Player attribute revision

By my logic, this needs to be done.

There are a few points that I'll like to make and hope I'll be concise and clear enough without typing in my native language.

* "Abstract" attributes involving shooting:

Finishing, long shots, penalties, free kick:

I think that shooting + right/left foot strength + Heading + Composure + a few others should ad up to finishing, therefore I think that we don't need that one.

I believe that it would be much better to have a shooting attribute in the list and that we can, with a combination of a few others determine how good a player is at finishing, shooting + some others = long shots, free kicks, penalties and every other that involves kicking the ball at the goal, if there are any left. I also think that this would give us a sense of being a good player ability judge. Also there is no empiric measure for how good a player is at finishing like there is for shooting.

* Abstract attribute "off the ball": decisions + pace + work rate + team work... should ad up to this. I'm not saying that it is bad to have this there, its just needs to be tied with those others, bringing me to my next point. Many mental attributes should be tied up together.

* Attribute correlation:

There has to be attribute grouping. The technique based, kicking based... By mine opinion there is no way that a player can have technique 5 and dribbling 15, crossing and corners, long shots and free kick... I know that correlation has already been taken into account as seen on the graphic attribute profile but I don't think that it has been done entirely right because I see a lot of players having crossing 5-ish and corners 15-20...

*Missing crucial attributes:

Long passing, short passing; free kick pass, free kick shot (if you don't agree with my first point)...

I assume those changes would take a lot of work but I strongly believe they would make the game much more realistic and therefore better. If someone from SI takes interest in my ideas I'll be glad to make entire list that I think player attributes should be.

So, you think "short shots" (finishing) and "long shots" should be merged (along some irrelevant attributes) but you think passing should be split in two?

What empiric measure? What is it?

Sebastien Larsson is probably the best free kick taker in England, and even in the top 10 or so in the world, but he isn't the best at finishing. Ruud Van Nistelrooy was for a long time the best finisher in the world, but he's terrible at long shots. Those four definitely need to be seperately.

Off the ball= moving into space when your team is in possession. Work rate= how hard you work (especially closing down defenders). Team work= how you co-operate with others (slightly abstract). Decisions= far more than this, every decision a player makes. Pace= how quickly they move, not how well they move. Jimmy Kébé is quick, a good team player and works hard, but has terrible movement. Leroy Lita is lazy and makes poor decisions, but he moves well and is often in space.

Correlation is your only valid point. Researchers try to do this, but it is certainly an area to be improved upon for regens. Long shots and free kicks should be related, though. Steven Gerrard is great at long shots, but a poor free kick taker (he's scored 2 in his career).

Free kick passing- a combination of free kicks, crossing, anticipation, creativity, passing, and decisions. This attribute would be almost impossible to rate independently, but combining these factors gives an accurate portrayal.

To add to SCIAG's points, you think Heading and Finishing are the same? Emile Heskey? Almost any centre-back in the world?

All these attributes play a part to how a player fares in the ME, even if they seem similar. They may tie in together for certain positions or certain parts of a players game, but then seperately they could tie in with another stat, or on their own.

I agree with the point on correlation.

Seems ridiculous to have 15 for dribbling yet 5 for technique.

I agree with some of these ideas, primarily about finishing and technique. When I first started playing FM I had a hard time understanding by what they meant by finishing...as my understanding of it was that finishing was any form of finishing, heading or shooting, but really that attribute could just be renamed shooting.

The technique attribute is also a confusing one, what exactly does technique constitute that dribbling, first touch, and the rest of the technical abilities don't? I think of it as just general skill level with the ball but I'm still not exactly sure what technique really means.

The other thing is crossing and passing...there maybe should be a long passing attribute, because crossing seems to just specifically mean crossing, so a player like Xabi Alonso, who is more skilled at long passes then most other players don't have any way to differentiate the fact that he is good at long passes and not necessarily crossing.

Still, I think the current attributes have had a lot of thought put in them and there isn't much that they miss out on. Changing the core attributes, which haven't been changed as long as I have been playing, since cm03/04 or something, would be a huge undertaking, its just not realistic.

To SCIAG and seftino:

I think you misunderstood almost everything. Please try again.

I never said that any attribute is the same as any other. Finishing IRL means much more then just short shooting.

SCIAG if you think that some attributes are irrelevant you don't understand the game.

Finishing and shooting are two completely different things.

Anyway, I've been wondering what exactly the passing attribute affects. Accuracy or power? Both?

How about substitute passing, finishing and long shots by:

- Kicking strength (which would apply to passes, free kicks, crosses, shots) - the maximum kicking strength for a player.

- Shooting accuracy (applying to short or long shots)

- Pass accuracy (the name of the attribute wouldn't need to be changed, but it should be clear that it is about accuracy not strength/speed)

Difference between long shot and short range shot accuracy should be governed by composure (players with higher composure can shoot very well in the crowed box). Effectiveness of long shots would also depend obviously in the kicking strength.

