... or with certain personalilty), but say generally already half/3 quarters way there. So a aml 'yellow' becoming, green/natural... purely by playing first team official games, friendlies and/or reserves.
Can anyone advise if theyve observed this or understand if this mechanic is possible... from extremely impressive levels of research into this game.
I do appreciate efforts and outcomes you all publish. For a busy family man, it allows me to enjoy game in way I want to, now free time of premium... compared to when I could spend tens of hours a week since championship manager 92/93 on the Amiga
B80 said: Hello guys, sorry if not 100% relevant... but is it possible for 'most' players to become natural or very, very close to...by playing in a certain position, but not having individual training set.
Im not talking a cb who is red or nothing, becoming a amc (i dont know... perhaps is possible for youth player... or with certain personalilty), but say generally already half/3 quarters way there. So a aml 'yellow' becoming, green/natural... purely by playing first team official games, friendlies and/or reserves.
Can anyone advise if theyve observed this or understand if this mechanic is possible... from extremely impressive levels of research into this game.
I do appreciate efforts and outcomes you all publish. For a busy family man, it allows me to enjoy game in way I want to, now free time of premium... compared to when I could spend tens of hours a week since championship manager 92/93 on the Amiga
Cheers! Expand
I think it can get very close, yes.
In my save, Rashford’s positional familiarity changed to Natural just by playing him as a left winger consistently, without setting any individual position training.
for FM24 and FM26. I took into account the required attributes of them, and then adjusted the proportion of each attribute that I thought was necessary based on a relatively simple intuition. This might not be the best training schedule.
If you need to target FM24 or FM26 (Because my consideration of mixture is bound to result in something that is not optimal for any of them.) , you can try to calculate it in your own way using that Excel.
harvestgreen22 said: for FM24 and FM26. I took into account the required attributes of them, and then adjusted the proportion of each attribute that I thought was necessary based on a relatively simple intuition. This might not be the best training schedule.
If you need to target FM24 or FM26 (Because my consideration of mixture is bound to result in something that is not optimal for any of them.) , you can try to calculate it in your own way using that Excel. Expand
In all the tests I’ve done with training sessions, I’ve always felt good in terms of development and player growth, but terribly bad on the pitch in terms of match results. The team doesn’t play well — it never plays well with these training sessions. Ideally, I’d like to find a mix between training that works, training that’s ‘bugged’ the way I’d want it to be, and strong performances on the pitch. Any ideas?
lucailvotto said: In all the tests I’ve done with training sessions, I’ve always felt good in terms of development and player growth, but terribly bad on the pitch in terms of match results. The team doesn’t play well — it never plays well with these training sessions. Ideally, I’d like to find a mix between training that works, training that’s ‘bugged’ the way I’d want it to be, and strong performances on the pitch. Any ideas? Expand
Can't say it's been like that for me. 2 first seasons in my Hoffenheim save we finished 2nd and won the cup and after that won a treble every season.
juliius said: Can't say it's been like that for me. 2 first seasons in my Hoffenheim save we finished 2nd and won the cup and after that won a treble every season. Expand
276 - 313: Divided into players operating in two separate groups, the "attack group" and the "defense group"
excel(part 7, the newest )
326 Handling, Shot Stopping, Physical x 2, Chance Conversion, Aerial Defence, Ground Defence and One on Ones 327 [Quickness][Match Practice][Attacking]x2
This is my current selected and conclusion:
The larger the amount of CA that is increased, the more inefficient attributes there will be. Therefore, increasing the CA will lead to a relatively poorer quality .
(1) Least growth but highest quality:
85 [回顾录像] [Match Review] The maximum increase in Acceleration Pace, or if the overall potential of the players is low CA growth: 17.40
43 （休息）无训练 [Rest] The maximum increase in Acceleration Pace, or if the overall potential of the players is low CA growth: 17.53
82 [恢复] [Recovery] Desired to use "85 or 43", but upon discovering a high incidence of injuries , as an alternative to the first two options. arranged several "[Recovery]" CA growth: 17.76
(2) Moderate growth, high quality:
317 [身体]x2[把握机会][攻击] [Physical]x2[Chance Conversion][Attacking] A balanced training (not in a hurry to enhance CA) CA growth: 30.71 Special note: "攻击组 All member in attack group", all non-goalkeeper players should be placed in the attack group.
276 [边路进攻] [Attacking Wings] as an alternative if discovering a high incidence of injuries CA growth: 29.17 Special note: "攻击组 All member in attack group", all non-goalkeeper players should be placed in the attack group.
(3) High growth, medium-high quality:
339 [速度][练习赛][攻击] [Quickness][Attacking][Match Practice] A balanced training (with a certain requirement for rapid improvement in CA) CA growth: 35.72 Note: If there are many injuries or the player lacks of March-Sharpness, add several "[Recovery]". (This is the one we recommended before.)
(4) very High growth , moderate quality:
331 [身体][练习赛][攻击][防守] [Physical][Match Practice][Attacking][Defending] If you need to increase the CA value as quickly as possible, use this . CA growth: 39.62
Be sure not to forget the additional focus. Expand
It's not possible to import files into FM 26.
But Match Review is only one session of that type, and the rest is either rest or recovery?
Basically these 3. The one with physical, match practice, attacking and defending most recently based on the excel sheets, the others for basically 3 or 4 seasons each
Hi all, great work @harvestgreen22. Just so I understand this correctly, would it be worthwhile—if you have a First Team, Under 21s, and Under 18s—to use the following schedules:
First Team / Under 21s: Schedule 331 Under 18s: Schedule 43
If anyone has experience using these schedules, I’d really appreciate you sharing what has worked well for you. It would be great to hear some success stories and learn from how others have approached this.
