Recommended to open this excel, because there is too much information to see at screenshots https://pixeldrain.com/u/rXnTcPNC (Fixed a copy and paste error in the last post)
“Growth strategy”15-23 , The preset condition reduces the "Professionalism " to "12" points, the maximum potential is set to 164, and the initial average CA is 94, so the average difference between PA and CA is PA-CA=164-94= 70 points.
The 9 strategies represent different percentages of bias,
If it is dominated by extreme increases in Physical classes (which pace and acc are most value attributes in any position), you will see a red color in the technical class (representing a decline), and as a price, CA increases less, but gets the best body classes (a dark blue color representing a rise).
If it is mainly dominated by "more CA", the technical class can be blue in excel table, the CA rises better, and the corresponding Physical class rises a little less
Which one to choose? I don't know. You can choose by looking at the table. I gave up analyzing. You can see all the attributes and CA values for "how much grow" in each year in the table.
Then, noting , "Strategy" 15-23 I added a "Plan 4" in "year 5". This is what I would like to observe if we do not use "[Addtional Focus Quickness]", then , the CA is less allocated to the physical class, to see if the technical and mental attributes may be balanced increase.
When looking at the excel table, you only need to observe 1-4 years on the line, the 5 year can be deleted to avoid affecting the viewing
The stuck growth of CA still exists in some cases, stuck and un-grow, This strange phenomenon, many players have given various solutions (such as contract renewal), it is still not clear what caused this
Dear @harvestgreen22 thank You very much for Your great contribution to this community and for better understandig of training. So, my question is which plan is best to use for U18 squad, is it plan 1 or plan 2? and which plan is best for U21 squad? Thank You very much, best regards!
debelizec19 said: Dear @harvestgreen22 thank You very much for Your great contribution to this community and for better understandig of training. So, my question is which plan is best to use for U18 squad, is it plan 1 or plan 2? and which plan is best for U21 squad? Thank You very much, best regards! Expand
If I am in a relatively high level league, I will choose Growth strategy 2 in all of them ( main team , U18, U21 ), which maybe relatively general and convenient
If I am in a relatively lowest ranking league and the players' PA is very low (for example, 50-80PA), then I will choose Growth strategy 3, giving up technical attributes and maximizing physical attributes
Explain another question that has been asked many times , in private messages and replies
As you can see clearly in the table chart, generally, the first year grow results are good, and the second year results are worse than year 1.
Reason: Growth is high in the first year because the CA is far from the PA. Then the growth is less and less because the CA is getting closer and closer to the PA
1. Now assume a condition: the initial CA was only 20, the PA was 160, and the "Professionalism" =15
So at the end of the first year, CA20 -- > average about 60 CA -- > average about 100 CA , Growth is very steady and always high , average +40 each year
In other words, CA will always grow at the greatest rate , when it is far from the maximum PA . and if it is 20 or 30 or so , away from the maximum PA, it will be much slow in any case (even if it is the first year of training and very young),
2. In other words, if the player CA and PA difference is not much, the "space" it can grow will be small
3. As another example, you can look directly at strategies 5-8 in the table, where CA is very close to PA and grows very little in the first year
harvestgreen22 said: If I am in a relatively high level league, I will choose Growth strategy 2 in all of them ( main team , U18, U21 ), which maybe relatively general and convenient
If I am in a relatively lowest ranking league and the players' PA is very low (for example, 50-80PA), then I will choose Growth strategy 3, giving up technical attributes and maximizing physical attributes Expand
Growth Strategy 2 is plan 3 for 2 years then plan 1 for 2 years correct?
Based on the data the best training strategies are either Strategy 17 (1 in the previous version) or Strategy 21 (2 in the previous version). Atm I prefer Strategy 21.