Difference between long and short passes accuracy would come down mostly to vision(creativity) and possibly technique.

IMO, this would be a more sensible and functional set of attributes.

PS: In terms of set pieces, maybe it would be better to also have:

- Crossing (the current crossing stat)

- Crossing from dead ball

- Shooting accuracy from dead ball

IMO, there is no reason why accuracy in crosses and shots in set pieces should be tied together like they are now (even if these accuracies are further affected by the long shot and crossing attributes), and also, I don't thing that crossing ability from free kick should be a different attribute from crossing from a corner (especially for free kicks pretty close to the corner flag), as it seems they are now.

How about substitute passing, finishing and long shots by:

- Kicking strength (which would apply to passes, free kicks, crosses, shots) - the maximum kicking strength for a player.

- Shooting accuracy (applying to short or long shots)

- Pass accuracy (the name of the attribute wouldn't need to be changed, but it should be clear that it is about accuracy not strength/speed)

Difference between long shot and short range shot accuracy should be governed by composure (players with higher composure can shoot very well in the crowed box). Effectiveness of long shots would also depend obviously in the kicking strength.

Difference between long and short passes accuracy would come down mostly to vision(creativity) and possibly technique.

IMO, this would be a more sensible and functional set of attributes.

PS: In terms of set pieces, maybe it would be better to also have:

- Crossing (the current crossing stat)

- Crossing from dead ball

- Shooting accuracy from dead ball

IMO, there is no reason why accuracy in crosses and shots in set pieces should be tied together like they are now (even if these accuracies are further affected by the long shot and crossing attributes), and also, I don't thing that crossing ability from free kick should be a different attribute from crossing from a corner (especially for free kicks pretty close to the corner flag), as it seems they are now.

Thank you lance, I was hoping for this kind of responses. See how you can understand something in correct way if you try to.

Good ideas, I'm kinda thinking in the same direction. Shot accuracy and shot strength would be good to have for governing many attributes.

* Attribute correlation:

There has to be attribute grouping. The technique based, kicking based... By mine opinion there is no way that a player can have technique 5 and dribbling 15, crossing and corners, long shots and free kick... I know that correlation has already been taken into account as seen on the graphic attribute profile but I don't think that it has been done entirely right because I see a lot of players having crossing 5-ish and corners 15-20...

*Missing crucial attributes:

Long passing, short passing;

I totally agree with the first part and think you will find that researched players in the Db naturally have these correlations the problem is the regen code doesn’t account for them.

I'm luke warm on the long/short passing split on the one hand its more realistic on the other its pretty rare to see big discrepancies between the two so for 90 odd percent of players the attributes will be with in a point of one another.

Re free kicks I would be happier if I could differentiate between direct and indirect free kick takers in the tactics menu and maybe choose two or three guys to do it and give them a % of set pieces to take.

What empiric measure? What is it?

Empiric measure is a scientific method. Empiric means that it can be checked again any time and determined whether is it correct or not. Empiric measure is absolute necessity for bonification. Opposing would be a philosophical debate, for instance whether something exists or not in far cosmos.

In football sense empiric measure for shooting accuracy would be how many times out of 100 for instance a player can hit given target. How fast does a player take to run a 100 meters and so on.

My point was that you cant give a number to how good a player is at taking penalties or free kicks because there are too many factors evolved. So bonificating correctly players skill of free kick for instance is impossible.

Before you ask, bonification is again a scientific proses of giving numeric value to some intensity of phenomenon. Like how accurate a player is at taking penalties.

How about substitute passing, finishing and long shots by:

- Kicking strength (which would apply to passes, free kicks, crosses, shots) - the maximum kicking strength for a player.

- Shooting accuracy (applying to short or long shots)

- Pass accuracy (the name of the attribute wouldn't need to be changed, but it should be clear that it is about accuracy not strength/speed)

The problem is that just because someone has a strong shot, he doesn't necessarily plays quick short passes.

I think the passing attribute should cover both power and accuracy. An accurate short pass shouldn't be a problem for anyone over the passing skill of, let's say 8, but the power of the pass makes a big difference. An accurate but slow pass can really break down a counter attack.

Empiric measure is a scientific method. Empiric means that it can be checked again any time and determined whether is it correct or not. Empiric measure is absolute necessity for bonification. Opposing would be a philosophical debate, for instance whether something exists or not in far cosmos.

In football sense empiric measure for shooting accuracy would be how many times out of 100 for instance a player can hit given target. How fast does a player take to run a 100 meters and so on.

My point was that you cant give a number to how good a player is at taking penalties or free kicks because there are too many factors evolved. So bonificating correctly players skill of free kick for instance is impossible.

Before you ask, bonification is again a scientific proses of giving numeric value to some intensity of phenomenon. Like how accurate a player is at taking penalties.

