PA CA Again, 1 more solution

First of all, I have looked at some opinions and they are all good and worthy of a look i their ow aspect.

Secondly, my first language is not English so bear with me.

Firstly, I would like to start by saying that the current system of CA/PA is stale and it needs to be revamped.

How?

Well there have been a lot of ideas and all of them have their merits and some are too complex, what I want to share is a little simpler (I think so).

The idea is that every regen should have a max PA of 100, that means that every player generated by the "god" (game code) should have a initial PA of 100 and a CA. This is different from the current system where the PA is already determined by the game code, and how random it may be it does not have the uncertainty that every gamer wants.

So, lets take a example of three players like everyone has done. All are regens starting at 16 years of age, with a random CA and a fixed PA of 100.

James Gold, CA=80, PA=100 at age 16

James Silver, CA=60, PA=100 at age16

James Bronze, CA= 40, PA=100 at age 16

So at this moment of time, only Gold will be worldclass, Silver will be good and Bronze will never make it.

But the new system will create uncertainty, by changing the PA constantly as the CA is changed now. How?

Well all three start out at their clubs.

In the first year Gold has limited chances in the first-team, some injuries and doesnot take the chances given to him. He averages 5.78 over the first season with no goals and assists. With every bad performance his CA goes down a little and his PA doesnot increase much. So, by the end of the season his CA=70 and PA=90.

But Bronze has a solid season, his manager plays hi well and he averages good overall as well, thereby increasing his CA= 70 and PA to 130

Silver has a good season, so goes to CA=70 PA=110

Now at 17, their respective PAs have all gone up, but the level of increment is different for all, determined by how well they play and their luck with injuries and the training available, while the CA has also changed.

So, in season 2 we have

James Gold, CA=70, PA=90 at age 17

James Silver, CA=70, PA=110 at age17

James Bronze, CA= 70, PA=130 at age 17

The major thing here is how do we calculate by how much the PA can increase. Well for this can be like:

For age 16, increase in CA= increase in PA, that is a player with who has CA=40 at the start and a PA=100, if his CA increases by 30 to CA=70 then his PA=130 the exact increase. However, the exact increase is only possible for year 16.

For age 17, increase in CA= 90% increase in PA, that is if a CA=70, PA=130 player’s CA increases by 30 again, this time the PA= 90%*30+130= 157

For 18, increase in CA= 80% increase in PA and so on, 19 inc. in CA= 70% inc. in PA …………………….. with players developing (PA increasing) till age 25.

And the maximum CA increase in a year can be set as well to say 30 for the first year and then 25, 20, 15, 10, so on

* will post an excel screen here, I just cant explain this

Off you go guys batter me 

I don't understand what's wrong with having a fixed potential. The fixed potential is how good someone can possibly be, if everything goes right for them.

For example:

I don't play football, I play basketball. I'm okay but I'm never going to play in the NBA, no matter how hard I train. My (fixed) potential is low. There is nothing I can do to change my maximum potential, it is what it is. It's the same with a football player.

Why should someone's maximum potential change?

I don't understand what's wrong with having a fixed potential. The fixed potential is how good someone can possibly be, if everything goes right for them.

For example:

I don't play football, I play basketball. I'm okay but I'm never going to play in the NBA, no matter how hard I train. My (fixed) potential is low. There is nothing I can do to change my maximum potential, it is what it is. It's the same with a football player.

Why should someone's maximum potential change?

Because it will create a uncertainty in the game, simples. This means that with proper training and a good output from a player they can develop into a good enough player. Its not about playing baseball or basketball or volleyball, its about randomness and uncertainty which means better gameplay. If u dont like it, its OK.

but not every player can become a top player, with unlimited potential it would be very easy to end up with a game full of world class players and few lower league players, sorry its not something i agree with, good post tho mate!

The biggest problem is that no computer programming can ever compensate for what happens in life, there are just too many variables to consider, things that could never be programmed into a game.

I have seen threads like this before and people have used Pedro as an example, my argument would be Pedro always had a high potential, it has just taken the right kind of manager to bring it out in him, which again is not something you can programme into the game.