To apply this to the game do as follows: 1. Use Plan 1 or 3 for the u18s (2 years, age 15/16-18) 2. when they age out move to B Team where you should use the opposite of what you used for u18s 3. Then when either CA high enough or Pace/Acc high enough (depends which way round you did it), move to senior squad. I stop actively training Pace/Acc when both are >16 4. When in senior squad remove Quickness additional focus
HOWEVER, I have some questions:
In the image I compare the growth patterns for the 2 different strategies (Note: Strat 1=Strat 17, and Strat 2=Strat 21, they just have different starting parameters). 1. When comparing Strat 1 vs Strat 2 something is wrong with your data @harvestgreen22 . Strat 2 has a much higher final CA, but overall has lower attributes, even when taking attribute weighting into account. 2. Additionally, when comparing Strat 17 vs Strat 21, Strat 17 appears to be slightly better. Which makes me question the CA values in the initial Strat 1 vs Strat 2 test even more.
Thanks again, @harvestgreen22 . Hopefully this is useful for everyone.
Based on the data the best training strategies are either Strategy 17 (1 in the previous version) or Strategy 21 (2 in the previous version). Atm I prefer Strategy 21.
To apply this to the game do as follows: 1. Use Plan 1 or 3 for the u18s (2 years, age 15/16-18) 2. when they age out move to B Team where you should use the opposite of what you used for u18s 3. Then when either CA high enough or Pace/Acc high enough (depends which way round you did it), move to senior squad. I stop actively training Pace/Acc when both are >16 4. When in senior squad remove Quickness additional focus
HOWEVER, I have some questions:
In the image I compare the growth patterns for the 2 different strategies (Note: Strat 1=Strat 17, and Strat 2=Strat 21, they just have different starting parameters). 1. When comparing Strat 1 vs Strat 2 something is wrong with your data @harvestgreen22 . Strat 2 has a much higher final CA, but overall has lower attributes, even when taking attribute weighting into account. 2. Additionally, when comparing Strat 17 vs Strat 21, Strat 17 appears to be slightly better. Which makes me question the CA values in the initial Strat 1 vs Strat 2 test even more.
Thanks again, @harvestgreen22 . Hopefully this is useful for everyone. Expand
Ok and then what schedule do you use for the senior squad?
twkmax said: Plan 3 but have no additional focus (or you can choose one if you want) Expand
Pk thanks, i still find it pretty insane that no training at all makes their Physicals grow more than anything you would think maybe even 1 Overall Physical session would do more
Robbo84FM said: Also is their a previous post that maybe i have missed that you tested Strategy's 1 - 14 as the excel link here is only 15 - 23? Expand
Based on the data the best training strategies are either Strategy 17 (1 in the previous version) or Strategy 21 (2 in the previous version). Atm I prefer Strategy 21.
To apply this to the game do as follows: 1. Use Plan 1 or 3 for the u18s (2 years, age 15/16-18) 2. when they age out move to B Team where you should use the opposite of what you used for u18s 3. Then when either CA high enough or Pace/Acc high enough (depends which way round you did it), move to senior squad. I stop actively training Pace/Acc when both are >16 4. When in senior squad remove Quickness additional focus
HOWEVER, I have some questions:
In the image I compare the growth patterns for the 2 different strategies (Note: Strat 1=Strat 17, and Strat 2=Strat 21, they just have different starting parameters). 1. When comparing Strat 1 vs Strat 2 something is wrong with your data @harvestgreen22 . Strat 2 has a much higher final CA, but overall has lower attributes, even when taking attribute weighting into account. 2. Additionally, when comparing Strat 17 vs Strat 21, Strat 17 appears to be slightly better. Which makes me question the CA values in the initial Strat 1 vs Strat 2 test even more.
Thanks again, @harvestgreen22 . Hopefully this is useful for everyone. Expand
Based on the data the best training strategies are either Strategy 17 (1 in the previous version) or Strategy 21 (2 in the previous version). Atm I prefer Strategy 21.