I know what an empiric measure is, I just don't know how you can possibly quantify that. % of shots on target doesn't take into account difficulty of the shot, the type of shot, the angle, the amount of time, whether the player was off balance, the amount of players around them, the skill of the goalkeeper...

It is impossible to quantify most things in football. It isn't baseball, where you can instantly see the percentage of hits, or basketball, where you can tell that a 50% shot conversion is pretty dire. In football, these things cannot be measured. They must be subjectively judged, whilst trying to keep the subjectivity to a minimum. Any "objective" rating would ultimately be less accurate and indeed more subjective than observation, as strange as that sounds.

Penalty taking in the game is simple. Use the penalty taking attribute, and composure.

To SCIAG and seftino:

I think you misunderstood almost everything. Please try again.

I never said that any attribute is the same as any other. Finishing IRL means much more then just short shooting.

SCIAG if you think that some attributes are irrelevant you don't understand the game.

Free kicks and penalties are irrelevant to shooting in open play.

Finishing is basically "short shooting". It's how good you are at putting the ball in the net from inside and around the area. If you think it is the same as free kick taking, penalty taking and long shots, you don't understand the game or football!

I have understood everything you've said.

You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of how football works. Finishing is a different skill to long shots, free kick taking is a different skill to either, and penalty taking is a different skill to all of them! Movement (OTB) is a different skill to decision making, anticipation, work rate and pace.

The problem is that just because someone has a strong shot, he doesn't necessarily plays quick short passes.

I think the passing attribute should cover both power and accuracy. An accurate short pass shouldn't be a problem for anyone over the passing skill of, let's say 8, but the power of the pass makes a big difference. An accurate but slow pass can really break down a counter attack.

That works for me too... my main concern with the passing attribute is the current non-clarity of it meaning accuracy or speed... I do think that kicking strength should play a role in long passes/crosses though.

what about Corner attribute, I think Free Kick and Crossing attributes should cover it?

By my logic, this needs to be done.

There are a few points that I'll like to make and hope I'll be concise and clear enough without typing in my native language.

* "Abstract" attributes involving shooting:

Finishing, long shots, penalties, free kick:

I think that shooting + right/left foot strength + Heading + Composure + a few others adds up to finishing, therefore I think that we don't need that one.

I believe that it would be much better to have a shooting attribute in the list and that we can, with a combination of a few others determine how good a player is at finishing, long shots, free kicks, penalties and every other that involves kicking the ball at the goal, if there are any left. I also think that this would give us a sense of being a good player ability judge. Also there is no empiric measure for how good a player is at finishing and others like there is for shooting.

Long Shots must be separate attribute.

Then, I'm not convinced at all by this generic "shooting attribute".

Finishing must stay as well: there's plenty of strikers who are mediocre under every possible technical aspect, but could pretty much put away any casual ball they find on their way...

Think of Filippo Inzaghi, arguably the best poacher of the last fifteen years... Should we just judge him by his techincal attribute, he'd be below average, and even his Composure is questionable. But the man can score... so his Finishing skill is the one and only that makes him a valuable player.

* Abstract attribute "off the ball" decisions + pace + work rate + team work ads up to this. I'm not saying that it is bad to have this there, its just needs to be tied with those others, bringing me to my next point. Many mental attributes should be tied up together.

No... you can be lightning-quick[high Pace] but if you run into the wrong place at the wrong time [lower Decisions] because your interaction with teammates is poor [low teamwork], or if you're lazy [poor workrate], you'll be useless to your team.

Moreso, you can take a smart decision [run/pass/shoot], but you can be totally crappy at running into space [poor Off the Ball skill]

The only link I can see is workrate and teamwork, but I suppose they're already linked in the game.

* Attribute correlation:

There has to be attribute grouping. The technique based, kicking based... By mine opinion there is no way that a player can have technique 5 and dribbling 15, crossing and corners, long shots and free kick... I know that correlation has already been taken into account as seen on the graphic attribute profile but I don't think that it has been done entirely right because I see a lot of players having crossing 5-ish and corners 15-20...

*Missing crucial attributes:

Long passing, short passing; free kick pass, free kick shot (if you don't agree with my first point)...

I'm not sure about that... Long or short pass, it's the same skill, just with a different level of difficulty. And anyway, every professional player is at least a "10" in Short Passing, so it could just be redundant.

Free kick pass gets covered by passing/crossing already.

By my logic, this needs to be done.

There are a few points that I'll like to make and hope I'll be concise and clear enough without typing in my native language.

* "Abstract" attributes involving shooting:

Finishing, long shots, penalties, free kick:

I think that shooting + right/left foot strength + Heading + Composure + a few others adds up to finishing, therefore I think that we don't need that one.

I believe that it would be much better to have a shooting attribute in the list and that we can, with a combination of a few others determine how good a player is at finishing, long shots, free kicks, penalties and every other that involves kicking the ball at the goal, if there are any left. I also think that this would give us a sense of being a good player ability judge. Also there is no empiric measure for how good a player is at finishing and others like there is for shooting.

