CA and it's use for footedness

So, CA's use in footedness completely distorts a player's profile. For example:

Both of these players are very similar with regards to CA, the only difference is each player's comfort with using their feet.

So, how to fix this?

Separate Footedness CA and attribute CA. Adding a separate CA count of 40 points for footedness would allow great players to look similar whilst still having the advantage of being able to use both feet.

It would also allow us to more accurately judge how good a player actually is by looking at their profiles, because currently it's impossible to tell due to how much they are distorted.

Also worth pointing out that Tunnicliffe isn't even a full "either", he's got a decent preference to Right footedness, so this situation could be even more skewed than it already is.

I don't need to mention that I'm in total agreement of the problem.

I am however, undecided on the resolution.

So, CA's use in footedness completely distorts a player's profile. For example:

No problem here, it does distort the way a profile looks.

Both of these players are very similar with regards to CA, the only difference is each player's comfort with using their feet.

So, how to fix this?

Separate Footedness CA and attribute CA. Adding a separate CA count of 40 points for footedness would allow great players to look similar whilst still having the advantage of being able to use both feet.

It would also allow us to more accurately judge how good a player actually is by looking at their profiles, because currently it's impossible to tell due to how much they are distorted.

I think we all agree that a player being two footed is better than a player of equal skill being single footed so its correct that their "footedness" does take up CA points.

Part of the problem of displaying it better is that it is more important for different areas of the pitch. A GK or a DC who is single footed is usually only marginally worse but for a striker it has a much larger impact. Would allocating the same amount of CA points to "footedness" be fair for all positions? If not then how would you cope with players learning new positions?

In theory your idea would fit neatly alongside suggestions in the past of splitting CA/PA between technical, mental & physical attributes but I'm not convinced this would work well in practice.

Footedness and finishing for example -

Two players who are equally good at finishing should have the same rating - so let's say both have finishing 15.

Player A can only finish with his right foot, Player B can use both.

Is player A worse at finishing? In-game he will be.

Using other attributes as an example - technique is important for finishing. Player A has 15 technique, Player B has 10. If we apply the same rules as footedness, Player B's finishing attribute should now be higher than Player A's.

The game is currently using one rule for attributes and a different rule for footedness. It shouldn't be happening like this.

No problem here, it does distort the way a profile looks.

I think we all agree that a player being two footed is better than a player of equal skill being single footed so its correct that their "footedness" does take up CA points.

Part of the problem of displaying it better is that it is more important for different areas of the pitch. A GK or a DC who is single footed is usually only marginally worse but for a striker it has a much larger impact. Would allocating the same amount of CA points to "footedness" be fair for all positions? If not then how would you cope with players learning new positions?

In theory your idea would fit neatly alongside suggestions in the past of splitting CA/PA between technical, mental & physical attributes but I'm not convinced this would work well in practice.

The problem I have with FM is that it doesn't distinguish between what can be learnt and what is natural. Being ambidextrous is often a natural occurence. Should something that a player has naturally as a child, be used to determine his overall stats? Imho, no, it should not. Being ambidextrous does not make you a better/more effective player. What it does, depending on your position, gives you more options. most top players are average at best with their 'weaker' foot.

All attributes modify each other - the difference is that profile attributes are invisible modifiers whereas footedness is a visible modifier.

It should be up to the match engine to do the modifying, we shouldn't see a visible result.

It doesn't do any visible modifying though. The only way the attributes are modified like this is if you create a player in the editor whose attributes are out of whack with his CA and the game rebalances the attributes when you start a game, which is a completely different thing. For the two screens show above, the exact same thing would happen with any other attribute - if you had two players similar CA players, one with pace 1 and one with pace 20, the rest of their attributes would look the same as above.

It doesn't do any visible modifying though. The only way the attributes are modified like this is if you create a player in the editor whose attributes are out of whack with his CA and the game rebalances the attributes when you start a game, which is a completely different thing. For the two screens show above, the exact same thing would happen with any other attribute - if you had two players similar CA players, one with pace 1 and one with pace 20, the rest of their attributes would look the same as above.

But that doesn't look wrong.

Acketr's point stands, but the thing is dual footdeness is far too dominant in ME and if player like Simons would have at lest decent left foot he would be literally unstoppable.