To apply this to the game do as follows: 1. Use Plan 1 or 3 for the u18s (2 years, age 15/16-18) 2. when they age out move to B Team where you should use the opposite of what you used for u18s 3. Then when either CA high enough or Pace/Acc high enough (depends which way round you did it), move to senior squad. I stop actively training Pace/Acc when both are >16 4. When in senior squad remove Quickness additional focus
HOWEVER, I have some questions:
In the image I compare the growth patterns for the 2 different strategies (Note: Strat 1=Strat 17, and Strat 2=Strat 21, they just have different starting parameters). 1. When comparing Strat 1 vs Strat 2 something is wrong with your data @harvestgreen22 . Strat 2 has a much higher final CA, but overall has lower attributes, even when taking attribute weighting into account. 2. Additionally, when comparing Strat 17 vs Strat 21, Strat 17 appears to be slightly better. Which makes me question the CA values in the initial Strat 1 vs Strat 2 test even more.
Thanks again, @harvestgreen22 . Hopefully this is useful for everyone. Expand
Up until U18 - [Rest]+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness] 18 and over - [Quickness]+[Match Practice]+[Attacking]+[Recovery]x7+[Double Intensity]
These elements can be organised in anyway so I can still respect @Zaz superrest method?
Is double intensity only for full health? Are the others 'no training'?
It looks like doing just 'Rest' for 2 years and then 'Full' training is best when comparing your data. How many test repeats did you do?
Also since it is clear that combining two extreme training is best (max quickness and then max CA), is it worth trying a different Max CA training program which has less of a focus on quickness?
Based on the data the best training strategies are either Strategy 17 (1 in the previous version) or Strategy 21 (2 in the previous version). Atm I prefer Strategy 21.
To apply this to the game do as follows: 1. Use Plan 1 or 3 for the u18s (2 years, age 15/16-18) 2. when they age out move to B Team where you should use the opposite of what you used for u18s 3. Then when either CA high enough or Pace/Acc high enough (depends which way round you did it), move to senior squad. I stop actively training Pace/Acc when both are >16 4. When in senior squad remove Quickness additional focus
HOWEVER, I have some questions:
In the image I compare the growth patterns for the 2 different strategies (Note: Strat 1=Strat 17, and Strat 2=Strat 21, they just have different starting parameters). 1. When comparing Strat 1 vs Strat 2 something is wrong with your data @harvestgreen22 . Strat 2 has a much higher final CA, but overall has lower attributes, even when taking attribute weighting into account. 2. Additionally, when comparing Strat 17 vs Strat 21, Strat 17 appears to be slightly better. Which makes me question the CA values in the initial Strat 1 vs Strat 2 test even more.
Thanks again, @harvestgreen22 . Hopefully this is useful for everyone. Expand
the questions: I don't know why it happened, And then the test is only tested once, so there does have to be some randomness
It looks like doing just 'Rest' for 2 years and then 'Full' training is best when comparing your data. How many test repeats did you do?
Also since it is clear that combining two extreme training is best (max quickness and then max CA), is it worth trying a different Max CA training program which has less of a focus on quickness? Expand
*I don't know if my translator misunderstood you, if I didn't, this is a topic that I just discussed with other gamer friends
I don't have any ideas at the moment (I mean I haven't started thinking about it yet, so I can't draw any conclusions, because all the preparation has been about how to maximize "Pace and Acceleration".
1.Pace and Acceleration, because everyone can get to 20 and it works a lot, so for me, I would be more inclined to get them to around 18-19 before I start moving on to other attributes.
2.Then if I want to add a specific attribute, I can start changing "[Addtional Focus]" to it at some point Or maybe I change "[Addtional Focus]" to "none" and assign it as nature would like
3.As for more Max CA, let me explain the mechanics of the game (which you probably already know) :
Two players, in different positions/duty. They both have exactly the same "attribute", but the CA is different. This is because different positions/duty have different "attributes" that they "need."
For example, "Centre-backs" need to "Positioning", And "wingers" do not need to "Positioning,"
If you add 10 "Positioning" to the two people at the same time "Centre-backs" +21 CA and "wingers" +2 CA That's a huge gap
4.Same principle, check H21 (which made by a Forum user) , it has a special [Addtional Focus] ，https://pixeldrain.com/u/AtUvd3hY Why does this training get a more CA of 34.7? Is it because it has so many training programs? (It takes 12 training per Week and the training is very intense.) No, If you change I20 (only 3 training per Week) to the same [Addtional Focus] , they will get about 34 CA too.
