Tl;dr I can do it and I did it before for 'general model' but it's pointless since after a few attributes the rest become basically a noise in the data.
Also in data analysis and especially in model development not always the more is better. Sometimes you use less features to 'generalise' model so it actually fits better. Another thing is it was meant to use mostly inside the game as an indicator about core attributes. I don't expect anyone to compare players based on 50 attributes. The 6-8 is doable even for 'visual' comparison. Expand
Ok, thanks for getting back to me. I still think there might be some value above 8 attributes. I see what you're saying about the lesser ones making 1% of impact which wouldn't be worth it. But let's say for argument's sake we take the next 3 highest factors for a striker (right now #8 is Composure with 45%), so #9 could be Technique with 36%, #10 Long Shots with 33% and #11 is Passing with 30%. If Jumping is most impactful at 100%, then a player that has Jumping 10 but the 3 I mentioned at 16 would be as effective (in theory) as one with 10 in the ones I mentioned and 16 in Jumping.
A list of top 15 or 20 attributes for each position would be very useful I think!
Anyway, I understand if you're too busy because you're doing this out of your own time to share with the community. If you can't I think I'll tweak your general results from the FM23 test and add them in (the impactful ones).
I'm thinking about this more in order to 'optimize' finding the best player out of curiosity, not just to try to win more games in FM. I use them with genie scout ratings so it's not a lot of trouble for me to insert more attributes (I don't use spreadsheet or a visualizer).
Orion said: I tried to replicate your case and I simply couldn't.
I've changed attributes of two players to match the ones of your players:
Player 1
Player 2
And the results for their GenieScout ratings are as shown:
So I have frankly no idea why you have those results.
My only wild guess is that maybe beside the ratings we can set, Genie takes into account some other factors into 'final rating'. As you can see I literally copied all attributes of your players to my players. So they have in theory attributes that should be suitable for AMLR yet they have highest rating in their respective 'original' positions (CD for Testing 1 and DMC for Testing 2) and their ratings for those positions is MUCH higher than it should be simply by taking only the attributes. Expand
Thanks for replying and testing. I am kinda thinking the same, that Genie does something extra to it. I don't 'need' to use Genie, but I like the extra colomns of 'potential AMLR' etc for seeing how good they can get with their percentages (not the actual PA colomn, dont care about that one), if that's even properly showing.
flob said: Thanks for replying and testing. I am kinda thinking the same, that Genie does something extra to it. I don't 'need' to use Genie, but I like the extra colomns of 'potential AMLR' etc for seeing how good they can get with their percentages (not the actual PA colomn, dont care about that one), if that's even properly showing. Expand
You might already know this but FYI the potential AMLR is only a guess made by genie scout. And I often see it estimate players way higher with their potential than what actually happens. It often estimates players already in their early 20s with not so great professionalism reaching their potential, which rarely happens.
recoba said: Ok, thanks for getting back to me. I still think there might be some value above 8 attributes. I see what you're saying about the lesser ones making 1% of impact which wouldn't be worth it. But let's say for argument's sake we take the next 3 highest factors for a striker (right now #8 is Composure with 45%), so #9 could be Technique with 36%, #10 Long Shots with 33% and #11 is Passing with 30%. If Jumping is most impactful at 100%, then a player that has Jumping 10 but the 3 I mentioned at 16 would be as effective (in theory) as one with 10 in the ones I mentioned and 16 in Jumping.
A list of top 15 or 20 attributes for each position would be very useful I think!
Anyway, I understand if you're too busy because you're doing this out of your own time to share with the community. If you can't I think I'll tweak your general results from the FM23 test and add them in (the impactful ones).
I'm thinking about this more in order to 'optimize' finding the best player out of curiosity, not just to try to win more games in FM. I use them with genie scout ratings so it's not a lot of trouble for me to insert more attributes (I don't use spreadsheet or a visualizer). Expand
I'm expecting to have more free time next month so maybe I'll be able to do something about it. My long-term plan was to also do this analysis for other FM editions I have in my possession at Steam but as said it takes quite some time just to process the seasons and believe me, even thou devs didn't brag about it they optimised the game by A LOT and processing speed between FM24 and FM23 is significant. Can't imagine how slow will it be for older ones.
The data is there and it's possible to just run the analysis using only visible attributes from player's profile (so Technical, Mental, Physical - excluding set pieces/penalty takes). As always it's matter of free time.
Orion said: I answered similar question before in this topic.