1. I decided to follow the same approach as in the comments and give each training schedule a Score.
check excel 9, First of all, I found the data that I tested. There are several such tables.
Table 1 shows the changes in winning rate when each attribute is increased to "18" from basic value. Table 2 shows the changes in winning rate when each attribute is reduced to "1" from basic value.
By "Table 1 - Table 2", we obtain "If this attribute is increased from 1 to 18, what changes will occur in the winning rate?"
This can serve as a weight to measure the importance of each attribute, and then multiply it by the improvement value of each attribute in the training schedule. This will result in a score representing the improvement. Finally, by summing up all the scores, the total score can be obtained.
2. However, there is a problem. Generally speaking, our players do not start training from attribute "1", so I found the table for "attribute 6".
Table 4 shows the changes in winning rate when each attribute is reduced to "6". By Table 1 - Table 4, we obtain "If this attribute is increased from 6 to 18, what changes will occur in the winning rate?"
This is more in line with the starting point of the usual players' training.
3. I calculated the score for each training schedule and placed it in the "Score" column. Then, in order to calculate the increase in score for each point of CA, I obtained "Quality" by dividing "Score" by "CA".
So: "Score" refers to how much victory the training schedule can bring you. "Quality" refers to the efficiency of the CA conversions you consume. "CA" symbolizes the approximate potential required.
PaulCustus said: Hi all, great work @harvestgreen22. Just so I understand this correctly, would it be worthwhile—if you have a First Team, Under 21s, and Under 18s—to use the following schedules:
First Team / Under 21s: Schedule 331 Under 18s: Schedule 43
If anyone has experience using these schedules, I’d really appreciate you sharing what has worked well for you. It would be great to hear some success stories and learn from how others have approached this.
Thanks in advance. Expand
I think there's nothing wrong with this. you might want to take a look at the latest results.
Basically it's the strategy for the 403 floor. I might make some minor adjustments based on the latest results (I just finished it but haven't checked yet).
Eddie said: Is 276 basically that? Is there no difference between rest and recovery? Expand
yes, There is a slight difference between "rest" and "recovery". To put it simply, if there are not many injuries or illnesses, there is no need to use the word "recovery". If there are many injuries or a lack of match sharpness, then use "recovery"
lucailvotto said: In all the tests I’ve done with training sessions, I’ve always felt good in terms of development and player growth, but terribly bad on the pitch in terms of match results. The team doesn’t play well — it never plays well with these training sessions. Ideally, I’d like to find a mix between training that works, training that’s ‘bugged’ the way I’d want it to be, and strong performances on the pitch. Any ideas? Expand
The attributes of the players are part of the victory, and training makes attributes better (this takes time) Then, if you need more immediate feedback, you might need to adopt some meta tactic in https://fm-arena.com/tables/. tactic are also an important part of achieving victory.
I have some free time again so I was doing my own analysis of the spreadsheets
I remove AMC and one DM from the calculations as I use a certain Knap tactic, and use the following weightings (basically from my Genie Scout Ratings file):
I've selected the promising ones to examine, though I couldn't find the corresponding spreadsheet for some and I haven't looked through it all exhaustively.
113: [Quickness][Match Practice][Chance Conversion][Quickness focus] - 7.019 | 90-90-100 | 34.4 CA 284: [Aerial Defence][Quickness focus][All players in attack group] - 6.874 | 5-15-5 | 23.52 CA 306: [Chance Creation][Quickness focus][All players in defend group] - 6.839 | 5-5-15 | 23.66 CA 276: [Attacking Wings][Quickness focus][All players in attack group] - 6.79 | 20-15-15 | 29.17 CA
It's a very close contest after those, but it would be a moot point to work out, because in the above 113 is a clear winner for high PA or low match load scenarios, 284 or 306 for low PA or giving players rest, and 276 for something closer to in-between.
@harvestgreen22 Could you post or direct me to the detailed data for 243 - [速度][攻击]x2[练习赛] - [Quickness] + [Match Practice] + [Attacking] x2? I was unable to find it
tam1236 said: What is "Game preset training 1" in this xls sheet?
great pace, acc, good aerial reach and dribbling>0
I connected all attributes (not only main but even not important) with level of importance , using https://fm-arena.com/thread/13685-current-24-4-latest-version-full-attribute-test-52000-match-samples/ - just took 0,1 of grow 1-20 as 1 point (I know it's not linear), make some excel magic and most effective, when all attributes weighted, are (all quickness focus):
1. Handling, Shot Stopping, Attacking, Physical, Chance Conversion, Aerial Defence, Ground Defence and Distribution
2. Game preset training 1 - I don't know what it is
3. [Physical][Quickness][Attacking]x3
4. [Quickness][Attacking][Transition Restrict]
5. [Physical][Match Practice][Chance Conversion]
Not so easy. As far as I know You get just best coach level and work level and that's all . If you have 100 coaches with 4 stars you are worse then one four-and-half star coach assisted by one-star nobody.
The "205 Game preset training 1" is
[Overall][Defending][Attacking][Set Piece Routines][Outfield][Recovery]x2
Recently, I have been busy , For this 205, I haven't have time completed its testing (with a small sample size), so it might be either better or worse than it actually is.
Your idea is very good.
Multiply (the degree of influence of the attribute) by (the growth value of each attribute),
and then add them up.
This will give you a total Score that measures the improvement in "maximizing player".
Sort this score to obtain "the best training schedule for maximizing player in the short term".
You will see the list sorted by Scores. The ones selected are all training schedules with significant improvements in CA.