This special [Addtional Focus] is changing the [Addtional Focus] of all the positions to the attributes that they need for their positions/duty . example , "Centre-backs" get a "Positioning" Addtional Focus ,which "Centre-backs" need
5.So if you want to "add as many CA as possible , less focus on quickness".
Changing the training schedule is a way . A more obvious and faster way to do this is to change [Addtional Focus] to the positions/duty need
(The two methods are not in conflict and can be done at the same time)
Recommended to open this excel,
because there is too much information to see at screenshots
https://pixeldrain.com/u/rXnTcPNC
(Fixed a copy and paste error in the last post)
edit in 22/1/2025: https://pixeldrain.com/u/953xPdxx
“
Plan 1 : [Rest]+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
Plan 2 : [Quickness]+[Attacking Direct]+[Recovery]x7+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
Plan 3 : [Quickness]+[Match Practice]+[Attacking]+[Recovery]x7+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
Plan 4 : [Quickness]+[Match Practice]+[Attacking]+[Recovery]x7+[Double Intensity]
1.Extreme way to increase Physical class stats
[Rest]+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
or
[Recovery]x7+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
2.Increase moderate levels of CA , as fewer invalid attributes as possible, and as many high value attributes as possible
[Quickness]+[Attacking Shadow Play]+[Recovery]x7+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
or
[Quickness]+[Attacking Direct]+[Recovery]x7+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
3. Add as much CA as possible , while fewer invalid attributes as possible, and as many high value attributes as possible
[Quickness]+[Match Practice]+[Attacking]+[Recovery]x7+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
or
[Physical]+[Match Practice]+[Attacking]+[Recovery]x7+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
"
”
“Growth strategy”15-23 , The preset condition reduces the "Professionalism " to "12" points, the maximum potential is set to 164, and the initial average CA is 94, so the average difference between PA and CA is
PA-CA=164-94= 70 points.
The 9 strategies represent different percentages of bias,
If it is dominated by extreme increases in Physical classes (which pace and acc are most value attributes in any position), you will see a red color in the technical class (representing a decline), and as a price, CA increases less, but gets the best body classes (a dark blue color representing a rise).
If it is mainly dominated by "more CA", the technical class can be blue in excel table, the CA rises better, and the corresponding Physical class rises a little less
Which one to choose? I don't know. You can choose by looking at the table. I gave up analyzing. You can see all the attributes and CA values for "how much grow" in each year in the table.
Then, noting , "Strategy" 15-23 I added a "Plan 4" in "year 5". This is what I would like to observe if we do not use "[Addtional Focus Quickness]",
then , the CA is less allocated to the physical class, to see if the technical and mental attributes may be balanced increase.
When looking at the excel table, you only need to observe 1-4 years on the line, the 5 year can be deleted to avoid affecting the viewing
The stuck growth of CA still exists in some cases, stuck and un-grow, This strange phenomenon, many players have given various solutions (such as contract renewal), it is still not clear what caused this
Dear @harvestgreen22 thank You very much for Your great contribution to this community and for better understandig of training.
So, my question is which plan is best to use for U18 squad, is it plan 1 or plan 2? and which plan is best for U21 squad?
Thank You very much, best regards!
debelizec19 said: Dear @harvestgreen22 thank You very much for Your great contribution to this community and for better understandig of training.
So, my question is which plan is best to use for U18 squad, is it plan 1 or plan 2? and which plan is best for U21 squad?
Thank You very much, best regards!
If I am in a relatively high level league, I will choose Growth strategy 2 in all of them ( main team , U18, U21 ), which maybe relatively general and convenient
If I am in a relatively lowest ranking league and the players' PA is very low (for example, 50-80PA), then I will choose Growth strategy 3, giving up technical attributes and maximizing physical attributes
Explain another question that has been asked many times , in private messages and replies
As you can see clearly in the table chart, generally, the first year grow results are good, and the second year results are worse than year 1.