Comment 1 ; Comment 2
Tl;dr I can do it and I did it before for 'general model' but it's pointless since after a few attributes the rest become basically a noise in the data.
Also in data analysis and especially in model development not always the more is better. Sometimes you use less features to 'generalise' model so it actually fits better.
Another thing is it was meant to use mostly inside the game as an indicator about core attributes. I don't expect anyone to compare players based on 50 attributes. The 6-8 is doable even for 'visual' comparison.
Ok, thanks for getting back to me. I still think there might be some value above 8 attributes. I see what you're saying about the lesser ones making 1% of impact which wouldn't be worth it. But let's say for argument's sake we take the next 3 highest factors for a striker (right now #8 is Composure with 45%), so #9 could be Technique with 36%, #10 Long Shots with 33% and #11 is Passing with 30%. If Jumping is most impactful at 100%, then a player that has Jumping 10 but the 3 I mentioned at 16 would be as effective (in theory) as one with 10 in the ones I mentioned and 16 in Jumping.
A list of top 15 or 20 attributes for each position would be very useful I think!
Anyway, I understand if you're too busy because you're doing this out of your own time to share with the community. If you can't I think I'll tweak your general results from the FM23 test and add them in (the impactful ones).
I'm thinking about this more in order to 'optimize' finding the best player out of curiosity, not just to try to win more games in FM. I use them with genie scout ratings so it's not a lot of trouble for me to insert more attributes (I don't use spreadsheet or a visualizer).
Orion said: I tried to replicate your case and I simply couldn't.
I've changed attributes of two players to match the ones of your players:
Player 1
Player 2
And the results for their GenieScout ratings are as shown:
So I have frankly no idea why you have those results.
My only wild guess is that maybe beside the ratings we can set, Genie takes into account some other factors into 'final rating'. As you can see I literally copied all attributes of your players to my players. So they have in theory attributes that should be suitable for AMLR yet they have highest rating in their respective 'original' positions (CD for Testing 1 and DMC for Testing 2) and their ratings for those positions is MUCH higher than it should be simply by taking only the attributes.
Thanks for replying and testing. I am kinda thinking the same, that Genie does something extra to it. I don't 'need' to use Genie, but I like the extra colomns of 'potential AMLR' etc for seeing how good they can get with their percentages (not the actual PA colomn, dont care about that one), if that's even properly showing.
flob said: Thanks for replying and testing. I am kinda thinking the same, that Genie does something extra to it. I don't 'need' to use Genie, but I like the extra colomns of 'potential AMLR' etc for seeing how good they can get with their percentages (not the actual PA colomn, dont care about that one), if that's even properly showing.
You might already know this but FYI the potential AMLR is only a guess made by genie scout. And I often see it estimate players way higher with their potential than what actually happens. It often estimates players already in their early 20s with not so great professionalism reaching their potential, which rarely happens.
recoba said: Ok, thanks for getting back to me. I still think there might be some value above 8 attributes. I see what you're saying about the lesser ones making 1% of impact which wouldn't be worth it. But let's say for argument's sake we take the next 3 highest factors for a striker (right now #8 is Composure with 45%), so #9 could be Technique with 36%, #10 Long Shots with 33% and #11 is Passing with 30%. If Jumping is most impactful at 100%, then a player that has Jumping 10 but the 3 I mentioned at 16 would be as effective (in theory) as one with 10 in the ones I mentioned and 16 in Jumping.
A list of top 15 or 20 attributes for each position would be very useful I think!
Anyway, I understand if you're too busy because you're doing this out of your own time to share with the community. If you can't I think I'll tweak your general results from the FM23 test and add them in (the impactful ones).
I'm thinking about this more in order to 'optimize' finding the best player out of curiosity, not just to try to win more games in FM. I use them with genie scout ratings so it's not a lot of trouble for me to insert more attributes (I don't use spreadsheet or a visualizer).
I'm expecting to have more free time next month so maybe I'll be able to do something about it.
My long-term plan was to also do this analysis for other FM editions I have in my possession at Steam but as said it takes quite some time just to process the seasons and believe me, even thou devs didn't brag about it they optimised the game by A LOT and processing speed between FM24 and FM23 is significant. Can't imagine how slow will it be for older ones.
The data is there and it's possible to just run the analysis using only visible attributes from player's profile (so Technical, Mental, Physical - excluding set pieces/penalty takes). As always it's matter of free time.