Its advantages are:
1. It maximizes the CA (Competitive Advantage) of the players in the short term, making their market value higher.
2. It maximizes the "combat effectiveness" of the players in the short term. This is very effective if there is an urgent need for game results.
3. It quickly fills the PA, avoiding the situation where the full potential cannot be realized.
Its disadvantages are:
The difference between "PA" and "current CA" has a significant impact on growth.
2. That is, a faster increase in CA will also deplete this difference more quickly, leading to a significant decline in growth in subsequent years.
3. When a player is proficient in multiple positions simultaneously, this depletion process will occur more rapidly (I can't think of an immediate explanation right now, but if you can roughly understand it, that would be great).
Due to these limitations, I am very hesitant about how to choose a "universal" training schedule that can accommodate all kinds of situations.
Mark said: I think I am getting closer to the best balance with your tests so thank you so much. Here is the next iteration:
Handling, Shot Stopping, Physical x 2, Chance Conversion, Aerial Defence, Ground Defence and One on Ones
Once again reducing the Decisions component and increasing the Acc and Pace
If you could test this when you get a chance i would very much appreciate it
Thanks
OK. I'll do it when I have some free time next time.
Handling, Shot Stopping, Physical x 2, Chance Conversion, Aerial Defence, Ground Defence and One on Ones
juliius said: @harvestgreen22 Out of interest could you run some tests where there is quickness in the actual schedule, for example the the recent quickness, match practice, 2xattacking. But instead of quickness as the individual focus have it on aerial? i would like to see how much jumping reach can potentially be gained in comparison with how much acc and pace you lose
My translator couldn't translate what you said, and then I tried to read it, but I also couldn't understand it.
Do you mean this?
"quickness, match practice, 2 x attacking "+ [Addtional Focus Strengh (Strengh,Jumping reach)]
Alternatively, you could simply list the "conditions" + the "training schedule" . Then I can copy it directly and test it.
tam1236 said: Thank You again for Your work.
It looks like maybe the best schedule for all the team (!) is 1xGK unit : One on Ones or Distribution (problem with reflexes)
That's little bit strange, because a description of this unit, like all GK units, is: GK do 1-on-1 and the rest of the team do role_specific_schedule. But maybe I'm wrong and this one has other system, and of course "reality" is not equal FM description .
Did You set roles for players for this tests ? Or left it empy (from position)
left it empy (from position)
ZaZ said: Something like that. I am actually using 1-2-1-2-1-2 now, but results are barely the same. Keep in mind that assumes double intensity at high condition, and focus on quickness. Also, should remove recovery sessions. The idea is "1x endurance", then "6x attacking", with full rest after matches.
Note: Check their table if you want to customize your training for some specific goal.
I almost always have two matches a week. Will I be able to fit six attacking training sessions in?
I've scheduled speed training for all players (except goalkeepers).
Should youth team training sessions be scheduled like this?
GabBau said: I almost always have two matches a week. Will I be able to fit six attacking training sessions in?
I've scheduled speed training for all players (except goalkeepers).
Should youth team training sessions be scheduled like this?
Two matches per week are four busy days (match day, and following day for rest). That leaves 3 days a week that can do 2x attacking each.
Keep in mind there are very similar training schedules presented by the author of this thread, or even better for your needs. Some of them might be even easier to fit in the calendar.
ZaZ said: Two matches per week are four busy days (match day, and following day for rest). That leaves 3 days a week that can do 2x attacking each.
Keep in mind there are very similar training schedules presented by the author of this thread, or even better for your needs. Some of them might be even easier to fit in the calendar.
I can barely get through your English here, and you want me to also understand Korean?
Just kidding. I'm just a little confused, and your message seemed the clearest to me.
Anyway, thanks.
juliius said: I've been thinking of trying to give every player aerial as a focus for half a season and half a season on quickness to see if i achieve a better balance on it.
Are you using aerial or strength individual focus?
Anyway I've tried a few times on FM24 and results were very underwhelming.
GabBau said: I can barely get through your English here, and you want me to also understand Korean?
Just kidding. I'm just a little confused, and your message seemed the clearest to me.
Anyway, thanks.
The table has english translation. Anyway, you are welcome to use my version, I was just saying there are other options. =)
it's kind off topic but do you guys training player traits?
i made a topic about it, is training player traits because off the time it takes prejudicial for player growth?
Do you guys know about that, i did not find anything about it.
@harvestgreen22 What do you think about this training plan that’s described as an ‘exploit’ in various forums? I’m talking about FM24
harvestgreen22 said: My translator couldn't translate what you said, and then I tried to read it, but I also couldn't understand it.
Do you mean this?
"quickness, match practice, 2 x attacking "+ [Addtional Focus Strengh (Strengh,Jumping reach)]
Alternatively, you could simply list the "conditions" + the "training schedule" . Then I can copy it directly and test it.
Of course. What i mean is pretty much what you said.
Quickness, match practice, 2x Attacking + Focus on strength
harvestgreen22 said: You will see the list sorted by Scores. The ones selected are all training schedules with significant improvements in CA.
Using this factor You can decide how fast You want to gain CA and also how efficiently to change PA into match score. For example [Physical][Tactical] has decent Match Score grow and decent change effectiveness (14.55) but only good acc+pace (AP=6.04) grow so I would rather choose [Physical][Quickness][Transition Restrict] (14.18, AP=6.50)
Its advantages are:
(...)
Its disadvantages are:
(...)
Due to these limitations, I am very hesitant about how to choose a "universal" training schedule that can accommodate all kinds of situations.