Reason: Growth is high in the first year because the CA is far from the PA. Then the growth is less and less because the CA is getting closer and closer to the PA
1. Now assume a condition: the initial CA was only 20, the PA was 160, and the "Professionalism" =15
So at the end of the first year, CA20 -- > average about 60 CA -- > average about 100 CA ,
Growth is very steady and always high , average +40 each year
In other words, CA will always grow at the greatest rate , when it is far from the maximum PA .
and if it is 20 or 30 or so , away from the maximum PA, it will be much slow in any case (even if it is the first year of training and very young),
2. In other words, if the player CA and PA difference is not much, the "space" it can grow will be small
3. As another example, you can look directly at strategies 5-8 in the table, where CA is very close to PA and grows very little in the first year
harvestgreen22 said: If I am in a relatively high level league, I will choose Growth strategy 2 in all of them ( main team , U18, U21 ), which maybe relatively general and convenient
If I am in a relatively lowest ranking league and the players' PA is very low (for example, 50-80PA), then I will choose Growth strategy 3, giving up technical attributes and maximizing physical attributes
Growth Strategy 2 is plan 3 for 2 years then plan 1 for 2 years correct?
Also is their a previous post that maybe i have missed that you tested Strategy's 1 - 14 as the excel link here is only 15 - 23?
Thank you @harvestgreen22 !
Based on the data the best training strategies are either Strategy 17 (1 in the previous version) or Strategy 21 (2 in the previous version).
Atm I prefer Strategy 21.
To apply this to the game do as follows:
1. Use Plan 1 or 3 for the u18s (2 years, age 15/16-18)
2. when they age out move to B Team where you should use the opposite of what you used for u18s
3. Then when either CA high enough or Pace/Acc high enough (depends which way round you did it), move to senior squad. I stop actively training Pace/Acc when both are >16
4. When in senior squad remove Quickness additional focus
HOWEVER, I have some questions:
In the image I compare the growth patterns for the 2 different strategies (Note: Strat 1=Strat 17, and Strat 2=Strat 21, they just have different starting parameters).
1. When comparing Strat 1 vs Strat 2 something is wrong with your data @harvestgreen22 . Strat 2 has a much higher final CA, but overall has lower attributes, even when taking attribute weighting into account.
2. Additionally, when comparing Strat 17 vs Strat 21, Strat 17 appears to be slightly better. Which makes me question the CA values in the initial Strat 1 vs Strat 2 test even more.
Thanks again, @harvestgreen22 . Hopefully this is useful for everyone.
twkmax said: Thank you @harvestgreen22 !
Based on the data the best training strategies are either Strategy 17 (1 in the previous version) or Strategy 21 (2 in the previous version).
Atm I prefer Strategy 21.
To apply this to the game do as follows:
1. Use Plan 1 or 3 for the u18s (2 years, age 15/16-18)
2. when they age out move to B Team where you should use the opposite of what you used for u18s
3. Then when either CA high enough or Pace/Acc high enough (depends which way round you did it), move to senior squad. I stop actively training Pace/Acc when both are >16
4. When in senior squad remove Quickness additional focus
HOWEVER, I have some questions:
In the image I compare the growth patterns for the 2 different strategies (Note: Strat 1=Strat 17, and Strat 2=Strat 21, they just have different starting parameters).
1. When comparing Strat 1 vs Strat 2 something is wrong with your data @harvestgreen22 . Strat 2 has a much higher final CA, but overall has lower attributes, even when taking attribute weighting into account.
2. Additionally, when comparing Strat 17 vs Strat 21, Strat 17 appears to be slightly better. Which makes me question the CA values in the initial Strat 1 vs Strat 2 test even more.
Thanks again, @harvestgreen22 . Hopefully this is useful for everyone.
Ok and then what schedule do you use for the senior squad?
Robbo84FM said: Ok and then what schedule do you use for the senior squad?
Plan 3 but have no additional focus (or you can choose one if you want)
twkmax said: Plan 3 but have no additional focus (or you can choose one if you want)
Pk thanks, i still find it pretty insane that no training at all makes their Physicals grow more than anything you would think maybe even 1 Overall Physical session would do more
Robbo84FM said: Also is their a previous post that maybe i have missed that you tested Strategy's 1 - 14 as the excel link here is only 15 - 23?
edit in 22/1/2025: https://pixeldrain.com/u/953xPdxx
Robbo84FM said: Growth Strategy 2 is plan 3 for 2 years then plan 1 for 2 years correct?
yes
twkmax said: Thank you @harvestgreen22 !