Long Shots must be separate attribute.

Then, I'm not convinced at all by this generic "shooting attribute".

Finishing must stay as well: there's plenty of strikers who are mediocre under every possible technical aspect, but could pretty much put away any casual ball they find on their way...

Think of Filippo Inzaghi, arguably the best poacher of the last ten years... Should we just judge him by his techincal attribute, he'd be below average, and even his Composure is questionable. But the man can score... so his Finishing skill is the one and only that makes him a valuable player.

* Abstract attribute "off the ball" decisions + pace + work rate + team work ads up to this. I'm not saying that it is bad to have this there, its just needs to be tied with those others, bringing me to my next point. Many mental attributes should be tied up together.

No... you can be lightning-quick[high Pace] but if you run into the wrong place at the wrong time [lower Decisions] because your interaction with teammates is poor [low teamwork], or if you're lazy [poor workrate], you'll be useless to your team.

Moreso, you can take a smart decision [run/pass/shoot], but you can be totally crappy at running into space [poor Off the Ball skill]

The only link I can see is workrate and teamwork, but I suppose they're already linked in the game.

* Attribute correlation:

There has to be attribute grouping. The technique based, kicking based... By mine opinion there is no way that a player can have technique 5 and dribbling 15, crossing and corners, long shots and free kick... I know that correlation has already been taken into account as seen on the graphic attribute profile but I don't think that it has been done entirely right because I see a lot of players having crossing 5-ish and corners 15-20...

Agreed, but isn't it rare to find players with such unbalanced attributes. Maybe a regen issue?

*Missing crucial attributes:

Long passing, short passing; free kick pass, free kick shot (if you don't agree with my first point)...

I'm not sure about that... Long or short pass, it's the same skill, just with a different level of difficulty. And anyway, every professional player is at least a "10" in Short Passing, so it could just be redundant.

Free kick pass gets covered by passing/crossing already.

I know what an empiric measure is, I just don't know how you can possibly quantify that. % of shots on target doesn't take into account difficulty of the shot, the type of shot, the angle, the amount of time, whether the player was off balance, the amount of players around them, the skill of the goalkeeper...

If you know that empiric stuff, why do you ask?

You can easily quantify by saying that if a player hits the given target 96 out of 100 he gets 20 for shooting. Then you, like in every rpg you take all the factors in account and lover hes chances by the measure each factor has.

It is impossible to quantify most things in football. It isn't baseball, where you can instantly see the percentage of hits, or basketball, where you can tell that a 50% shot conversion is pretty dire. In football, these things cannot be measured. They must be subjectively judged, whilst trying to keep the subjectivity to a minimum. Any "objective" rating would ultimately be less accurate and indeed more subjective than observation, as strange as that sounds.

Errrr, ok. But you see FM is pretty much a quantification of football. How come you cant see that? What have you been playing mate?

Penalty taking in the game is simple. Use the penalty taking attribute, and composure.

Free kicks and penalties are irrelevant to shooting in open play.

Are they? You are saying that SHOOTING from fk or SHOOTING a penalties has nothing to do with SHOOTING in the play?

Finishing is basically "short shooting". It's how good you are at putting the ball in the net from inside and around the area. If you think it is the same as free kick taking, penalty taking and long shots, you don't understand the game or football!

I never said they are the same. Try understanding something if you can because I think I've done ok job explaining this the first time.

I have understood everything you've said.

NO YOU HAVEN'T, believe me

You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of how football works. Finishing is a different skill to long shots, free kick taking is a different skill to either, and penalty taking is a different skill to all of them! Movement (OTB) is a different skill to decision making, anticipation, work rate and pace.

You just think like that, whatever makes you happy Gonna say again, go back and try to understand if u will, if not, well, have a nice life...

A few points:

Freekick taking is certainly a different skill than shooting from open play - the main skill in freekick taking being bending the ball either over or around the wall, something that is not really required from open play. Penalties is again a different skill, being at least in part down to deceiving the keeper with your run-up, plus the fact it's a stationary ball and a stationary keeper, rather than having to react to the movement of both.

Players with high dribbling but low technique, to me anyway, are players like Shaun Wright-Phillips - they never appear to be properly in control of the ball (at least in the same way Messi is when he's dribbling, for example), but still manage to dribble past players.

"You can easily quantify by saying that if a player hits the given target 96 out of 100 he gets 20 for shooting. Then you, like in every rpg you take all the factors in account and lover hes chances by the measure each factor has. " - the problem here is you are introducing a massive amount of subjective opinion when you start manipulating the result by introducing other factors - you may as well try and make a proper estimation of his finishing.

A few points:

Freekick taking is certainly a different skill than shooting from open play - the main skill in freekick taking being bending the ball either over or around the wall, something that is not really required from open play. Penalties is again a different skill, being at least in part down to deceiving the keeper with your run-up, plus the fact it's a stationary ball and a stationary keeper, rather than having to react to the movement of both.