Yes, exactly. Simple match score ranking is good if You have loads of youngsters with great potential and big PA-CA. That is You play as something like Barcelona. On the other hand the problem with just Quickness schedule is , that it leaves unused big part of PA if You have better newgens.
And that's why :
B. There is a factor to use: CA gain divided by match score (the less the better) which tells us how effectively PA is changed into match score . For example Quickness (alone) training has this factor quite low (11.68 after *10k), but Resistance and Endurance lower. And lowest (=most effective using PA-CA points) is Match Review training which, by the way, gives biggest acceleration+pace gain (AP=7.18) what is strange to me
But if one :
C. calculates match score for GK table and make a mark on general table, it turns out, that [Physical][Tactical] is quite a bad schedule for goalkeepers. (But still better than just Quickness). All becomes very complicate but if you care about GK - [Physical][Quickness][Resistance][Aerial Defence] is nice for GK and fairly effective in PA match score conversion (14.07, AP 6.09). or similar [Physical]x2[Chance Conversion] (14.04, 6.19)
xls with table
tam1236 said: Yes, exactly. Simple match score ranking is good if You have loads of youngsters with great potential and big PA-CA. That is You play as something like Barcelona. On the other hand the problem with just Quickness schedule is , that it leaves unused big part of PA if You have better newgens.
Using this factor You can decide how fast You want to gain CA and also how efficiently to change PA into match score. For example [Physical][Tactical] has decent Match Score grow and decent change effectiveness (14.55) but only good acc+pace (AP=6.04) grow so I would rather choose [Physical][Quickness][Transition Restrict] (14.18, AP=6.50)
And that's why :
B. There is a factor to use: CA gain divided by match score (the less the better) which tells us how effectively PA is changed into match score . For example Quickness (alone) training has this factor quite low (11.68 after *10k), but Resistance and Endurance lower. And lowest (=most effective using PA-CA points) is Match Review training which, by the way, gives biggest acceleration+pace gain (AP=7.18) what is strange to me
But if one :
C. calculates match score for GK table and make a mark on general table, it turns out, that [Physical][Tactical] is quite a bad schedule for goalkeepers. (But still better than just Quickness). All becomes very complicate but if you care about GK - [Physical][Quickness][Resistance][Aerial Defence] is nice for GK and fairly effective in PA match score conversion (14.07, AP 6.09). or similar [Physical]x2[Chance Conversion] (14.04, 6.19)
xls with table
what is training match review?
lucailvotto said: what is training match review?
You have such a position in training options. Available only next day after a match
excel(part 1 , old)
Using this factor You can decide how fast You want to gain CA and also how efficiently to change PA into match score. For example [Physical][Tactical] has decent Match Score grow and decent change effectiveness (14.55) but only good acc+pace (AP=6.04) grow so I would rather choose [Physical][Quickness][Transition Restrict] (14.18, AP=6.50)
https://mega.nz/file/4UUUDKgC#NuyR8RDaNap2_e44yi9SS2cjTkGgo2dpTL33obiUWQE
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/pcRwnxi8
excel(part 2 , old)
https://mega.nz/file/QZNVgQzK#xOTiw1heWmVtIDRDDPiUZqzbBnqYAbVi14RYX0W3CoQ
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/NzTu56KH
excel(part 3, old)
https://mega.nz/file/8JlW2LKb#NZyQ-gdnlcXu3Iun8-l5I-_c7wRmikgAvjOZjEsTvCg
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/oa8Y2Z4U
excel(part 4, old)
https://mega.nz/file/dENF1KSK#gY0GO3Od_fALZ51UW_2dxLnAMnmlt0hkt01FVh9ZP50
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/ihxzDL9p
excel(part 5, old )
https://mega.nz/file/dAMBTTAD#qJSvz7gwU0o-Yo3ecffCsMEBLiOesQe_7bwiCR_DGXw
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/pcYTkHrZ
excel(part 6, old )
https://mega.nz/file/ABNjyJLa#5dnATFyZJzx1kpgvL_XzK5G1oiEtPUCAcuglbwL_G-8
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/5uJ576BD
excel(part 7, the newest )
https://mega.nz/file/xEVGgToB#wlfXt8z6fdoXOez8N8Wk4-Qv3e1rq2Miv1p_0xU5t5A
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/4mTPSyTD
276 - 313: Divided into players operating in two separate groups, the "attack group" and the "defense group"
Mark said: I think I am getting closer to the best balance with your tests so thank you so much. Here is the next iteration:
Handling, Shot Stopping, Physical x 2, Chance Conversion, Aerial Defence, Ground Defence and One on Ones
Once again reducing the Decisions component and increasing the Acc and Pace
If you could test this when you get a chance i would very much appreciate it
Thanks
juliius said: @harvestgreen22 Out of interest could you run some tests where there is quickness in the actual schedule, for example the the recent quickness, match practice, 2xattacking. But instead of quickness as the individual focus have it on aerial? i would like to see how much jumping reach can potentially be gained in comparison with how much acc and pace you lose
tam1236 said: Yes, exactly. Simple match score ranking is good if You have loads of youngsters with great potential and big PA-CA. That is You play as something like Barcelona. On the other hand the problem with just Quickness schedule is , that it leaves unused big part of PA if You have better newgens.