Nah, not everyone can become good, I mean the Max CA change possible is 30, 25, 20 and so on; a player can have a CA change of 10, 15, 20, 5 and so on so he will not be a World Class player

I really don't get all these threads, there is nothing wrong with the current system...

This one is gimmicky and rubbish anyhow, I'd sooner buy FIFA manager than Football Manager trying to pass this dross off as a potential system!

i dont think you would end up with much variation

Nah, not everyone can become good, I mean the Max CA change possible is 30, 25, 20 and so on; a player can have a CA change of 10, 15, 20, 5 and so on so he will not be a World Class player

but then why 30, where does this number come from? All you have done is take one restriction and replace it with another really. Whilst i do agree the current system is not perfect, but it will never be, because life changes dramatically from day to day in some cases.

As i say tho interesting read mate.

Someone's maximum potential doesn't change, that defeats the purpose of a maximum potential.

Let's just look at the facts here. We have a system where we have some set roof for potential, then the players have their ability. The potential is generally higher than the player will get anyhow, so I really don't see what the problem is! You can't just have it so everyone can become a star, this isn't your mom's pep talk before your first day at junior high, you'd completely bugger the game balence with rubbish like this.

The only thing I'd suggest is a slightly different system where first of all they revampt the CA/PA system, making the following changes:

- Recreate the limit for the max CA/PA from 200 to ~300... Why... Cause! No seriously, there needs to be something more, something far more than would normally appear, for just that one or two incredible players. The one in every 100 year players with around ~220 PA, rather than the one in 10-20 year players that have PA of ~200. Then the odd, just out of the blue one in 1000 season player of PA 240+. The only issue is that if it were in the game, the database [mumble mumble] would be tempted to use it.

- Implement a system whereby the rate at which a player developes grinds to a halt as they reach their PA. So a player who has a CA of 100 but a PA of 160 can get with some amount of "developement" to say 120, whilst a player who has a CA of 100 but a PA of 110 would instead reach, let's say 105 from the same amount of "development". I don't know, I'll write a better version of this latter that actually has some detail workings.

Not everyone is a wonderchild, accept it and move on.

Also, why does your guy have a higher CA than PA at points?!

As has been the case in other threads you are confusing PA with how CA develops. Most of what you've described is about how CA develops throughout a save and is where improvements can be made.

Here the player doesnot reach 200 cause he doesnot attain max CA in each season

arghhh, its doing my head in!! cant i just train them?

There is already uncertainty in the game if you don't look at a players PA. These are only seen in the editor or FMRTE, and are not meant to be seen by the manager in-game, they are there as a tool to stop every player in the world turning into Messi.

PA is fine, but I think the way CA goes up and down could be improved.

Well its not the system that has to be implemented its just a suggestion.

Why 30, well its just an assumption, the finer details can be worked out.

Yes, it will have variations

It just uses the change in CA as a reference for changing the PA, on the principle that when CA increases there should some increase in the PA so that the player will not freeze at point X and can no longer develop

There is already uncertainty in the game if you don't look at a players PA. These are only seen in the editor or FMRTE, and are not meant to be seen by the manager in-game, they are there as a tool to stop every player in the world turning into Messi.

PA is fine, but I think the way CA goes up and down could be improved.

Well its what you think, I think the current system is not good enough just like u think that the way the CA changes should be improved, simples.

Thannks for the input

wouldn't it be simpler if the players were replaced like for like?

for example messi retires, so a regen is created, with the same pa that messi had, somewhere in argetina, but obviously with a random ca and starting attributes!!

wouldn't it be simpler if the players were replaced like for like?

for example messi retires, so a regen is created, with the same pa that messi had, somewhere in argetina, but obviously with a random ca and starting attributes!!

Yeah but was there a player of Messi's talent 100 years ago, will there be a player in 100 years time who we're going to say is much better than Messi, making clones of players isn't really realistic IMO. Also you'd know to scout Argentina for players if this was implemented in the game.

Yeah but was there a player of Messi's talent 100 years ago, will there be a player in 100 years time who we're going to say is much better than Messi, making clones of players isn't really realistic IMO. Also you'd know to scout Argentina for players if this was implemented in the game.

i said random ca

wouldn't it be simpler if the players were replaced like for like?

for example messi retires, so a regen is created, with the same pa that messi had, somewhere in argetina, but obviously with a random ca and starting attributes!!