I know. The idea is that shooting skill would just be the governing attribute on calculating how good a player is at free kicks and penalties. How come almost no one understands this???

Players with high dribbling but low technique, to me anyway, are players like Shaun Wright-Phillips - they never appear to be properly in control of the ball (at least in the same way Messi is when he's dribbling, for example), but still manage to dribble past players.

The same as above.

"You can easily quantify by saying that if a player hits the given target 96 out of 100 he gets 20 for shooting. Then you, like in every rpg you take all the factors in account and lover hes chances by the measure each factor has. " - the problem here is you are introducing a massive amount of subjective opinion when you start manipulating the result by introducing other factors - you may as well try and make a proper estimation of his finishing.

I'm pretty sure that this is the way FM is working now and has been from start. The player hes a given attribute for shooting, then u take in to equation how good a keeper is, is he closed down and by who, how good the pitch is...

I agree that shooting from a free kick is different from shooting from open play... but I don't see why it is the same as crossing from a free kick! And right now, we are at least lead to believe, that the attribute "set pieces" influences both crosses and shots from free kicks (which is a bad choice by SI IMO).

Also tied to this weakness is the fact that we cannot separately choose the taker of a free kick for a shot and for a cross (eg., for instance if I am real, I might want Ronaldo to take my free kicks from the left when they are in kicking range, but have xabi alonso instead if they are going to be crosses).

what about Corner attribute, I think Free Kick and Crossing attributes should cover it?

Seperate skills. The ball is stationary for a corner, and moving for most crosses. Free kicks are often shots. A better idea than those proposed though.

If you know that empiric stuff, why do you ask?

You can easily quantify by saying that if a player hits the given target 96 out of 100 he gets 20 for shooting. Then you, like in every rpg you take all the factors in account and lover hes chances by the measure each factor has.

I asked because there is no way you can make football scientific! You need to be able to say "X player is great in the box, but poor outside the box", "Y is a great technical finisher, but struggles to keep cool and therefore struggles to hit the target", and so forth. You admit that these things are impossible to quantify, yet you want them quantified! You also say that there is no such measure for finishing, but there is for shooting?

Surely one such as yourself knows that science wants to ensure every comparison is valid. You're supposed to be testing one variable at a time. The dependent variable (shots on target %) should only be affected by one factor if we want things to be scientific, and that should be the player's skill. It isn't. Therefore, you can't measure a player's skill at shooting purely by his sot %.

If you did want to do it that way, you'd have to make it so that only a player's skill affects whether the shot is on target. That would be incredibly unrealistic. Shots from the halfway line that are bobbling, with the player's back to the goal, a world class goalkeeper, the wind blowing the other way, the player under pressure from three players, off balance, down in the dumps, demotivated, on a terrible run of form, and so on, would have the same chance of going in as Van Nistelrooy in front of an open goal with no opponents in the half.

Errrr, ok. But you see FM is pretty much a quantification of football. How come you cant see that? What have you been playing mate?

You are correct, FM is an attempt at quantifying football. But it is a complex one, because football is very complex. You can't simplify it.

Are they? You are saying that SHOOTING from fk or SHOOTING a penalties has nothing to do with SHOOTING in the play?

Read my Gerrard example. Terrible at free kicks, brilliant at long shots, good at finishing, okay at penalties. Cristiano Ronaldo- fantasic finisher, good at long shots, great at penalties, average at free kicks. Juninho- brilliant at free kicks and penalties, average finisher, good at long shots. Sebastien Larsson- brilliant at free kicks, poor at penalties, below average at finishing, okay at long shots. They AREN'T the same. You want one attribute to represent all these players abilities. How can you make Ronaldo better at finishing than Larsson, who is better at free kicks than Gerrard, who is better at long shots than Ronaldo, if you only have one attribute representing all these things?

I never said they are the same. Try understanding something if you can because I think I've done ok job explaining this the first time.

You have strongly implied it if you think shooting is just one skill, not many.

NO YOU HAVEN'T, believe me

You just think like that, whatever makes you happy Gonna say again, go back and try to understand if u will, if not, well, have a nice life...

Deary me. I understand exactly what you are saying. You think shooting can be simplified down to one skill, despite all evidence telling you it can't.

Spot on SCIAG.

I'm getting tired of this and the fact that someone thinks that this post of yours is spot on is just frustrating.

Most of the things you say you are contradictoring yourself. There maybe is no way of making football 100% scientific but the game is and we are talking about the game!

You agree that fm is an attempt of quantifying and over there you said that football cant be scientific and then you argue that it is a complex one. Who said that it is simple? If you so strongly believe that football cant be quantified at all, why are you playing the game?

