Idea: Separate CA/PA's

I brought this up in an earlier thread and was advised to start a new thread on it so......

Do any people feel that there should be separate physical CA/PA, technical CA/PA and mental CA/PA. This seems more complicated but some players may be able to improve more physically as they are natural athletes while they may have that little technical ability their second touch is always a tackle. While others may be technically sound, they may not have the physical capabilities or mental skill.

Then there would be the rare gift of having all 3 high like Lionel Messi, Andres Iniesta etc. would which defines whether or not the player would be world class or just very good.

Physical attributes could improve easier with intense training while the others would not be so easy.

What are peoples views on this?

Good idea mate

IDK if i like this idea or not. But it is weird to think that if someone like Ulsain Bolt became a football player, his CA would probably be around 90-100 only becase of his physical attributes.

And i honestly don't think Iniesta would have a high physical PA.

totally agree, great idea but i think it would make the game harder and many people are already complaining about the game being too hard due to the tactics.

I agree. I've been saying a similar thing for a while along with several others and I believe SI will eventually overhaul the CA/PA system to be along these lines.

I know this is beyond the scope of your suggestion, but taken to the extreme there should eventually be a separate PA for every attribute but I can't imagine we would be seeing such a radical change for a few years. If every attribute were to have its own PA then there would need to be an algorithm to calculate each attribute's PA from a single all-encompassing PA when you start a new game, so not only would it increase the set up time but it would also need double the current space to store the CA/PA of each player, and of course a reliable algorithm which would create believable attribute PAs from a single all-encompassing PA (to avoid researchers having to speculate every attribute) but separating the physical/mental/technical would be a step in the right direction and not too difficult to introduce so I would fully support your suggestion.

I don't think it would make it harder. All that would really change would be how good the players can become in each stat.

As far as i know at the moment you could get a 21 year old 6ft 4 CB and make him technically fantastic when it comes to shooting and set pieces. Whereas he wouldn't have high technical PA but Physically he would be dominant and could be great.

Like I said before I think it's a great idea.

@Kickballz,

That's overkill.. If you think about it, there already is a PA for each stat, it's 20.

I agree. I've been saying a similar thing for a while along with several others and I believe SI will eventually overhaul the CA/PA system to be along these lines.

I know this is beyond the scope of your suggestion, but taken to the extreme there should eventually be a separate PA for every attribute but I can't imagine we would be seeing such a radical change for a few years. If every attribute were to have its own PA then there would need to be an algorithm to calculate each attribute's PA from a single all-encompassing PA when you start a new game, so not only would it increase the set up time but it would also need double the current space to store the CA/PA of each player, and of course a reliable algorithm which would create believable attribute PAs from a single all-encompassing PA (to avoid researchers having to speculate every attribute) but separating the physical/mental/technical would be a step in the right direction and not too difficult to introduce so I would fully support your suggestion.

This is a good expansion of the idea with perhaps the middle step of doing it for groups like each training category having a CA and PA(strength, aerobic etc.)

Like I said before I think it's a great idea.

@Kickballz,

That's overkill.. If you think about it, there already is a PA for each stat, it's 20.

I disagree. The fact that it 20 for every attribute merely shows the limitations of the current system when a player has limited PA, as is made clear from the recent thread discussing physical attributes of lower league players.

I assume the most efficient way to do this would be to first group to players into sets, i.e. workhorses, slight technical players, instinctive players, all-rounders, etc.

Next, divide a current CA/PA set by three giving you effectively the CA/PA for one category, and then use the player group type to determine how this is distributed.

Example to make this clearer: Player X has a CA/PA of 90/120, and so has a catergory CA/PA of 30/40 (call this his TA for arguements sake). If he is a workhorse, he gets TA +8% for Physical, +8% for mental and -16% for technical, giving him 32.5, 32.5, 25 respectively for CA)

If anyone thinks this is vaguely interesting but badly explined let me know and I'll attempt again....likewise if its rubbish let me know and I'll go back to my corner.

great idea, because it takes players longer to develope different aspects of their game.

I think this is a great idea if it is implementable. The only worry I would have is that there is already an exploit in the programming where you can train a player who's for example a cb to have almost every stat 20 by retraining him in an unnatural position like striker, there's a thread on here about it somewhere. If you separated pa into 3 categories it might mean position training having too much of an effect on a players non-essential attributes. I have no idea about programming though, so that might not even be an issue and if it's not then the op's idea is one I'd really like to see implemented in the next fm.

I think this is a great idea if it is implementable. The only worry I would have is that there is already an exploit in the programming where you can train a player who's for example a cb to have almost every stat 20 by retraining him in an unnatural position like striker, there's a thread on here about it somewhere. If you separated pa into 3 categories it might mean position training having too much of an effect on a players non-essential attributes. I have no idea about programming though, so that might not even be an issue and if it's not then the op's idea is one I'd really like to see implemented in the next fm.

If it is programmed well that wouldn't be a problem. That exploit would be avoided by retaining an overall PA along with the lesser PAs (physical/mental/technical) none of which can be exceeded or be changed no matter how you retrain a player. Of course, it wouldn't be straightforward. There would probably have to be changes to how players react to training and also player positions would have to be factored into the whole equation but the effort i'm sure would make it worthwhile if it could be done well.

Good idea, some players just arent clever or natural athletes!

Great idea IMO mate, thing it would add an extra sense of realism to the game.

An immediate thought:

SI already provides everything they need to make this system work. How? Easy...

1. Natural fitness: determines the PA for physical stats. NF develops as players age (up to their peak, say 27 or so) then holds steady for a few years before declining as they age. Injuries (torn ACL's, etc.) could also impact NF (say, -1 for a lengthy knee injury) whereas top-quality coaches and/or facilities could enable an increase.

2. Technique: determines the PA for technical skills. Changes slightly over a player's career (possibly as a result of injury or coaching, for example.)

3. Determination: determines a player's PA for the mental aspect of the game. Determination indicates a player's willingness to continually learn and refine his game. Can be impacted through tutoring/mentoring, as well as happiness at the club. An unhappy player is less likely to apply himself at learning the game.

I've always thought of these 3 attributes as being somewhat unnecessary as they're currently used and, as I've mentioned in threads dealing with the viability of older players, I think these attributes could be better used as an indicator of what to expect from your player (as opposed to relying on the CA/PA system of allocation.)