This was once the exact way that regens were created in the game (hence the term 'regens' still sticking around to this day) and the major problem with it was it didn't provide any variety at all. Not only did it mean it was extremely easy to re-find these players without the aid of outside tools, but it also meant there was absolutely no uncertainty at all - you could never EVER find a player from a minor nation who was actually any good.

This was once the exact way that regens were created in the game (hence the term 'regens' still sticking around to this day) and the major problem with it was it didn't provide any variety at all. Not only did it mean it was extremely easy to re-find these players without the aid of outside tools, but it also meant there was absolutely no uncertainty at all - you could never EVER find a player from a minor nation who was actually any good.

they could get regenerated at a random location? in messi's case any spanish speaking country, c ronaldo's case any portuguese speaking country

they could get regenerated at a random location? in messi's case any spanish speaking country, c ronaldo's case any portuguese speaking country

Even then, you could never randomly have an amazing player from, say, Saudi Arabia.

Ultimately, the old system was just really unbalanced, which is why they moved away from it.

There is only one problem with the CA/PA system imo...

it's too easy to get an accurate idea of the PA, scouting is too easy. So you aren't taking chances or anything like that. You want uncertainty? Don't change a system that is simple and works, just make it harder to see that end result. Need more uncertainty in scouting... like attributes not being accurate without extensive scouting or time with the team, giving a more vague idea of potential without extensive looks... basically it all boils down to not just getting a report card on a player with a solid scout and knowing what you have because they tell you everything right there. Force us to scout players for 3 matches or more to get all the info. Leave areas blank until players have spent a significant amount of time at the team, like the strength/weakness reports by coaches.

Stuff like that is whats missing. Don't need to change the point system, just how easy it is to get the information.

I think the current PA/CA system only feels "stale" when using a program to check the real values. I'm not saying you (the op) does this, but it is what happened to me - I used to do it alot in my early days, and to be honest it took away the excitement of finding someone with a potential off the chart and wondering exactly how far he could go. If there is an issue, i believe it is with the scouting system, like Martyr1777 talks about in the post above. In real life, how easy is it to judge a players potential? I have no experience in the field and thus no answer to this, but i would guess it is extremely hard. Alot harder than it currently is in FM.

Yeah the introduction of the CA/PA star system has been terrible. Might help the beginner see which area of the team is "weakest" but really ruins the enjoyment of watching players progress. Was good in the past when a youngsters progress stalled and you had to decide whether to send him out on loan or play him more often or get rid of him...sometimes a player you thought had peaked would turn into a world beater at another club. Now it's almost impossible to go wrong in the transfer market.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't this formula make it so any player at a successful club can at minimum be a decent player, and unsuccessful clubs would never generate/produce any decent talent (successful/unsuccessful taking into account good/bad performances).

Agreed, The system of star ratings based on CA and PA is inadequate because some times the lower CA player is better because of attribute distribution. When AI managers and scouts can judge players based on how their attributes fulfill a certain role the AI will be much more competitive.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't this formula make it so any player at a successful club can at minimum be a decent player, and unsuccessful clubs would never generate/produce any decent talent (successful/unsuccessful taking into account good/bad performances).

No because in the current model CA increases only when a player plays good trains well and etc.. Now, a player cant improve well if his attributes are not distributed properly thus slowing his growth automatically. Furthermore, you can have a player with good initial attributes but is inconsistent in his performances so his CA wont increase too much and thus the PA will also be tied down.

For example, Fabgregas was good, early on because he has good attributes for the position he plays, and when Wenger played him he did good and hence his attributes increased. I agree that he had potential early on but that was down to good attribute distribution which the scout would have looked at. This good distribution made him a good player for his age and thus his attributes kept increasing to the point where he has peaked around 23 (I dont exactly know). I will demonstrate this in excel.

Look at the Fabregas and Denilson comparision I made hope it clears some things up

ets look at Raheem Sterling, he has potential everyone knows that, but he develops is upto the Liverpool trainings and chances he gets, if he does take his chances and trains well without injuries he may come out to be Raheem Sterling GOLD, if he doesnt take his chances and so on then he becomes Raheem SCRAP

Your system makes no sense and offers no improvement over older systems.

