Player stats or CA..?

On the odd occasion i come across players with better stats even tho they have a lower CA.. Obviously CA is important but how good is a player with a lower CA but better stats?

Ai teams when signing young players always seem to base them choices based on PA, alot of them after 4 years at top prem clubs dont even make the grade and end up getting released on free's

CA is a sort of total for attributes, with each attribute weighted on importance for the position. On its own, it means nothing.

Do you mean statistics or attributes in that post? Because attributes>CA>stats IMO.

Having said that, if you can get a player to perform better than he should do, maybe because he thinks you're great so will do whatever you say, then it doesn't matter what his CA is!

I listen to scout recommendations when buying players.

I look at stats when fielding players.

yeh obiously the higher CA will in most cases give players better stats..

Some times im torn from signing players because of the CA or scout rating's based on stars.. there are some players that have good stats when searchinf for them using the search engine but when i find out they have a low CA it puts me off from signing them..

Just wondering if a team of players with good stats in crucial area's would be as good as a team of players with a high CA..?

Just wondering if a team of players with good stats in crucial area's would be as good as a team of players with a high CA..?

The match engine bases itself on stats, not CA. CA / PA is only used for player development, and apart from what scouts tell you, you should not even consider them.

i guess the only key or hidden stat which determins how well these stats get carried out are the Consistancy and big match stats..?

The one with the lower CA is better for 2 reasons:

1) He has better attributes

2) Lower CA will mean that he will be able to improve more than a player with higher CA but the same PA

This is of course unless higher CA also means better hidden attributes

Basically you'd have stumbled upon a player with better attribute distribution

Does CA itself have any impact in the ME or only the attributes are used for chance calculations? Nobody knows for sure.

Just to give a further indication, this is the attribute weighting system for FM10.

Fixed the table...

Att/ Posn	GK	DR/L	WBR/L	SW	DC	DMC	MC	AMC	MR/L	AMR/L	ST	Training category
Acceleration	3	4	4	4	4	4	4	5	5	6	6	Aerobic
Agility		4	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	Aerobic
Balance		2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	Aerobic
Inj Prone	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	
Jumping		1	2	1	3	4	1	1	1	1	1	4	Aerobic
Natural Fitness	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	Strength
Pace		2	4	4	4	4	4	4	5	5	6	6	Aerobic
Stamina		1	3	4	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	2	Strength
Strength	3	3	2	3	4	3	3	3	2	2	4	Strength
Corners		0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	Set pieces
Crossing	0	2	3	1	1	1	1	1	4	4	2	Set pieces
Dribbling	0	1	2	1	1	2	2	3	3	4	3	Ball control
Finishing	0	1	1	1	1	2	2	3	2	2	4	Shooting
First touch	1	2	3	3	2	3	3	3	3	3	4	Ball control
Free kicks	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	Set pieces
Heading		1	2	1	2	4	1	1	1	1	1	4	Ball control
Long shots	0	1	1	1	1	3	3	3	2	2	2	Shooting
Long throws	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	Set pieces
Marking		0	3	2	2	4	1	1	1	1	1	1	Defending
Passing		1	2	3	3	2	4	4	4	3	2	2	Attacking
Penalties	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	Set pieces
Tackling	0	4	3	2	4	4	3	2	2	2	1	Defending
Technique	1	2	3	3	1	3	3	3	3	3	3	Ball control
Versatility	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	
Aggression	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	
Anticipation	2	3	3	4	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	Tactics
Bravery		4	2	1	2	2	1	1	1	1	1	1	
Composure	2	2	2	3	2	2	3	3	3	3	4	Shooting
Concentration	4	4	3	4	4	3	2	2	2	2	2	Defending
Consistency	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	
Decisions	4	4	3	4	4	3	3	3	2	2	2	Tactics
Dirtiness	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	
Flair		0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	Ball control
Imp Matches	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	
Iinfluence	2	1	1	2	2	1	1	1	1	1	1	
Off the ball	0	1	2	1	1	1	2	3	2	2	4	Tactics
Positioning	4	4	3	4	4	3	2	2	1	1	2	Tactics
Teamwork	2	2	2	1	1	2	2	2	2	2	1	Tactics
Creativity	1	2	2	2	1	3	4	4	3	3	2	Attacking
Workrate	1	2	2	1	2	4	3	3	3	3	2	Strength
Aerial ability	4	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	Goalkeeping
Command of area	4	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	Tactics
Communication	4	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	Tactics
Eccentricity	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	
Handling	5	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	Goalkeeping
Kicking		4	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	Goalkeeping
One on ones	4	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	Goalkeeping
Reflexes	5	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	Aerobic
Rushing out	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	Tactics
Tend to punch	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	
Throwing	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	Goalkeeping

Read:

0 - is free attribute for this position

1 - least weight for position ... 6 - heaviest weight for position.