And that's why :
B. There is a factor to use: CA gain divided by match score (the less the better) which tells us how effectively PA is changed into match score . For example Quickness (alone) training has this factor quite low (11.68 after *10k), but Resistance and Endurance lower. And lowest (=most effective using PA-CA points) is Match Review training which, by the way, gives biggest acceleration+pace gain (AP=7.18) what is strange to me
But if one :
C. calculates match score for GK table and make a mark on general table, it turns out, that [Physical][Tactical] is quite a bad schedule for goalkeepers. (But still better than just Quickness). All becomes very complicate but if you care about GK - [Physical][Quickness][Resistance][Aerial Defence] is nice for GK and fairly effective in PA match score conversion (14.07, AP 6.09). or similar [Physical]x2[Chance Conversion] (14.04, 6.19)
xls with table
excel(part 7, the newest )
326 Handling, Shot Stopping, Physical x 2, Chance Conversion, Aerial Defence, Ground Defence and One on Ones
327 [Quickness][Match Practice][Attacking]x2
This is my current selected and conclusion:
The larger the amount of CA that is increased, the more inefficient attributes there will be.
Therefore, increasing the CA will lead to a relatively poorer quality .
(1) Least growth but highest quality:
85 [回顾录像] [Match Review] The maximum increase in Acceleration Pace, or if the overall potential of the players is low
CA growth: 17.40
43 （休息）无训练 [Rest] The maximum increase in Acceleration Pace, or if the overall potential of the players is low
CA growth: 17.53
82 [恢复] [Recovery] Desired to use "85 or 43", but upon discovering a high incidence of injuries , as an alternative to the first two options. arranged several "[Recovery]"
CA growth: 17.76
(2) Moderate growth, high quality:
317 [身体]x2[把握机会][攻击] [Physical]x2[Chance Conversion][Attacking] A balanced training (not in a hurry to enhance CA)
CA growth: 30.71
Special note: "攻击组 All member in attack group", all non-goalkeeper players should be placed in the attack group.
276 [边路进攻] [Attacking Wings] as an alternative if discovering a high incidence of injuries
CA growth: 29.17
Special note: "攻击组 All member in attack group", all non-goalkeeper players should be placed in the attack group.
(3) High growth, medium-high quality:
339 [速度][练习赛][攻击] [Quickness][Attacking][Match Practice] A balanced training (with a certain requirement for rapid improvement in CA)
CA growth: 35.72
Note: If there are many injuries or the player lacks of March-Sharpness, add several "[Recovery]".
(This is the one we recommended before.)
(4) very High growth , moderate quality:
331 [身体][练习赛][攻击][防守] [Physical][Match Practice][Attacking][Defending] If you need to increase the CA value as quickly as possible, use this .
CA growth: 39.62
Be sure not to forget the additional focus.
One more word:
I didn't pay attention to the training results of the goalkeepers,
but the training outcomes of the goalkeepers have been recorded in the Excel file (check the "Goalkeepers" page)
For the majority of the tests, I use [Additional Focus Agility and Balance] for goalkeepers .
Because Agility is one of the most effective attributes.
harvestgreen22 said: excel(part 1 , old)
https://mega.nz/file/4UUUDKgC#NuyR8RDaNap2_e44yi9SS2cjTkGgo2dpTL33obiUWQE
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/pcRwnxi8
excel(part 2 , old)
https://mega.nz/file/QZNVgQzK#xOTiw1heWmVtIDRDDPiUZqzbBnqYAbVi14RYX0W3CoQ
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/NzTu56KH
excel(part 3, old)
https://mega.nz/file/8JlW2LKb#NZyQ-gdnlcXu3Iun8-l5I-_c7wRmikgAvjOZjEsTvCg
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/oa8Y2Z4U
excel(part 4, old)
https://mega.nz/file/dENF1KSK#gY0GO3Od_fALZ51UW_2dxLnAMnmlt0hkt01FVh9ZP50
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/ihxzDL9p
excel(part 5, old )
https://mega.nz/file/dAMBTTAD#qJSvz7gwU0o-Yo3ecffCsMEBLiOesQe_7bwiCR_DGXw
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/pcYTkHrZ
excel(part 6, old )
https://mega.nz/file/ABNjyJLa#5dnATFyZJzx1kpgvL_XzK5G1oiEtPUCAcuglbwL_G-8
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/5uJ576BD
excel(part 7, the newest )
https://mega.nz/file/xEVGgToB#wlfXt8z6fdoXOez8N8Wk4-Qv3e1rq2Miv1p_0xU5t5A
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/4mTPSyTD
276 - 313: Divided into players operating in two separate groups, the "attack group" and the "defense group"
excel(part 7, the newest )
326 Handling, Shot Stopping, Physical x 2, Chance Conversion, Aerial Defence, Ground Defence and One on Ones
327 [Quickness][Match Practice][Attacking]x2
This is my current selected and conclusion:
The larger the amount of CA that is increased, the more inefficient attributes there will be.
Therefore, increasing the CA will lead to a relatively poorer quality .
(1) Least growth but highest quality:
85 [回顾录像] [Match Review] The maximum increase in Acceleration Pace, or if the overall potential of the players is low
CA growth: 17.40
43 （休息）无训练 [Rest] The maximum increase in Acceleration Pace, or if the overall potential of the players is low
CA growth: 17.53
82 [恢复] [Recovery] Desired to use "85 or 43", but upon discovering a high incidence of injuries , as an alternative to the first two options. arranged several "[Recovery]"
CA growth: 17.76
(2) Moderate growth, high quality:
317 [身体]x2[把握机会][攻击] [Physical]x2[Chance Conversion][Attacking] A balanced training (not in a hurry to enhance CA)
CA growth: 30.71
Special note: "攻击组 All member in attack group", all non-goalkeeper players should be placed in the attack group.
276 [边路进攻] [Attacking Wings] as an alternative if discovering a high incidence of injuries
CA growth: 29.17
Special note: "攻击组 All member in attack group", all non-goalkeeper players should be placed in the attack group.