In fact it makes thigns a hole lot worse... A whole lot!

This makes no sense, the point of potential is that it's exactly that. There's no reason for making PA go up year by year as it's meant to be potential.

Your system is rubbish, and whilst its clear what you're trying to do it just isn't very good.

This breaks apart completely when you want the game to consider Late Bloomers.

Also, It breaks down completely when it comes to the degradation of players.

I do like the system but the math isn't complete. You also took a player that became world class at the age of 20 as the norm which is a fault (example with fabregas). There are very, very few players in the world who amass such reputation and skill very quickly. (I can probably name a handfull out of a world of footballers which im just going to number infinite)

Players don't start decreasing at the age of 27, especially when you consider the fact that footballers peak around 30

I do think its a suitable idea, but A LOT more math needs to be done. You would need to introduce variables based on Personality, how a Professional player would differentiate from a Realist etc...

With this system, the Anelkas, Giggs, Drogbas would never exist. At least with the current Fixed PA system they can occur... (VERY rarely... at least better than never.)

While I appreciate the OP having put thought into a new system, I do think it adds a lot of unnecessary pseudo-variables to the equation but the core of the CA/PA issue is still ruled by constants...

What's with the 100PA for everyone?

16yo Rooney didn't have the same potential of 16yo John Doe...

Also, the fixed maximum increase/decrease in CA and PA won't add a lot of flexibiliy to the system IMO.

I just maintain my old "PA gets freely renegotiated every year according to the previous season's performances" is the easiest and leanest way to produce both early bloomers, late bloomers, fizzled stars and 24yo never-weres.

No complicated calculations, no fixed numbers...

Basically you can have a Pedro or a Drogba going from "who is this guy" to "he's great", thanks to in-game performances. Now that's what I'd call an actual "gameworld", instead of the current "straight-line evolution from year 20xx"

Ideas to improve or better the current system is always welcome.

However I don't think any system should take into account the in-game match rating of the individual players in question.

Take any two players of equal PA, equal CA, age, personality, happiness and so on, but play with two different roles say GK and CF. Granted that opportunities would differ in game, it is a fact that they would not have the same in-game match rating on average over a season. In general the person that scores the goals or makes the assists would get the highest ratings.

There are many reasons that a player would have a low match rating - including but not limited to tactics.

So if individual CA/PA growth is determined by the in-game match rating, then there would be a MASSIVE problem.

I'm a pure pragmatist at heart; the bottom line is all that matters. A win is a win; a loss is a loss. Sure there are quite a few benefits of being 4-0 up at half time, but all that really matters and all that will be counted is the "three" points. It is a team effort after all! Playing sleep inducing games that guarantee 100% victories is preferred to anything that has fewer victories. Any profit making business would 100% agree.

Individual in-game ratings are - and are only just - nice.

I don't think the currenty CA development system is match-rating based...

Isn't it a mix of training+facilites+staff skills+match time+in-game stats? Then again, the rating is more or less a reflection of in-match performances, albeit with some odd outcomes at times.

No need to rework a new system from scratch... IMO the current growth system is decent enough, we just need the chance for players to go UP and DOWN according to all the aforementioned factors...

If my 130/130 midfielder has been performing above and beyond his face-value attributes (his CA...), holding his own among/against world class players, why shouldn't his attributes go up?

Or, if my 175/180 striker has sucked balls instead of putting them into the net, why can't he lose many points, just to get them back as soon as he's back on track?

Flexibility is all we need.

Is what your describing not more down to form than anything else? An average player may play out of his skin, but it doesnt make him world class by ability, same goes for your striker senario, the player hasnt necessarily lost the ability, just his form is poor, like Rooney earlier this season, he didnt become a worse player, he hasnt lost the ability he showed last year, he is just struggling to recapture the level of performances.

That is definately something that could be worked on, it seems like when players hit top form they very rarely lose that form, like the golden ball thread has shown, Messi very rarely has a bad season unless he is injured, Ronaldo the same, whereas i dont think in real life their good form will be indefinite.