Hope this helps you pinpoint the formulas. Note that the degree of proficiency in a position reflects on the CA. Thus, a 20 in ST with 20 in AMC will actually reflect 50% of the above weights for ST and 50% for AMC.

Just to give a further indication, this is the attribute weighting system for FM10.

Wow! Where did you get this from? Is it official? Or has it been worked out by someone else?

Is this the same system FMRTE or Genie scout use for calculating ratings?

I'm not sure. It's from a thread from ages ago. (Link here)

I've never used FMRTE or Genie, so can't say if they use this or not.

I don't think the table is official from SI, but I'm pretty sure it's very close to how things work.

Is that table how the game calculates where a player needs his stats depending on his possition on the pitch.?

No, it calculates the amount of CA points it takes away from a player, per stat.

For example (I'm not using the table, I'm generating fake figures for the sake of ease, here)

A ST has 100 CA points. Finishing costs 1 CA point, per 1 attribute level on "Finishing"

The striker has 20 for finishing, this would mean, 20 of his 100 CA points are taken, and all put in to the "Finishing" category.

This was exploitable in FM08 and FM09, (Maybe 10, maybe 11, I've not seen any tests run on it yet) - Where by, a ST Finishing would cost 1. And a Defenders finishing would cost 0.1 (Because it's not an important attribute for a defender) - So re training a ST to become a DC (Thus ST/DC) Would mean his Finishing attribute would only cost 0.5 CA point, resulting in an epic rise in the vital attributes for a striker. Like I say, I'm not sure if this still works in FM11.

Hopefully I've explained that well enough

No, it calculates the amount of CA points it takes away from a player, per stat.

For example (I'm not using the table, I'm generating fake figures for the sake of ease, here)

A ST has 100 CA points. Finishing costs 1 CA point, per 1 attribute level on "Finishing"

The striker has 20 for finishing, this would mean, 20 of his 100 CA points are taken, and all put in to the "Finishing" category.

This was exploitable in FM08 and FM09, (Maybe 10, maybe 11, I've not seen any tests run on it yet) - Where by, a ST Finishing would cost 1. And a Defenders finishing would cost 0.1 (Because it's not an important attribute for a defender) - So re training a ST to become a DC (Thus ST/DC) Would mean his Finishing attribute would only cost 0.5 CA point, resulting in an epic rise in the vital attributes for a striker. Like I say, I'm not sure if this still works in FM11.

Hopefully I've explained that well enough

Interesting post. I tend to prefer the more balanced player because a striker with 20 finishing but 2 composure 4 flair and 4 technique might not be very good.

Yeah, I get that. I was just using that for arguments sake

I understand what you mean now, so exploitation, in other words cheat.? lol.

people would use training to make super players as if they were taking banned substances.?

What i was wondering you see, some times a player with 150 CA and a PA of 160 may have some better stats than say a player with 175 CA and a PA of 180.

Differance is when using Genie or the in game scouts advice, i would search for a high CA/PA or a high star value by the scout 5* etc.. I got the impression big clubs that signed young players went on either reputation or PA alone, most of them never making the grade despite having some of the best training facilities in the game..

So if i want a star studden striker, if he had 16 for finishing, offball, anticipation, frst touch, tecnique, pace, acceleration etc but only had CA of 150, providing his consistancy rating was say at least a 10 or 12. he would do a better job than say a stiker with a CA of 180 if his stats were the same..?

I was confussed why some players had better stats than other despite having less CA thats all. Rather deep i know

I understand what you mean now' date=' so exploitation, in other words cheat.? lol.

people would use training to make super players as if they were taking banned substances.?[/quote']

In simple terms, yes.

What i was wondering you see, some times a player with 150 CA and a PA of 160 may have some better stats than say a player with 175 CA and a PA of 180.

That is literally down to the weight attribute system. You could have a ST with PA of 160 with 20 "20" attributes, because they're valued quite low in the AWS. For example, Tackling, Marking, Passing, Long Throws, Corners could all be 20's, giving the impression the player is far beyond his PA, and in the same instant, you could have a ST with 180 PA, with 6 20 Attributes, that are very costing on the AWS. For example, Finishing, Composure, Technique, Long shots, Pace, Acceleration. So, you get the impression the 1st striker is the better player, but in terms of key attributes, and and the attribute weighting system, the second striker is far and away the better player.

So if i want a star studden striker, if he had 16 for finishing, offball, anticipation, frst touch, tecnique, pace, acceleration etc but only had CA of 150, providing his consistancy rating was say at least a 10 or 12. he would do a better job than say a stiker with a CA of 180 if his stats were the same..?

Not exactly. If the stats are the same, they're the same. He could potentially do better than a striker with CA 180 if the 180 ability points weren't distributed in to those key attributes you pointed out.

Yeah, I get that. I was just using that for arguments sake

Gotcha.