You don't know this but at training fields there are targets with circles drown on some wall, with bull'seye and everything which a player shoots at. Also today I imagine they can measure the force with which the shot hits the target and there must be a distance as a constant on these tests. This is what I was talking about, scientific enough don't you think? I assume you thought that I was talking about a goal on the match when mentioning a target. I suppose that when testing a player on anything a coach would try to have conditions as ideal as possible. Then in a rpg manner, in the game players shot would be a + and most other stuff like keeper skill, weather: rain, wind; gravitational pull of the moon on that day... a minus in determining weather he scores or not.

For the x-th time, shooting skill would be one of the attributes, the governing one, that ads up and makes finishing, free kick, long shots... It'll be good to have shooting power and shooting accuracy for an attribute so we could have something like this for attribute system. Or at least that is my initial idea.

exsampe:

Finishing = shooting accuracy 30% + shooting power 20% + heading 20% + composure 10% + some more maybe, or something like this.

Long shots = shooting power 40% + shooting accuracy 20% + creativity + flair maybe + decisions 10 anticipation 10 for example

penalties = composure 50% + shooting pow + shoting acc + some other stuff.

I don't like finishing as it is now as an independent attribute because it kinda doesn't make sense because a header is a finish and long shot is a finish...

I would put for instance Finishing, ball playing, sweeping, stopping and a few more as a main attributes and have all others governing them, like I said, like in any RPG with this kind of setup.

If you don't understand now I'm not talking to you any more.

Are you sure that Gerrard is terrible at FK? He may not be Juninho but I strongly believe that he's quite good. Also, you do know that Cristiano takes them in Real now and did it in utd? Kinda cant be average then? In fact any player that you've seen on a big scene taking fk cant be bad at them.

Spot on SCIAG.

Steven Gerrard is great at long shots, but a poor free kick taker (he's scored 2 in his career).

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1385745/steven_gerrard_free_kick_compilation/

Being pedantic doesn't make you right, Erik. Most Liverpool fans don't rate Gerard as a fk taker, a lot don't even think he should take corners, so SCIAG is right, whislt your video is just clutching at straws.

Being pedantic doesn't make you right, Erik. Most Liverpool fans don't rate Gerard as a fk taker, a lot don't even think he should take corners, so SCIAG is right, whislt your video is just clutching at straws.

Did you actually read he's writing?

I read his and it made perfect sense, I tried to make sense of yours, but i'm afraid I struggled to find anything that I would consider realistic or reasonable. No offence, obviously you feel very strongly about it, otherwise you wouldn't be quite so abrasive or dismissive, but judging by the reaction to your ideas, supproters are few and far between. (safety smile)

Being pedantic doesn't make you right, Erik. Most Liverpool fans don't rate Gerard as a fk taker, a lot don't even think he should take corners, so SCIAG is right, whislt your video is just clutching at straws.

But he's decent at both, it's not as if he's s*** at either.

Now Aaron Lennon's corner taking is rubbish, but he's a decent crosser of the ball.

Suite yourself. Sorry for seeming abrasive, arrogant or anything. Just trying to make ppl understand my point and hawing a hard time understanding why m I not succeeding. Have you ever played some rpg game?

I agree that, as it is now, it's very unclear which attributes are important when setting set piece takers.

Why have an attribute for corners if the crossing attributes remains important? Or doesn't it? Why have a corners attributes then in the first place?

Same with free-kicks and penalties. Do other attributes count or not? I really don't know. If they don't it seems a bit strange sometimes to have a great/crap set piece taker with a usually related attribute which is at the other end of the scale. If they do count, then I don't see the need or purpose of keeping the special attributes.

So who should take my corners?

Corners 15, Crossing 14

or Corners 16, Crossing 11?

But he's decent at both, it's not as if he's s*** at either.

Now Aaron Lennon's corner taking is rubbish, but he's a decent crosser of the ball.

I'd say Lennon is a poor crosser of the ball. He can however still put a good ball into the box - due to his passing, technique and creativity, as well as his reading of the game and his teammates running. He largely sees a target and puts the ball into their feet from a wide position, rather than putting in a cross for someone to get on the end of.

But he's decent at both, it's not as if he's s*** at either.

Now Aaron Lennon's corner taking is rubbish, but he's a decent crosser of the ball.

No, but in comparison to his long shots and passing ability, his fk's and corners are rubbish.

Suite yourself. Sorry for seeming abrasive, arrogant or anything. Just trying to make ppl understand my point and hawing a hard time understanding why m I not succeeding. Have you ever played some rpg game?

You don't need to make people understand your point, they'll disagree either way, but trying to force them to understand or back down will only turn people agaisnt you. Accept the fact that opinions differ.

So who should take my corners?

Corners 15, Crossing 14

or Corners 16, Crossing 11?

One would hope that the overiding attribute would be the specific, i.e corner taking, regardless of all other stats.

I never take the crossing attribute or creativity for that matter into corner takers. I assume that if they have a high corner stat, then they are good at exactly that.

Clarification would great on these points?? Perhaps from a mod ?