The only reason it doesn't look wrong is because the pace attribute is listed with all the other attributes, whereas the footedness is hidden off to the side. So unless you want a Weak Foot Ability attribute adding, I don't see what can be done to make it look 'right'.

I disagree - even if they were listed as part of the attributes, it'd still look wrong because of how severe the effect of two-footedness is.

But if two-footedness is as dominant in the match engine as Fabio says it is, then it has to be this heavily weighted in terms of CA, otherwise you'd have players over-performing compared to their CA, which would break any number of areas of the game (scouting, player development, transfers, AI squad-building etc). If the match engine effects of two-footedness can be reduced, then the CA weighting can be reduced as well, but how would you do that? I guess you'd probably have to make two footed players still really favour their 'stronger' foot making two-footedness less useful to a player, or change the research guidelines and regen code so that the majority of players are given no more than say 15 for their weaker foot, making genuinely two-footed players a real rarity.

But if two-footedness is as dominant in the match engine as Fabio says it is, then it has to be this heavily weighted in terms of CA, otherwise you'd have players over-performing compared to their CA, which would break any number of areas of the game (scouting, player development, transfers, AI squad-building etc).

And that's a match engine workaround for a proper issue.

The issue still needs to be fixed imo.

It's absolutely not a match engine work around - it's a fundamental way that the game is designed to work. A player with CA 160 should play like a player with CA 160 in the match engine, a player with CA 100 should play like a player with CA 100 and so on. If that doesn't hold true, then the whole of the game is destroyed. And if a player with two good feet is a lot better than a player with only 1 good foot, then he needs to have a much higher CA because he will play much better in the match engine.

See, I disagree -

A player should play like his attributes.

CA should only ever be used as a way to keep those attributes in check.

If a player plays better than his attributes, that's a match engine problem.

Researchers shouldn't have to think about how they play in the match engine, they should only have to worry about giving a player attributes that match him.

But weaker footedness IS an attribute, and CA IS being used to keep it in check. How tightly it regulates it needs to be directly related to how important that attribute is to a player in the match engine, and that's what is happening, because being two-footed is very useful to a player at the moment.

As it should be - but the severity of its effect on other attributes is far too large.

I can't see how anyone can argue that if you look at the two players in the first post.

If a player plays better than his attributes, that's a match engine problem.

Researchers shouldn't have to think about how they play in the match engine, they should only have to worry about giving a player attributes that match him.

You can't just separate the two things like that. There aren't attributes in real life - you can't say with absolute truth that Rooney is 18 finishing, Tevez is 20 work rate and so on. You have to have to decide on the definitions of those attributes and the scale of those attributes (in other words the research guidelines). And that has to be done in terms of the match engine, because it's the match engine that is reproducing the players footballing abilities - there's no point the researchers giving players X attributes if the match engine is working on a different scale and set of definitions and the players end up playing like Y attributes.

SO change the match engine to bring it more in-line with real life

Which is what I said 10 posts ago You can't change the CA weightings without changing the match engine or research guidelines to match, otherwise we'll end up with the same situation as in CM0304, where players like Orri Freyr Oskarrson (if I've got that name right?) were massively overperforming because the match engine favoured physical attributes, but the CA weightings didn't match. If we just reduce the CA weighting for two-footedness, we'll potentially have the situation where some average Joe Bloggs premier league player wth CA 160 plays like the best player in the world becuase he's got two good feet. The issue is either how to reduce the effectiveness of two footed players in the match engine, or are researchers overrating how many genuinely two-footed players there are?

Ah so you do agree it looks wrong and are just trying to find a way to make it happen?

That makes this easier

Which is what I said 10 posts ago You can't change the CA weightings without changing the match engine or research guidelines to match, otherwise we'll end up with the same situation as in CM0304, where players like Orri Freyr Oskarrson (if I've got that name right?) were massively overperforming because the match engine favoured physical attributes, but the CA weightings didn't match. If we just reduce the CA weighting for two-footedness, we'll potentially have the situation where some average Joe Bloggs premier league player wth CA 160 plays like the best player in the world becuase he's got two good feet. The issue is either how to reduce the effectiveness of two footed players in the match engine, or are researchers overrating how many genuinely two-footed players there are?

I think there is definately a problem with the researching of two-footed players. Irl there is very few players that have a strong weak foot. Most players have average at best.

I dont really see how you can compare those two players, the one with all the 20's must be edited, he is miles better than messi is rated in the game, and he has an almost top level for PA.