(3) High growth, medium-high quality:
339 [速度][练习赛][攻击] [Quickness][Attacking][Match Practice] A balanced training (with a certain requirement for rapid improvement in CA)
CA growth: 35.72
Note: If there are many injuries or the player lacks of March-Sharpness, add several "[Recovery]".
(This is the one we recommended before.)
(4) very High growth , moderate quality:
331 [身体][练习赛][攻击][防守] [Physical][Match Practice][Attacking][Defending] If you need to increase the CA value as quickly as possible, use this .
CA growth: 39.62
Be sure not to forget the additional focus.
this is for fm24 or 26?
Hello guys, sorry if not 100% relevant... but is it possible for 'most' players to become natural or very, very close to...by playing in a certain position, but not having individual training set.
Im not talking a cb who is red or nothing, becoming a amc (i dont know... perhaps is possible for youth player... or with certain personalilty), but say generally already half/3 quarters way there. So a aml 'yellow' becoming, green/natural... purely by playing first team official games, friendlies and/or reserves.
Can anyone advise if theyve observed this or understand if this mechanic is possible... from extremely impressive levels of research into this game.
I do appreciate efforts and outcomes you all publish. For a busy family man, it allows me to enjoy game in way I want to, now free time of premium... compared to when I could spend tens of hours a week since championship manager 92/93 on the Amiga
Cheers!
B80 said: Hello guys, sorry if not 100% relevant... but is it possible for 'most' players to become natural or very, very close to...by playing in a certain position, but not having individual training set.
Im not talking a cb who is red or nothing, becoming a amc (i dont know... perhaps is possible for youth player... or with certain personalilty), but say generally already half/3 quarters way there. So a aml 'yellow' becoming, green/natural... purely by playing first team official games, friendlies and/or reserves.
Can anyone advise if theyve observed this or understand if this mechanic is possible... from extremely impressive levels of research into this game.
I do appreciate efforts and outcomes you all publish. For a busy family man, it allows me to enjoy game in way I want to, now free time of premium... compared to when I could spend tens of hours a week since championship manager 92/93 on the Amiga
Cheers!
I think it can get very close, yes.
In my save, Rashford’s positional familiarity changed to Natural just by playing him as a left winger consistently, without setting any individual position training.
lucailvotto said: this is for fm24 or 26?
for FM24 and FM26.
I took into account the required attributes of them, and then adjusted the proportion of each attribute that I thought was necessary based on a relatively simple intuition.
This might not be the best training schedule.
If you need to target FM24 or FM26
(Because my consideration of mixture is bound to result in something that is not optimal for any of them.)
, you can try to calculate it in your own way using that Excel.
harvestgreen22 said: for FM24 and FM26.
I took into account the required attributes of them, and then adjusted the proportion of each attribute that I thought was necessary based on a relatively simple intuition.
This might not be the best training schedule.
If you need to target FM24 or FM26
(Because my consideration of mixture is bound to result in something that is not optimal for any of them.)
, you can try to calculate it in your own way using that Excel.
In all the tests I’ve done with training sessions, I’ve always felt good in terms of development and player growth, but terribly bad on the pitch in terms of match results. The team doesn’t play well — it never plays well with these training sessions. Ideally, I’d like to find a mix between training that works, training that’s ‘bugged’ the way I’d want it to be, and strong performances on the pitch. Any ideas?
lucailvotto said: In all the tests I’ve done with training sessions, I’ve always felt good in terms of development and player growth, but terribly bad on the pitch in terms of match results. The team doesn’t play well — it never plays well with these training sessions. Ideally, I’d like to find a mix between training that works, training that’s ‘bugged’ the way I’d want it to be, and strong performances on the pitch. Any ideas?
Can't say it's been like that for me. 2 first seasons in my Hoffenheim save we finished 2nd and won the cup and after that won a treble every season.
juliius said: Can't say it's been like that for me. 2 first seasons in my Hoffenheim save we finished 2nd and won the cup and after that won a treble every season.
How training you use
harvestgreen22 said: excel(part 1 , old)
https://mega.nz/file/4UUUDKgC#NuyR8RDaNap2_e44yi9SS2cjTkGgo2dpTL33obiUWQE
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/pcRwnxi8
excel(part 2 , old)
https://mega.nz/file/QZNVgQzK#xOTiw1heWmVtIDRDDPiUZqzbBnqYAbVi14RYX0W3CoQ
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/NzTu56KH
excel(part 3, old)
https://mega.nz/file/8JlW2LKb#NZyQ-gdnlcXu3Iun8-l5I-_c7wRmikgAvjOZjEsTvCg
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/oa8Y2Z4U
excel(part 4, old)
https://mega.nz/file/dENF1KSK#gY0GO3Od_fALZ51UW_2dxLnAMnmlt0hkt01FVh9ZP50
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/ihxzDL9p
excel(part 5, old )
https://mega.nz/file/dAMBTTAD#qJSvz7gwU0o-Yo3ecffCsMEBLiOesQe_7bwiCR_DGXw
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/pcYTkHrZ
excel(part 6, old )
https://mega.nz/file/ABNjyJLa#5dnATFyZJzx1kpgvL_XzK5G1oiEtPUCAcuglbwL_G-8
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/5uJ576BD
excel(part 7, the newest )
https://mega.nz/file/xEVGgToB#wlfXt8z6fdoXOez8N8Wk4-Qv3e1rq2Miv1p_0xU5t5A
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/4mTPSyTD
276 - 313: Divided into players operating in two separate groups, the "attack group" and the "defense group"
excel(part 7, the newest )
326 Handling, Shot Stopping, Physical x 2, Chance Conversion, Aerial Defence, Ground Defence and One on Ones
327 [Quickness][Match Practice][Attacking]x2
This is my current selected and conclusion:
The larger the amount of CA that is increased, the more inefficient attributes there will be.