The problem with any kind of system that is fluid (no fixed PA) is that we can end up with a situation where we can turn just about any player into a good or world class player as long as he's in a club with great facilities and coaches and plays a lot. Dynamic league reputation is perhaps an example of this. The current system may not be perfect, but it does a good enough job. There is uncertainty, you can't turn any player into a world beater, some won't reach their potential while others will.

In the real world, not all players can become Ronaldos or Messis, or even Ji-Sung Parks for that matter. To become a world class player you need a fantastic talent base. Nothing can ever substitute that. PA is a good enough replicant of that I think. The problem I have with it is that player seem to go into decline when they go a bit over 30, pretty much no matter what you do. At least regens who don't have ridiculously good mental (hidden) attributes.

I think we are rather talking about amendments to the current system than designing a whole new one.

If my 130/130 midfielder has been performing above and beyond his face-value attributes (his CA...), holding his own among/against world class players, why shouldn't his attributes go up?

Because he reached his limit. It makes no sense when you think of it as fixed numbers, but try to pretend you didn't know the numbers behind his ability ingame for a moment. I personally find it makes perfect sense that a player has reached their limit, his own personal glass ceiling so to say.

this is similar to how the player development works in Out of the Park Baseball (actually published by SI for a few years). I don't think it's as crazy as people make it out to be. to a large extent, your potential is determined not by some artificial limit imposed at birth, but by what you make of your career - specifically, your determination and professionalism. let's say you have an FM regen - we'll call him "Mario Balotelli" - who has the following stats:

CA: 100

PA: 150

professionalism: 5

determination: 5

temperament: 5

let's say he gets tutored by his favorite player - we'll call him "Carlos Tevez" - and he raises his professionalism, determination, and temperament. (as far as I know, this is possible ingame). then why shouldn't his potential improve? if you take two players who are exactly identical, but one is more professional, determined, and level-headed, every scout in the world would say that player has more potential. scouts IRL don't have some magical barometer to measure a player's potential. they measure a player's potential by watching them play (using their CA, in FM terms), and by taking into account certain things they see (attributes, in FM terms). if a player's attributes change, why wouldn't their PA change? when Man Utd signed Chris Smalling, it wasn't because Sir Alex Ferguson right clicked on him and told his scout to make a Scout Report, and then he accessed a database and figured out that Chris Smalling had a PA of whatever, applying a random variable to make the report not 100% accurate. it's because his scout saw Smalling, saw that he had all the physical tools (i.e. *current* physical attributes) and mental tools (i.e. *current*mental attributes) and technical tools (i.e. *current* technical attributes) to become a good player in the future.

Is what your describing not more down to form than anything else? An average player may play out of his skin, but it doesnt make him world class by ability, same goes for your striker senario, the player hasnt necessarily lost the ability, just his form is poor, like Rooney earlier this season, he didnt become a worse player, he hasnt lost the ability he showed last year, he is just struggling to recapture the level of performances.

It's not necessarily down to form...

Also keep in mind this "flexible PA" model would affect younger players (and newgens), while established stars (like Rooney) wouldn't have drastic modifications...

Just think of the up/down trends in CA as an extensions of the training ones... Rooney's season hasn't been stellar, but clearly not bad enough to earn him a substantial CA/PA cut.

A player at a Top Club would need something really really amazing in order to get extra points (thus no need to worry about exceeding the 200CA limit, or about every player becoming a Messi), while it would still take a disaster of a season (think of Amauri...) to get a noticeable drop.

My scenario is designed to reflect the rise and fall of plenty of players... The "average mid-table" guys who, under the current system, are damned to a career of unremarkable mediocrity, NO MATTER HOW WELL they perform.

And the odd "major disappointments" who, for some reason, fail to live up to their initial hype, but who could still get a second chance.

The game system is currently a one-way road to greatness or to failure. While we all have seen plenty of players having their ups and downs... Take Van der sar... in FM universe he would have NEVER been able to go back from Fulham to United at age 35 and playing his best football.

Or Drogba... In the game if you have a Guingamp-era Drogba, he'll never ever become good enough to start a game at Chelsea...

The list could go on and on...

Just don't think of it as a "CA rollercoaster", but as a gradual and skill-scaled road.

To oversimplify it... John Doe would NEVER go from PA100 at Peterborough to PA150 as soon as he becomes Blackburn 5th striker... It would take him a couple of successful seasons as a regular there to get something like that, and I mean TRULY successful.