Based on the data the best training strategies are either Strategy 17 (1 in the previous version) or Strategy 21 (2 in the previous version).
Atm I prefer Strategy 21.
To apply this to the game do as follows:
1. Use Plan 1 or 3 for the u18s (2 years, age 15/16-18)
2. when they age out move to B Team where you should use the opposite of what you used for u18s
3. Then when either CA high enough or Pace/Acc high enough (depends which way round you did it), move to senior squad. I stop actively training Pace/Acc when both are >16
4. When in senior squad remove Quickness additional focus
HOWEVER, I have some questions:
In the image I compare the growth patterns for the 2 different strategies (Note: Strat 1=Strat 17, and Strat 2=Strat 21, they just have different starting parameters).
1. When comparing Strat 1 vs Strat 2 something is wrong with your data @harvestgreen22 . Strat 2 has a much higher final CA, but overall has lower attributes, even when taking attribute weighting into account.
2. Additionally, when comparing Strat 17 vs Strat 21, Strat 17 appears to be slightly better. Which makes me question the CA values in the initial Strat 1 vs Strat 2 test even more.
Thanks again, @harvestgreen22 . Hopefully this is useful for everyone.
edit in 22/1/2025: https://pixeldrain.com/u/953xPdxx
strategy 15-- strategy 23 is actually Professionalism 15,
Now with true Professionalism 12 in strategy 24-- 32,
twkmax said: Plan 3 but have no additional focus (or you can choose one if you want)
Why wouldn't you have additional focus? Is there a negative?
twkmax said: Thank you @harvestgreen22 !
Based on the data the best training strategies are either Strategy 17 (1 in the previous version) or Strategy 21 (2 in the previous version).
Atm I prefer Strategy 21.
To apply this to the game do as follows:
1. Use Plan 1 or 3 for the u18s (2 years, age 15/16-18)
2. when they age out move to B Team where you should use the opposite of what you used for u18s
3. Then when either CA high enough or Pace/Acc high enough (depends which way round you did it), move to senior squad. I stop actively training Pace/Acc when both are >16
4. When in senior squad remove Quickness additional focus
HOWEVER, I have some questions:
In the image I compare the growth patterns for the 2 different strategies (Note: Strat 1=Strat 17, and Strat 2=Strat 21, they just have different starting parameters).
1. When comparing Strat 1 vs Strat 2 something is wrong with your data @harvestgreen22 . Strat 2 has a much higher final CA, but overall has lower attributes, even when taking attribute weighting into account.
2. Additionally, when comparing Strat 17 vs Strat 21, Strat 17 appears to be slightly better. Which makes me question the CA values in the initial Strat 1 vs Strat 2 test even more.
Thanks again, @harvestgreen22 . Hopefully this is useful for everyone.
@twkmax Can you confirm this is what you do?
Up until U18 - [Rest]+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
18 and over - [Quickness]+[Match Practice]+[Attacking]+[Recovery]x7+[Double Intensity]
These elements can be organised in anyway so I can still respect @Zaz superrest method?
Is double intensity only for full health? Are the others 'no training'?
@Middleweight165
U18: [Quickness]+[Match Practice]+[Attacking]+[Recovery]x7+[Double Intensity] +[Additional Focus Quickness]
B Team: [Rest]+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
Then move players into first team once Acc and Pace >16
First Team: [Quickness]+[Match Practice]+[Attacking]+[Recovery]x7+[Double Intensity]
Additional focus is removed so that CA growth becomes less specific to quickness and creates a more rounded player once my 16 threshold is met.
@harvestgreen22
It looks like doing just 'Rest' for 2 years and then 'Full' training is best when comparing your data. How many test repeats did you do?
