Player Positions and Re-training;

Just a couple of things really..

Can you successfully re-train a player to be natural in a different position, like for example, if a player is a natural ML, and an accomplished AML, could he be re-trained to a natural AML?

And, is there a massive difference on performances if a player is natural in a position compared to if a player is only accomplished in this position, for example playing an natural AMC in MC? Because although the roles differ slightly, many things about the role are similar, particularly if the AMC is playing as an MCa.

Any help would be great, cheers.

I'm pretty sure you cannot retrain a player to be a 'natural' in a different position, that is the point, he is NOT a natural in the new position. But obviously, 'accomplished' is nearly as good as far as I am concerned

To answer the first question, yes you can train a player to natural. He will not retain the position as natural if you stop training him there though. Eventually he will revert back to what he was before you started training him in that position (so that could be competent, awkward, etc).

I don't know the answer to the second question

I agree with the op on the point about big differences in ability from say ml to aml or mc to acm. 99% of players can play ml and aml to the same standard.

And for midfielders it should just be cm/acm cm/dcm or cm/dcm/acm for players that can play all.There shouldnt be just cm for players because again 99% of cm can play further forward or further back or both.

Just a couple of things really..

Can you successfully re-train a player to be natural in a different position, like for example, if a player is a natural ML, and an accomplished AML, could he be re-trained to a natural AML?

And, is there a massive difference on performances if a player is natural in a position compared to if a player is only accomplished in this position, for example playing an natural AMC in MC? Because although the roles differ slightly, many things about the role are similar, particularly if the AMC is playing as an MCa.

Any help would be great, cheers.

Yes, and Yes.

Each player has a rating for every position on the pitch. This rating ranges from 1 to 20 (as you can see in the editor). You will notice that the colours range from red through to bright green representing his comfort in that position. Each player has an adaptability attribute which determines the rate at which they can be trained in a different position. The higher the rating, the fast they can be re-trained into a new position. If you have a player with high adaptability (great than 16), you should be able to re-train his position (both by training and by playing him there) quickly. I don't have my notes in front of me (which is also why I can't remember the attribute for adaptability - it is maybe flexibility), but I believe you can increase their position "points" by up to 4 in each season if they are continually played in that position and are being re-trained in that position and have high adaptability. So, if you have a player that is accomplished (meaning they have between 14 and 19 points for that position), they can become natural in the new position within a season. If you find that they are not reaching natural it means that their adaptability attribute is not high enough to reach this rating as quickly as you like so you must be patient. There are many of the attributes within the game that we typically don't treat as important but then wonder why players display some weird behaviours. They ALL are important.

As for your second question, the rating of a player in any particular position has a direct impact on each of the attributes they have. So for example, a player with a rating for AMC of 16 will not be as effective as another player with 20 at AMC. Again the adaptability rating comes in to play here, but the simplest way to look at it (although it doesn't work quite as simplistic as this) is to consider that a 16 rated player with 20 for passing will only operate as a 16 for passing if played in an "accomplished" only position.

Does that make sense? Please feel free to ask any further questions.

Brilliant Hawshiels, exactly what I needed to know.

Cheers.

Yes, and Yes.

Each player has a rating for every position on the pitch. This rating ranges from 1 to 20 (as you can see in the editor). You will notice that the colours range from red through to bright green representing his comfort in that position. Each player has an adaptability attribute which determines the rate at which they can be trained in a different position. The higher the rating, the fast they can be re-trained into a new position. If you have a player with high adaptability (great than 16), you should be able to re-train his position (both by training and by playing him there) quickly. I don't have my notes in front of me (which is also why I can't remember the attribute for adaptability - it is maybe flexibility), but I believe you can increase their position "points" by up to 4 in each season if they are continually played in that position and are being re-trained in that position and have high adaptability. So, if you have a player that is accomplished (meaning they have between 14 and 19 points for that position), they can become natural in the new position within a season. If you find that they are not reaching natural it means that their adaptability attribute is not high enough to reach this rating as quickly as you like so you must be patient. There are many of the attributes within the game that we typically don't treat as important but then wonder why players display some weird behaviours. They ALL are important.

As for your second question, the rating of a player in any particular position has a direct impact on each of the attributes they have. So for example, a player with a rating for AMC of 16 will not be as effective as another player with 20 at AMC. Again the adaptability rating comes in to play here, but the simplest way to look at it (although it doesn't work quite as simplistic as this) is to consider that a 16 rated player with 20 for passing will only operate as a 16 for passing if played in an "accomplished" only position.

Does that make sense? Please feel free to ask any further questions.

are you sure it's adaptibility attribute that count? not agility?

are you sure it's adaptibility attribute that count? not agility?

Yeah its adaptability mate. Its a hidden personality trait.

One thing Id like confirmed if possible.

If I retrain a guy from MC to AMC, does playing him in a MC position with attack duties count as playing him as an AMC?

I dont think it does but it should. I think I have to play him behind the front man/men.

Grrrr, I just found out that after re-training a player in a new position we HAVE TO KEEP RE-TRAINING him so that he won't forget the newly learned position. Many people on these forums were saying that once a player is trained, it is enough to let him play in that position so that he won't forget it. I re-trained an AMC for AMR, and once he became natural I still kept re-training him for 1-2 months. Then I stopped re-training him, but since he became my starting AMR, he kept playing in that position. However after only a few games his rating in AMR has now dropped back to 'accomplished'.

So this is a proof that we have to keep re-training players in their new positions.

This doesn't make any sense at all, and I'm very very disappointed!!!

I was always under the impression 'Adaptability' only related to how easily a player will settle in a new country/location.

Versatility is what I would imagine would be the most important factor in retraining a player.

I've never been especially happy with the notion of people being just MC, AMC, DM, etc. I appreciate that the different positions require different skills but I really doubt the sense of a player having a bright green dot as an MC and red dots for AMC and DM. I'm sure that the positions have enough of the basics in common to suggest that a player ought to be able to make a reasonable fist of playing there.

I've never been especially happy with the notion of people being just MC, AMC, DM, etc. I appreciate that the different positions require different skills but I really doubt the sense of a player having a bright green dot as an MC and red dots for AMC and DM. I'm sure that the positions have enough of the basics in common to suggest that a player ought to be able to make a reasonable fist of playing there.

I agree with that; an AMC will probably already have lower stats for marking & tackling than a DMC without there being an additional "where am I?" penalty.