The problem with any kind of system that is fluid (no fixed PA) is that we can end up with a situation where we can turn just about any player into a good or world class player as long as he's in a club with great facilities and coaches and plays a lot. Dynamic league reputation is perhaps an example of this. The current system may not be perfect, but it does a good enough job. There is uncertainty, you can't turn any player into a world beater, some won't reach their potential while others will.

See above...

That's the main reason for which I'm not advocating the "no more PA" scenario...

Once again: training facilities and staff will NEVER turn a Leage Two defender into a new John Terry... However, should said L2 defender perform decently enough in the Championship, he could eventually develop into, guess what, an adequate Championship defender

But of course you already know it'd take a lot of ability/luck/determination to get a player to overachieve that much...

Very good idea there. Perhaps we can combine the current Max Potential with the Dynamic Potential suggested here then we'd have a model similar to what we have now.

What I mean by this is that Messi is Messi because his Max Potential is Immense (Max Potential) AND because he trained in a World Class Youth System (Dynamic Potential).

Do you think Messi would be as good as he is now if he trained with some Sunday Football Team in the 6th tier of football? Not exactly.

On the other side, some players will have abysmal Max Potential but will get chances to play game in game out.

They will improve and become reliable first team-ers but never be world class no matter how many games they will play for the likes of Arsenal or Barca.

SI can actually look into this.

It's not necessarily down to form...

Also keep in mind this "flexible PA" model would affect younger players (and newgens), while established stars (like Rooney) wouldn't have drastic modifications...

Just think of the up/down trends in CA as an extensions of the training ones... Rooney's season hasn't been stellar, but clearly not bad enough to earn him a substantial CA/PA cut.

A player at a Top Club would need something really really amazing in order to get extra points (thus no need to worry about exceeding the 200CA limit, or about every player becoming a Messi), while it would still take a disaster of a season (think of Amauri...) to get a noticeable drop.

My scenario is designed to reflect the rise and fall of plenty of players... The "average mid-table" guys who, under the current system, are damned to a career of unremarkable mediocrity, NO MATTER HOW WELL they perform.

And the odd "major disappointments" who, for some reason, fail to live up to their initial hype, but who could still get a second chance.

The game system is currently a one-way road to greatness or to failure. While we all have seen plenty of players having their ups and downs... Take Van der sar... in FM universe he would have NEVER been able to go back from Fulham to United at age 35 and playing his best football.

Or Drogba... In the game if you have a Guingamp-era Drogba, he'll never ever become good enough to start a game at Chelsea...

The list could go on and on...

Just don't think of it as a "CA rollercoaster", but as a gradual and skill-scaled road.

To oversimplify it... John Doe would NEVER go from PA100 at Peterborough to PA150 as soon as he becomes Blackburn 5th striker... It would take him a couple of successful seasons as a regular there to get something like that, and I mean TRULY successful.

See above...

That's the main reason for which I'm not advocating the "no more PA" scenario...

Once again: training facilities and staff will NEVER turn a Leage Two defender into a new John Terry... However, should said L2 defender perform decently enough in the Championship, he could eventually develop into, guess what, an adequate Championship defender

But of course you already know it'd take a lot of ability/luck/determination to get a player to overachieve that much...

Do you not think tho that it would make more sense to develop a great detail level in form rather than messing around with ability? My point is ability is there, Rooney has always had the ability, it will not really change much as he is for the best part a developed player having a bad time of it. Should they not focus more on the form side of things, so situations your describing are more possible in FM, there is little chance at the moment of Ronney, Messi, Ronaldo ect having bad seasons in FM unless very badly managed, whereas in real life there is a much much greater chance of them dropping off for a year or two, doesnt mean their attributes have really changed, more their ability to use the attributes to their fullest has.

BTW just using Rooney as an example in this case.

Do you not think tho that it would make more sense to develop a great detail level in form rather than messing around with ability? My point is ability is there, Rooney has always had the ability, it will not really change much as he is for the best part a developed player having a bad time of it. Should they not focus more on the form side of things, so situations your describing are more possible in FM, there is little chance at the moment of Ronney, Messi, Ronaldo ect having bad seasons in FM unless very badly managed, whereas in real life there is a much much greater chance of them dropping off for a year or two, doesnt mean their attributes have really changed, more their ability to use the attributes to their fullest has.