Therefore, increasing the CA will lead to a relatively poorer quality .
(1) Least growth but highest quality:
85 [回顾录像] [Match Review] The maximum increase in Acceleration Pace, or if the overall potential of the players is low
CA growth: 17.40
43 （休息）无训练 [Rest] The maximum increase in Acceleration Pace, or if the overall potential of the players is low
CA growth: 17.53
82 [恢复] [Recovery] Desired to use "85 or 43", but upon discovering a high incidence of injuries , as an alternative to the first two options. arranged several "[Recovery]"
CA growth: 17.76
(2) Moderate growth, high quality:
317 [身体]x2[把握机会][攻击] [Physical]x2[Chance Conversion][Attacking] A balanced training (not in a hurry to enhance CA)
CA growth: 30.71
Special note: "攻击组 All member in attack group", all non-goalkeeper players should be placed in the attack group.
276 [边路进攻] [Attacking Wings] as an alternative if discovering a high incidence of injuries
CA growth: 29.17
Special note: "攻击组 All member in attack group", all non-goalkeeper players should be placed in the attack group.
(3) High growth, medium-high quality:
339 [速度][练习赛][攻击] [Quickness][Attacking][Match Practice] A balanced training (with a certain requirement for rapid improvement in CA)
CA growth: 35.72
Note: If there are many injuries or the player lacks of March-Sharpness, add several "[Recovery]".
(This is the one we recommended before.)
(4) very High growth , moderate quality:
331 [身体][练习赛][攻击][防守] [Physical][Match Practice][Attacking][Defending] If you need to increase the CA value as quickly as possible, use this .
CA growth: 39.62
Be sure not to forget the additional focus.
It's not possible to import files into FM 26.
But Match Review is only one session of that type, and the rest is either rest or recovery?
lucailvotto said: How training you use
Basically these 3. The one with physical, match practice, attacking and defending most recently based on the excel sheets, the others for basically 3 or 4 seasons each
Is 276 basically that? Is there no difference between rest and recovery?
@harvestgreen22 with this training, how tactics you use?
Hi all, great work @harvestgreen22. Just so I understand this correctly, would it be worthwhile—if you have a First Team, Under 21s, and Under 18s—to use the following schedules:
First Team / Under 21s: Schedule 331
Under 18s: Schedule 43
If anyone has experience using these schedules, I’d really appreciate you sharing what has worked well for you. It would be great to hear some success stories and learn from how others have approached this.
Thanks in advance.
excel (part 8)
https://mega.nz/file/1IcmhKCK#cu14MjkFF8dT9CzYAN3XGEsBAV0HM1oMBc0BhS4MOLM
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/TAGi8qnQ
excel (part 9)
https://mega.nz/file/VQVQFb6D#qLdgX0zI1yzVY_6lFvJA1hHEVATleYgXYQD2p3KJmSA
or
https://pixeldrain.com/u/frdBZ1g8
1.
I decided to follow the same approach as in the comments
and give each training schedule a Score.
check excel 9,
First of all, I found the data that I tested.
There are several such tables.
Table 1 shows the changes in winning rate when each attribute is increased to "18" from basic value.
Table 2 shows the changes in winning rate when each attribute is reduced to "1" from basic value.
By "Table 1 - Table 2", we obtain "If this attribute is increased from 1 to 18, what changes will occur in the winning rate?"
This can serve as a weight to measure the importance of each attribute, and then multiply it by the improvement value of each attribute in the training schedule. This will result in a score representing the improvement.
Finally, by summing up all the scores, the total score can be obtained.
2.
However, there is a problem. Generally speaking, our players do not start training from attribute "1", so I found the table for "attribute 6".
Table 4 shows the changes in winning rate when each attribute is reduced to "6".
By Table 1 - Table 4, we obtain "If this attribute is increased from 6 to 18, what changes will occur in the winning rate?"
This is more in line with the starting point of the usual players' training.
3.
I calculated the score for each training schedule and placed it in the "Score" column.
Then, in order to calculate the increase in score for each point of CA, I obtained "Quality" by dividing "Score" by "CA".
So:
"Score" refers to how much victory the training schedule can bring you.
"Quality" refers to the efficiency of the CA conversions you consume.
"CA" symbolizes the approximate potential required.
PaulCustus said: Hi all, great work @harvestgreen22. Just so I understand this correctly, would it be worthwhile—if you have a First Team, Under 21s, and Under 18s—to use the following schedules:
First Team / Under 21s: Schedule 331
Under 18s: Schedule 43
If anyone has experience using these schedules, I’d really appreciate you sharing what has worked well for you. It would be great to hear some success stories and learn from how others have approached this.
Thanks in advance.
I think there's nothing wrong with this. you might want to take a look at the latest results.
lucailvotto said: @harvestgreen22 with this training, how tactics you use?
Basically it's the strategy for the 403 floor.
I might make some minor adjustments based on the latest results
(I just finished it but haven't checked yet).
Eddie said: Is 276 basically that? Is there no difference between rest and recovery?
yes,
There is a slight difference between "rest" and "recovery". To put it simply, if there are not many injuries or illnesses, there is no need to use the word "recovery".