I have felt that these [striker] stats should be somewhat linked. Is it even possible that a human being would be a 20 finisher yet have little flair, technique or composure? Would it not make more sense to say make position specific ratings not vary by more than say 10?

Gotcha.

I have felt that these [striker] stats should be somewhat linked. Is it even possible that a human being would be a 20 finisher yet have little flair, technique or composure? Would it not make more sense to say make position specific ratings not vary by more than say 10?

In principle, I agree. In the FM world, however, especially in long term games, this would just see the production of mass produced perfection. Which wouldn't be good for the game.

In principle, I agree. In the FM world, however, especially in long term games, this would just see the production of mass produced perfection. Which wouldn't be good for the game.

But wouldnt only the CA/PA 190+ players be close to perfection? And. also, the defenders and the GKers would also be better rated so maybe this would balance out.

I don't think it would work, personally.

I mean, I get what you're saying, for example, how can someone with 20 finishing and 20 composure have 8 in penalties. But if there was a hard written line of code that said 20 in 1 = Attribute no less than 10 points away in another, if would be hell. Unless you really finely tuned the way the attributes were linked. And even then, there would be so much open to debate, that it would be one hell of a project.

I don't think it would work, personally.

I mean, I get what you're saying, for example, how can someone with 20 finishing and 20 composure have 8 in penalties. But if there was a hard written line of code that said 20 in 1 = Attribute no less than 10 points away in another, if would be hell. Unless you really finely tuned the way the attributes were linked. And even then, there would be so much open to debate, that it would be one hell of a project.

Lets hope the keep on improving the game. That being said, beyond a couple UI issues, its already pretty damned good.

Does CA itself have any impact in the ME or only the attributes are used for chance calculations? Nobody knows for sure.

CA has no impact on the ME whatsoever, for sure.

Please could people use the word "attributes" if that is what they mean, a "stat" is a statistic and mixing the terms up is very confusing!

CA has no impact on the ME whatsoever, for sure.

Please could people use the word "attributes" if that is what they mean, a "stat" is a statistic and mixing the terms up is very confusing!

Yes, this is a pet hate of mine. 90% of people on here refer to someone's attributes as stats, which is not the case. 'Yeah his stats are immense' etc!!!

Just to give a further indication, this is the attribute weighting system for FM10.

I don't see how this can be right. I have a regen striker with CA/PA 184/192.

Here are some of his most strikery attributes:

Accelleration 12

Pace 15

Jumping 17

Strength 20

Finishing 18

First Touch 18

Heading 18

Composure 20

How do these attributes not add up to more than 192 PA under this chart.

I don't see how this can be right. I have a regen striker with CA/PA 184/192.

Here are some of his most strikery attributes:

Accelleration 12

Pace 15

Jumping 17

Strength 20

Finishing 18

First Touch 18

Heading 18

Composure 20

How do these attributes not add up to more than 192 PA under this chart.

I did say this was for FM10 (But after reading that thread, it seems it may be for an earlier version) - So the manner in which they are weighted, would obviously be different in FM11, because I think they have tried to combat the training exploitation.

You could theoretically work out the attribute weighting system, if you had an external scouting tool, but it would take an absolute age.

I should have mentioned that this was a FM 2010 regen.

Yeah I thought the same Redbyrd. Based on what Nep said and the table - if the finishing weight is 4 for a striker - then if they have 20 for finishing then they have consumed 80 points right? So that would mean a striker could not have 20 for finishing, composure, and first touch (as they all have a weight of 4) as it would be 240 points. But I must have missed something.

I'm not entirely sure what the table represents. You might be better off reading the thread it's from

But it's to do with the whole thing

link to that thread please?

not sure if that makes sense

imagine a 19/19 pace/acc winger forward eg walcott, i'm not sure what his CA/PA is actually in the game but i imagine around 155/170. how many ca points does his acc/pace take up? 19x 6 = 114 for just one of those, so 228 for both physical attributes combined?

surely it would make more sense if the CA costs rise exponentially as the levels increase, eg improving from acceleration attribute 9 -> 10 only takes 2 (for example) but 19->20 may take the full 6?

Just follow the linked post, and it'll take you to the thread. As I said, I'm not entirely sure how the table works.

Tnx for the input NEP.

a while back i remember REGENS beeing clone's of retired players.. these days they are more random. when playing long term games because i wanted to help the AI teams stay good i would use FMRTE to increase there youth products and Attirbutes of players..

Having not played more than 5 games so far on FM11 i can't comment if the regens and AI squad building oer time is better than previous version's, i have seen top clubs signing alot of 30+ players which on first impression's worrie's me..

If i was no manager of a prem club with a rich Chairman rather than go out and spend millions on 27+ players i would want to get as many of the U21 talent as possible to blood these players into the style of play i wanted after years of coaching..

When we talk about Attributes and CA/PA do AI managers use stats to buy players or CA/PA? i dare say reputation comes into play.?