How accurate is genie scout?

Not sure where to put this so I just stuck it here; sorry.

But anyway can anyone tell me just how accurate the "Show Potential Attributes" function is on Genie Scout?

atm, I'm getting some very odd results for high PA players, they're coming out looking like 130 PA players when they have about 190 PA!

here's a few examples:

So can anyone tell me if this is seriously what I can expect in the future, is this feature really accurate? if so

Might get more response in the Editors Hideaway.

Might get more response in the Editors Hideaway.

I'll post this there then, cheers.

I wouldnt swear to it, but with the 2nd and 3rd players... Dolgov and Shogenov, it might give you a poor prediction because they aren't on full-time contracts yet... as for the other 2, i dunno...

It distributes the CA evenly towards every attribute, which makes them a bit more rounded than they should be (e.g. wingers will be better at defending than you'd train them to be), but even with that, these results look strange. Makengo looks like the ideal traditional winger, but he doesn't look like a 195 CA player.

I wouldnt swear to it, but with the 2nd and 3rd players... Dolgov and Shogenov, it might give you a poor prediction because they aren't on full-time contracts yet... as for the other 2, i dunno...

It distributes the CA evenly towards every attribute, which makes them a bit more rounded than they should be (e.g. wingers will be better at defending than you'd train them to be), but even with that, these results look strange. Makengo looks like the ideal traditional winger, but he doesn't look like a 195 CA player.

I see cheers, that's what I thought though, I did however get these promising answers in another thread.

Genie Scout doesn't accurately model the increase in mental attributes as a player ages. He'll be a lot better than that.

The main reason he's not technically great is a) really high attributes in the heaviliy weighted winger attributes and b) A higher than average ability in both feet.

He will be an absolute world beater, guaranteed.

Ackter is right. After I got well and truly bored on older versions I messed about with old saves and looked through how players progressed. I'd find players of mine when they were young (16-18) and compare what it thought they'd be to what they became in the game, and the result was surprising. They were in all cases far and away better players. I concluded 3 things from those tests:

1. Genie Scout's modelling of player development only takes into account CA weighted attributed (some mental stats don't hold a CA weighting)

2. It's only a guess and so players can develop differently (in most cases in a more balanced way)

3. Players will almost universally be better than they are predicted to become

I'll do the same come November on my current save, and in truth after this it'll be interesting to see when the "best players" were produced on my save and how they developed.

Also, that Makengo player will fairly beastly when he's fully developed. What's his off the ball now though, you'd want to train him individually on off the ball if it's low. Get that up, tutor him and his mental attributes will shoot up.

I'd also point out that I feel scouting tools are actually quite poor tools, especially in the hands of someone who doesn't understand how the system works correctly. That is, some people fall into the trap of; "197 PA!!!, this guy's the new Ronaldo!!1!" You can have high CA/PA players who are rubbish and low CA/PA players who are fantastic. The system is basically just the way the game models and limits the potential of infinite development under the hood, and sometimes looking at isn't the best way to go (hence the PA system arguments that went on around here before the forums went down). My greatest ever player had a CA of 182 (in FM08) at his peak and a PA of 187, whilst I had several players of over 190 CA in that version. Don't fall in the CA/PA trap. But no, that kid you've posted could make a good player.

So that hopefully clears things up a little, I will definitely compare Makengo in a few years time and compare results.

Isn't this for cheats?

Isn't this for cheats?

Yes.

(I didn't buy any of the players I observed the results for fwiw, this thread closely ties in with this thread)