I agree that, as it is now, it's very unclear which attributes are important when setting set piece takers.

Why have an attribute for corners if the crossing attributes remains important? Or doesn't it? Why have a corners attributes then in the first place?

Same with free-kicks and penalties. Do other attributes count or not? I really don't know. If they don't it seems a bit strange sometimes to have a great/crap set piece taker with a usually related attribute which is at the other end of the scale. If they do count, then I don't see the need or purpose of keeping the special attributes.

So who should take my corners?

Corners 15, Crossing 14

or Corners 16, Crossing 11?

This is true, but the examples being used aren't a big deal imo. The two sets of attributes you suggested, both will deliver a decent corner imo, so there's no need to worry about who you should pick and it's unlikely that ther ewill be a drastic difference.

Consideration of similar attributes would be more of an issue/should be taken into consideration if you have a more drastic difference afaic e.g.

Player A - Corners 18, Crossing 4

Player B - Corners 15, Crossing 12

In this situation I would be more inclined to go with the player whose attributes are stronger overall and not just in one area. You're example, imo isn't drastic enough to cause any serious issue.

but trying to force them to understand or back down will only turn people agaisnt you. Accept the fact that opinions differ.

I'm sorry it seemed like that. IMO you need to understand something before having an opinion. The fact that someone disagree with me is not what bothers me, what bothers me is that someone is disagreeing without understanding... Good thing would be to let just something go but I can be stubborn sometimes.

Now Aaron Lennon's corner taking is rubbish, but he's a decent crosser of the ball.

he wasn't acknowledged as a good crosser by Spurs fans a while ago. I'm sure his corner attribute has improved as much as crossing but since there are other players at Spurs responsible for taking corners, none of us can judge his corner taking.

how would a scout judge someones corner attribute if he is not taking corners? IMO player cant have 10 for corners and 16 for crossing like Lennon has.

Seperate skills. The ball is stationary for a corner, and moving for most crosses. Free kicks are often shots. A better idea than those proposed though.

stationary -> set pieces

crossing -> as a slightly different skill to passing/shooting

it's more or less same technique or skill-how hood you're able to kick accurate ball at decent speed. can't think of any player being able to put good crosses who suck at corner taking. can't think of any player with good ability at set pieces who suck at corner taking. there's nothing fundamentaly wrong with corner attribute, it's just unnecesary problem for researchers. I could think of at least 5 attributes missing in game which are more important or attributes which could be seperated from existing ones.

the attribute which I fundamentaly disagree with is penalty taking. it's all about confidence and being able to take pressure, plus a little ability to kick the ball well.

how would a scout judge someones corner attribute if he is not taking corners? IMO player cant have 10 for corners and 16 for crossing like Lennon has.

I agree and this problem is even more eveident with Penalty attribute.

I agree and this problem is even more eveident with Penalty attribute.

Yes it's a problem, but the player has to have those attributes. If you go to a penalty shootout a player may be required to take one that normally doesn't in real life. Even if you removed the penalty attribute and just used finishing/composure/technique etc, it's the same with many other attributes - how do you judge a DCs crossing and finishing etc when they very very rarely cross or finish in a real life game. You just have to make an educated guess based on your knowledge of the player. I don't see any other way.

true, what I wanted to say is that ''Penalty attribute'' is as much technical as it is mental and about confidence, moral, influence...

I don't know how scouting in fm actually works. I'm quite sure that clubs do have databases on how good their players are at basic attributes like shooting accuracy, shooting power, crossing, jumping, pace and many other. One of the ideas behind this thread was to make those attributes that can be determined a governing attributes for those that cant, like finishing and penalties, corners... This way attributes wouldn't be confusing and would be much more accurate.

how would a scout judge someones corner attribute if he is not taking corners? IMO player cant have 10 for corners and 16 for crossing like Lennon has.

It's realistic to assume that scouts will watch players training as well as during matches, just like real life, and from there assume that players train corners whether they are the designated corner taker or not. Assumptions, but realistic.

This is true, but the examples being used aren't a big deal imo. The two sets of attributes you suggested, both will deliver a decent corner imo, so there's no need to worry about who you should pick and it's unlikely that ther ewill be a drastic difference.

Consideration of similar attributes would be more of an issue/should be taken into consideration if you have a more drastic difference afaic e.g.

Player A - Corners 18, Crossing 4

Player B - Corners 15, Crossing 12

In this situation I would be more inclined to go with the player whose attributes are stronger overall and not just in one area. You're example, imo isn't drastic enough to cause any serious issue.

I know, I just wanted to be sensible with a question that posed itself to me quite a few times already in similar manner.

The basic matter is, why is there a specific attribute if other attributes are still important, assuming that is the case?

Ideally the corner attribute should be made up from a combination of all relevant attributes in their respective importance weight and just sum up the corner taking ability as a service to the user, i.e. 'look at this and don't think further, you need not'.