Also since it is clear that combining two extreme training is best (max quickness and then max CA), is it worth trying a different Max CA training program which has less of a focus on quickness?
twkmax said: @Middleweight165
U18: [Quickness]+[Match Practice]+[Attacking]+[Recovery]x7+[Double Intensity] +[Additional Focus Quickness]
B Team: [Rest]+[Double Intensity]+[Addtional Focus Quickness]
Then move players into first team once Acc and Pace >16
First Team: [Quickness]+[Match Practice]+[Attacking]+[Recovery]x7+[Double Intensity]
Additional focus is removed so that CA growth becomes less specific to quickness and creates a more rounded player once my 16 threshold is met.
Thanks! Are the rest settings all no training and double with full condition?
twkmax said: Thank you @harvestgreen22 !
.
Based on the data the best training strategies are either Strategy 17 (1 in the previous version) or Strategy 21 (2 in the previous version).
Atm I prefer Strategy 21.
To apply this to the game do as follows:
1. Use Plan 1 or 3 for the u18s (2 years, age 15/16-18)
2. when they age out move to B Team where you should use the opposite of what you used for u18s
3. Then when either CA high enough or Pace/Acc high enough (depends which way round you did it), move to senior squad. I stop actively training Pace/Acc when both are >16
4. When in senior squad remove Quickness additional focus
HOWEVER, I have some questions:
In the image I compare the growth patterns for the 2 different strategies (Note: Strat 1=Strat 17, and Strat 2=Strat 21, they just have different starting parameters).
1. When comparing Strat 1 vs Strat 2 something is wrong with your data @harvestgreen22 . Strat 2 has a much higher final CA, but overall has lower attributes, even when taking attribute weighting into account.
2. Additionally, when comparing Strat 17 vs Strat 21, Strat 17 appears to be slightly better. Which makes me question the CA values in the initial Strat 1 vs Strat 2 test even more.
Thanks again, @harvestgreen22 . Hopefully this is useful for everyone.
the questions:
I don't know why it happened,
And then the test is only tested once, so there does have to be some randomness
twkmax said: @harvestgreen22
It looks like doing just 'Rest' for 2 years and then 'Full' training is best when comparing your data. How many test repeats did you do?
Also since it is clear that combining two extreme training is best (max quickness and then max CA), is it worth trying a different Max CA training program which has less of a focus on quickness?
*I don't know if my translator misunderstood you, if I didn't, this is a topic that I just discussed with other gamer friends
I don't have any ideas at the moment (I mean I haven't started thinking about it yet, so I can't draw any conclusions, because all the preparation has been about how to maximize "Pace and Acceleration"
1.Pace and Acceleration, because everyone can get to 20 and it works a lot, so for me, I would be more inclined to get them to around 18-19 before I start moving on to other attributes.
2.Then if I want to add a specific attribute, I can start changing "[Addtional Focus]" to it at some point
Or maybe I change "[Addtional Focus]" to "none" and assign it as nature would like
3.As for more Max CA, let me explain the mechanics of the game (which you probably already know) :
Two players, in different positions/duty. They both have exactly the same "attribute", but the CA is different.
This is because different positions/duty have different "attributes" that they "need."
For example,
"Centre-backs" need to "Positioning",
And "wingers" do not need to "Positioning,"
If you add 10 "Positioning" to the two people at the same time
"Centre-backs" +21 CA
and "wingers" +2 CA
That's a huge gap
4.Same principle, check H21 (which made by a Forum user) , it has a special [Addtional Focus] ，https://pixeldrain.com/u/AtUvd3hY
Why does this training get a more CA of 34.7? Is it because it has so many training programs? (It takes 12 training per Week and the training is very intense.)
No, If you change I20 (only 3 training per Week) to the same [Addtional Focus] , they will get about 34 CA too.
This special [Addtional Focus] is changing the [Addtional Focus] of all the positions to the attributes that they need for their positions/duty .
example , "Centre-backs" get a "Positioning" Addtional Focus ,which "Centre-backs" need
5.So if you want to "add as many CA as possible , less focus on quickness".
Changing the training schedule is a way . A more obvious and faster way to do this is to change [Addtional Focus] to the positions/duty need
(The two methods are not in conflict and can be done at the same time)