If there are many injuries or a lack of match sharpness, then use "recovery"
lucailvotto said: In all the tests I’ve done with training sessions, I’ve always felt good in terms of development and player growth, but terribly bad on the pitch in terms of match results. The team doesn’t play well — it never plays well with these training sessions. Ideally, I’d like to find a mix between training that works, training that’s ‘bugged’ the way I’d want it to be, and strong performances on the pitch. Any ideas?
The attributes of the players are part of the victory, and training makes attributes better (this takes time)
Then, if you need more immediate feedback, you might need to adopt some meta tactic in https://fm-arena.com/tables/.
tactic are also an important part of achieving victory.
Great work again @harvestgreen22. After seeing your latest test results, I’ll most likely run the following setup:
First Team / Under 21s: Schedule 331
Under 18s: Schedule 44
@harvestgreen22
Could you run a test where the schedule is:
1xQuickness and the additional focus on Strength?
I have some free time again so I was doing my own analysis of the spreadsheets
I remove AMC and one DM from the calculations as I use a certain Knap tactic, and use the following weightings (basically from my Genie Scout Ratings file):
Acceleration 0.97
Pace 1.0
Dribbling (DC/DL/DR/AML/AMR) 0.28
Concentration (DC/DL/DR) 0.22
Anticipation 0.13
Composure 0.1
Decisions -0.3
I've selected the promising ones to examine, though I couldn't find the corresponding spreadsheet for some and I haven't looked through it all exhaustively.
Results:
113: 3.17675 + 3.1 + 0.27 + 0.627 + 0.28275 + 0.2075 - 0.645 = 7.019 | 90-90-100
284: 3.17675 + 3.375 + 0.056 + 0.385 + 0.156 + 0.115 - 0.39 = 6.874 | 5-15-5
282: 3.32225 + 3.325 + 0.056 + 0.22 + 0.04875 + 0.015 - 0.12 = 6.867 | 15-15-15
306: 3.0555 + 3.425 + 0.048 + 0.396 + 0.1495 + 0.125 - 0.36 = 6.839 | 5-5-15
276: 3.019125 + 3.175 + 0.238 + 0.473 + 0.17225 + 0.1625 - 0.45 = 6.79 | 20-15-15
150: 2.91 + 3.0625 + 0.443 + 0.605 + 0.39 + 0.275 - 0.9 = 6.7855 | 90-90-90
260: 3.0009 + 2.875 + 0.42 + 0.605 + 0.365625 + 0.23125 - 0.759375 = 6.7384 | 105-105-105
90: 2.829 + 3.0625 + 0.466 + 0.568 + 0.349 + 0.266 - 0.81 = 6.7305 | 45-45-45
97: 2.813 + 3.125 + 0.373 + 0.583 + 0.3055 + 0.24 - 0.7125 = 6.727 | 105-100-100 (what I previously suggested)
129: 2.78875 + 2.925 + 0.52266 + 0.682 + 0.39975 + 0.245 - 0.87 = 6.693 | 100-80-80
331: 2.8009 + 3.025 + 0.39666 + 0.704 + 0.391625 + 0.23 - 0.855 = 6.693 | 105-105-105
123: 2.86958 + 3.1 + 0.24266 + 0.561 + 0.289 + 0.20333 - 0.64125 = 6.624 | 65-75-75
121: 2.93425 + 3.125 + 0.084 + 0.5005 + 0.099 + 0.07375 - 0.25125 = 6.565 | 85-95-85
99: 2.9827 + 3.1 + 0.12 + 0.418 + 0.1495 + 0.105 - 0.3675 = 6.5077 | 10-10-20
328: 2.7645 + 3.05 + 0.20533 + 0.396 + 0.221 + 0.1675 - 0.465 = 6.33933
188: 2.776625 + 2.925 + 0.252 + 0.396 + 0.212875 + 0.18375 - 0.54 = 6.206 | 90-90-100
The last figure is the total % intensity for GK-Defending-Attacking groups.
Raw performance Top 5:
113: [Quickness][Match Practice][Chance Conversion][Quickness focus] - 7.019
284: [Aerial Defence][Quickness focus][All players in attack group] - 6.874
282: [Defending Wide][Quickness focus][All players in attack group] - 6.867
306: [Chance Creation][Quickness focus][All players in defend group] - 6.839
276: [Attacking Wings][Quickness focus][All players in attack group] - 6.79
High Dribbling:
113: [Quickness][Match Practice][Chance Conversion][Quickness focus] - 7.019, 0.27 dribbling
150: [Attackingx6][Quickness focus] - 6.7855, 0.443 dribbling
90: [Attackingx3][Quickness focus] - 6.7305, 0.466 dribbling
129: [Handling][Shot Stopping][Attacking][Defending][Aerial Defence][Ground Defence][Chance Creation][Chance Conversion][Quickness focus] - 6.693, 0.523 dribbling
Best overall (subjective):
113: [Quickness][Match Practice][Chance Conversion][Quickness focus] - 7.019 | 90-90-100 | 34.4 CA
284: [Aerial Defence][Quickness focus][All players in attack group] - 6.874 | 5-15-5 | 23.52 CA
306: [Chance Creation][Quickness focus][All players in defend group] - 6.839 | 5-5-15 | 23.66 CA
276: [Attacking Wings][Quickness focus][All players in attack group] - 6.79 | 20-15-15 | 29.17 CA
It's a very close contest after those, but it would be a moot point to work out, because in the above 113 is a clear winner for high PA or low match load scenarios, 284 or 306 for low PA or giving players rest, and 276 for something closer to in-between.
@harvestgreen22 Could you post or direct me to the detailed data for 243 - [速度][攻击]x2[练习赛] - [Quickness] + [Match Practice] + [Attacking] x2? I was unable to find it