I don't see why there should be a separate attribute if that is not the end of what you need to know. :confused:

Irl the penalty taking ability of a player is the result of a combination of various skills, both mental and technical. There is nothing apart from that which comes on top. The ability to take penalties is all the other abilities coming together to this one moment, just like they are in any other situation of the game where FM has no special attribute category. So why have that here?

Is actually anyone 100% positive on whether or not other attributes are important as well?

Being pedantic doesn't make you right, Erik. Most Liverpool fans don't rate Gerard as a fk taker, a lot don't even think he should take corners, so SCIAG is right, whislt your video is just clutching at straws.

As a Liverpool fan Gerrard should take no set plays bar penalties. In my opinion.

I know, I just wanted to be sensible with a question that posed itself to me quite a few times already in similar manner.

The basic matter is, why is there a specific attribute if other attributes are still important, assuming that is the case?

Ideally the corner attribute should be made up from a combination of all relevant attributes in their respective importance weight and just sum up the corner taking ability as a service to the user, i.e. 'look at this and don't think further, you need not'.

I don't see why there should be a separate attribute if that is not the end of what you need to know. :confused:

Irl the penalty taking ability of a player is the result of a combination of various skills, both mental and technical. There is nothing apart from that which comes on top. The ability to take penalties is all the other abilities coming together to this one moment, just like they are in any other situation of the game where FM has no special attribute category. So why have that here?

Is actually anyone 100% positive on whether or not other attributes are important as well?

All attributes affect and are affected by multiple other attributes. Passing is not the entirety of how good a player is at passing, it's affected by decisions, creativity, technique and so on. It's the same with corners - other things affect corners too, but the corner attribute is that element of technique/ability/whatever that purely relates to corners. The only argument for removing the corner attribute is if every player's ability to take a corner is exactly the same as his ability to cross a ball. If there are players who are better corner takers than crossers, or vice versa, then we need separate attributes for the two.

The basic matter is, why is there a specific attribute if other attributes are still important, assuming that is the case?

I know what you're saying, but football is a convoluted sport. It isn't as simple as saying Player A is a great finisher, he has to have composure and off the ball ability as well, in terms of a striker. In terms of a midfielder, they might be an excellent passer, but lack technique or concentration.

The main attribute is passing, however that score is how good the player can be IF everything else works as well. I always assume that the other attributes determine the propensity with which the player can achieve their main stats i.e. a player with 16 passing and 16 technique will complete a higher percentage of passes than a player with 16 passing and 5 technique.

The same goes for heading. I'm 5'7 and i'm a pretty good header of the ball, but only if it's at an apropriate height i.e. in FM terms I might have 16 for heading, but 3 for jumping, which means i'm great at heading in certain situations, but my jumping ability affects my heading ability sometimes.

a) Pace + Dribbling + Control = Great combination.

b) Pace + Dribbling = Decent combination, but poor control means they'll lose the ball more often than combination a.

c) Dribbling = Not great, lack of control will disrupt dribblign and lack of pace will affect ability to get past man.

In terms of propensity, as I view it.

a) 8 out of 10 dribbles will go well.

b) 6 out of 10 dribbles will go well.

c) 4 out of 10 dribbles will go well.

Etc, etc, etc.

Corners and crossing, i'm not sure about that one, that seems bizarre tbh, but I udnerstand the other relationships.

I totally agree.

But when it comes to finishing or passing we have many different possible situations and there is such a thing as being able to score a goal which is a unique and separate ability from others which also come into effect in different goal scoring opportunity situations.

Yet, I don't see the special thing in hitting a ball from 12 yards in a cetre position, or in crossing a ball from a quarter circle with a one yard radius.

Unlike for instance passing or finishing, these are not separate or unique skills of a football player, but just made up from a combination of other skills. I agree that not just the crossing attribute alone may apply for corners, also technique and a few mental stats will be important. But what is it that separates crossing plus technique plus a few mental attributes from taking a corner that deserves to be an attribute of its own? I don't see that or what it could be. Nor do I see that in penalties. Finishing, technique, composure, pressure, determination, fatigue, decisions. What on top of that that deserves an attribute of its own?

I don't deny at all that many factors are involved in a good corner or a good penalty. My argument is that all of these factors are already covered by the normal attributes and that there is nothing on top of that which could be assumed to be the penalty taking ability. That ability is the result of adding up all necessary abilities of a player to take a good penalty.

It only makes sense to keep those as separate attributes if they either sum all needed attributes up with no need for thinking further or add and contain something special about taking a penalty which is not covered by other attributes already and important enough to justify being an attribute of its own.

I can see neither being the case.

Imho we should not get rid of the set piece attributes as they offer very important information to the user at one glance and make the game easier to handle. It would be a mess if we were forced to use some algorythm on every player to figure out for ourselves if he might be good at taking penalties. Instead they should remain in place, but include nothing more than a calculated figure made up from all other important attributes. Everything else seems illogical to me.