When I was making 1 CA players to win the premier league, a bunch of my tests gave the players each half a dozen traits or so that were complimentary to my tactic. It seemed to make zero difference to no traits.
I think that if anything, traits may actually be a negative, where the player won't follow your tactic as well because it contradicts his trait.
A thought I just had is that maybe they make traits have zero performance impact in and of themselves because otherwise you could end up with unfortunate results such as Haaland supposed to be slightly better than Mbappe as Striker, but then a researcher adds 'Shoots with Power' trait to Mbappe and unwittingly messes the hierarchy up.
I learn a lot about training in the training topic but found nothing about player traits.
Is it better not learn at all?
Sometimes my AssMan give me advice about traits and i agree with him often and my players start to training the traits.
But now i'm thinking the player is losing training time to learn some uselles trait and will develop less trought the season....am i right?
Is there a good trait worth it to learn?
When I was making 1 CA players to win the premier league, a bunch of my tests gave the players each half a dozen traits or so that were complimentary to my tactic. It seemed to make zero difference to no traits.
I think that if anything, traits may actually be a negative, where the player won't follow your tactic as well because it contradicts his trait.
A thought I just had is that maybe they make traits have zero performance impact in and of themselves because otherwise you could end up with unfortunate results such as Haaland supposed to be slightly better than Mbappe as Striker, but then a researcher adds 'Shoots with Power' trait to Mbappe and unwittingly messes the hierarchy up.