It seems that the default attributes performed better than when they added +5 points to passing for each player. Am I understanding this correctly better passing actually made the players worse according to the testing? There was as 3 better GD with worse passing overall.
My second question would be for player development. Knowing this attribute testing, it looks like it could be a good idea to spam quickness training since pace and acceleration seem very good. When developing a player, does the player have a maximum of a certain attribute they can reach or do they just have a max PA that can be filled out based on the attributes you developed harder?
For example, if a player is 170 PA, and you spam quickness training will his pace/accel be better than the same player where you trained other areas in a more balanced manner? Would that quickness trained be player have worse attributes in the mentals/techincals to offset the rise in pace/accel?
shakturi101 said: It seems that the default attributes performed better than when they added +5 points to passing for each player. Am I understanding this correctly better passing actually made the players worse according to the testing? There was as 3 better GD with worse passing overall. Expand
Just saw your post on Reddit, OP. I stuck this response up a few minutes ago:
Regarding your first question — yes, this is what the tests showed. Note also that they're looking at a huge sample size of games to eliminate the impact of RNG. Passing doesn't mean anything, and the same is true for other attributes.
The problem with spamming quickness and physical training is that things like heading ability will deteriorate. You also don't want to create too many training sessions for your players, or they will be injured much more quickly. I recommend reviewing Evidence Based Football Manager's studies on these topics.
A player with a PA of 170 who has higher pace and acceleration than another player who also has a PA of 170 will generally perform better in the match engine over the long run. There are still a lot of short term fluctuations due to how strong the RNG is in the game engine.
Long story short: the correct way to min/max Football Manager is to pay close attention to pace and acceleration.
If you go back and read old posts, you'll learn that experienced players have known about this going back to the Championship Manager days. It's been contentious for a long time as well, by the way.
Note as well that the best way to advance quickly through the lower leagues is to get as many fast players as you can, whether it's through loans or whatever. Things like inconsistency and injury proneness won't matter as much at that level, since you're really only using the players for the time being to get from point A to point B.
Hope that helps! Apologies that there was no real discussion around your question. I think this is a very relevant topic that unfortunately seems to attract quite a deal of controversy.
I have looked at the player attribute testing for FM24 and I had a few questions about it.
It is linked below.
https://fm-arena.com/table/26-player-attributes-testing/
It seems that the default attributes performed better than when they added +5 points to passing for each player. Am I understanding this correctly better passing actually made the players worse according to the testing? There was as 3 better GD with worse passing overall.
My second question would be for player development. Knowing this attribute testing, it looks like it could be a good idea to spam quickness training since pace and acceleration seem very good. When developing a player, does the player have a maximum of a certain attribute they can reach or do they just have a max PA that can be filled out based on the attributes you developed harder?
For example, if a player is 170 PA, and you spam quickness training will his pace/accel be better than the same player where you trained other areas in a more balanced manner? Would that quickness trained be player have worse attributes in the mentals/techincals to offset the rise in pace/accel?
shakturi101 said: It seems that the default attributes performed better than when they added +5 points to passing for each player. Am I understanding this correctly better passing actually made the players worse according to the testing? There was as 3 better GD with worse passing overall.
That was just the RNG.
Look at this thread - https://fm-arena.com/thread/9405-adding-rng-random-number-renerator-numbers-to-the-test-results/
Just saw your post on Reddit, OP. I stuck this response up a few minutes ago:
Regarding your first question — yes, this is what the tests showed. Note also that they're looking at a huge sample size of games to eliminate the impact of RNG. Passing doesn't mean anything, and the same is true for other attributes.
The problem with spamming quickness and physical training is that things like heading ability will deteriorate. You also don't want to create too many training sessions for your players, or they will be injured much more quickly. I recommend reviewing Evidence Based Football Manager's studies on these topics.
A player with a PA of 170 who has higher pace and acceleration than another player who also has a PA of 170 will generally perform better in the match engine over the long run. There are still a lot of short term fluctuations due to how strong the RNG is in the game engine.
Long story short: the correct way to min/max Football Manager is to pay close attention to pace and acceleration.
If you go back and read old posts, you'll learn that experienced players have known about this going back to the Championship Manager days. It's been contentious for a long time as well, by the way.
Note as well that the best way to advance quickly through the lower leagues is to get as many fast players as you can, whether it's through loans or whatever. Things like inconsistency and injury proneness won't matter as much at that level, since you're really only using the players for the time being to get from point A to point B.
Hope that helps! Apologies that there was no real discussion around your question. I think this is a very relevant topic that unfortunately seems to attract quite a deal of controversy.