BTW just using Rooney as an example in this case.

But Rooney is not the right example... he was already good when he was 16... my system and the current system wouldn't provide different results with a player like him.

Think of Amauri instead.

Up til age 26 he couldn't score to save his life, then in the two following years he bagged as many goals than in his whole previous career. Then at Juventus had an okay season and 18 months of shocking ineptitude.

You can't possibly chalk all that up to "form"... Which was the real Amauri? The guy who struggled score more than an average defender, or solid power forward able to reach the 10-15 goals tally, or the laughing stock we all loved from his second season at Juventus onwards?

Or take Luca Toni, who went too from being an ok mid-table target man to world class striker to immovable lamppost...

Form and tactics can play a role in scoring streaks or droughts, in stints of poor form or of stellar performances... But the key is short... When the situation gets the rule and not the exception, then something must be up.

(in your Rooney example... in his "poor" season so far he has scored 10 goals in 22 league games, still not too shabby considering he's been through a lot)

My point is: in the 2004 edition of FM, Amauri and Toni could have had a CA/PA around 120-140 respectively, totally in line with their status as footballers and with their resumé at that point in time.

So if you started a game back then, neither man would have had the chance to become World Champion (Toni) or to have a couple of unexpectedly good seasons.

I can accept the fact players having limits (hence I'm not debating the concept of maximum PA), but if my "average midfielder" who apparently has peaked already at age 25 can still go on to establish himself at, say, Chelsea or United, despite having "Everton-like" attributes, why can't he get a SMALL boost to his attributes over time?

Sure, he won't ever turn into a Gerrard or a Lampard, but if he can hold his own at their level, isn't it absurd having his attributes stuck "in his past career"?

i see what your saying, i would still argue that in Amurai's case he always had the ability, but other things affected his use of his ability, maybe what i am getting at is more to do with personality rather than ability you can have all the talent in the world, but if you dont have the right motivation to use it properly then you will never get to be a top player.

You do make some very good points tho.

The only thing that removing a fixed PA would help with is making each game different, placing more emphasis on scouting and looking for talent and removing the option of simply looking at the database and seeing who the best players are.

I do see the benefit of having a dynamic PA but in reality it would be difficult to implement and more importantly harder to understand for a lot of the player base.

Thing is, no matter how good a players CA/PA is, what it comes down to is their performance on the pitch. A player with a 120CA could quite easily outperform a player with a 140CA dependent on factors (certain attributes, consistency etc). It's not always the most talented players which make the greatest footballers. I do think a lot of the time people look too much into CA/PA and not average ratings.

I know, and I've had plenty of "average players" overperforming and outperforming players with higher attributes...

The debate about CA/PA isn't about them as bare figures, but as reflection of the whole attributes grid (a shortcut, if you will...)

However I don't see what's wrong in "rewarding" said players with sensible rises in attributes, just like other players lose points due to injuries, poor training/performances.

The aforementioned 120CA player can perform as well as a 150CA player, but then again it just could raise questions about the effectiveness of attributes... After all if my 12 Finishing 11 Composure can score as much, if not more, than a 15 Finishing 14 Composure striker [assuming they're similar type of strikers playing in similar systems] it's going to be weird and, eventually, a bit too "random".

So why can't this 12/11 striker get an extra point or two as PROOF of and REWARD for his performances, even though he apparently has peaked already?

i dont really look at CA or PA levels for players so i cant say for certain but do any players ever max out their PA? I know certain players will start off at a certain CA with a PA slighly higher but are players ever likely to reach the full PA level?

i dont really look at CA or PA levels for players so i cant say for certain but do any players ever max out their PA? I know certain players will start off at a certain CA with a PA slighly higher but are players ever likely to reach the full PA level?

Yes they do. I usually destroy my career when I stop playing it by checking my players with FM Scout. Quite many players have CA difference (PA-CA) less than 5.

For example my first team http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/4216/58160311.jpg

Many players are past prime, many players still developing, still 4 players have PA difference 1-2.