I dont really see how you can compare those two players, the one with all the 20's must be edited, he is miles better than messi is rated in the game, and he has an almost top level for PA.

Even if he has been edited - the game will rearrange his attributes until they fall in line with his CA.

As both are top-tier players, they shouldn't look so extremely different.

I think there is definately a problem with the researching of two-footed players. Irl there is very few players that have a strong weak foot. Most players have average at best.

It isn't a problem with the researchers as the problem remains when the game is full of generated players.

Even if he has been edited - the game will rearrange his attributes until they fall in line with his CA.

As both are top-tier players, they shouldn't look so extremely different.

They will if one is a "real" player if you will, and one is an edited player, of course the attributes will be skewed, a good example would be to make two identical players in every attribute except footedness, and then show the results.

I do get your point to be honest, but as others have said unless there is a complete re-design of how the ME uses the attributes it could very much upset the balance that SI is still struggling to achieve. Any player who is two footed would instantly have a HUGE advantage in the current ME.

The only way that this could be done in a way that reflects the CA AND the two-footedness would be to have an attributes value for each foot. (Hmm.. now there's a concept...)

It stands to reason that a player who has a weaker left foot than right is going to have less control, less power and less technique with his weaker foot when compared to his stronger one but there is no way in the game to reflect that...

They will if one is a "real" player if you will, and one is an edited player, of course the attributes will be skewed, a good example would be to make two identical players in every attribute except footedness, and then show the results.

I do get your point to be honest, but as others have said unless there is a complete re-design of how the ME uses the attributes it could very much upset the balance that SI is still struggling to achieve. Any player who is two footed would instantly have a HUGE advantage in the current ME.

I'm testing it with Tunnicliffe now - I've reduced his left foot from 10 to 1.

He's already been boosted by 9 attribute points after only a week. Once he's rebalanced I'll post another picture of him.

but do you know the CA/PA of that crazy regen with all the 20's?

I don't yet - but his CA is going to be a maximum of 200 which isn't too far off Tunnicliffe's.

Ah so you do agree it looks wrong and are just trying to find a way to make it happen?

That makes this easier

Yes and no

Basically there are two key questions:

1) How closely does the currently researched set of players match real life players in terms of two-footedness - my gut feeling (as Menion also says) is that there are too many genuinely two-footed players in the game at the moment - players are being rated as two-footed whereas in real life they may be good with both feet, but tend to only use their 'stronger' foot. In which case we either need to decide that these players should be rated as say 20/17 in terms of strong foot/weak foot not 20/20, or we have something like a PPM that says favours right foot or favours left foot, so we can have competent two-footed players that are less effective in the match engine, plus real two-footers as well.

2) How important is being two-footed in real life, and does the current match engine replicate that correctly for all degrees of two-footedness. And if the match engine is overrating two-footedness, we need to know why. You can't just 'make two-footedness less effective', you need to find specific situations where the player is gaining an advantage and reduce the advantage somehow. Having the favours left/right PPMs could possibly sort this, as you'd get two footed players players using the 'wrong' foot more often (i.e. if a two footed player has a shooting chance that falls naturally on his left foot, but he has a favours right foot PPM, he'd be more likely to use the wrong foot, reducing the effectiveness of his two-footedness).

Figure out the answers to those two questions, and you'll either be forced to come to the conclusion that the game is right at the moment, or you'll know how to address it properly. But what ever happens, the key thing is that the CA weightings, the match engine and the research guidelines all match up as closely as possible.

As I said, my gut feeling is that there are too many two-footed players in the game at the moment. If these are all reduced slightly and the regen code is amended to match, then you'll get far fewer players looking like the screenshot above. Then we can probably tweak the CA weightings as well.

But isnt the player in question an example of a player who CAN use his weaker foot if needed, but will mainly use his good foot, he only has a rating of 10 on his left foot so i wouldnt have classed him as being either footed.

Ok, he's rebalanced - 10 footedness points = 39 attribute points!

It would be interesting to hear what Riz has to say on the subject, he is usually good for these debates regarding attribute points and CA/PA.

I'd like to hear the reasoning for the footedness weightings, might PM and ask him to add his tuppance.

Ok, he's rebalanced - 10 footedness points = 39 attribute points!

Which attributes though? They are all weighted differently according to his position.

Can you do something similar with Pace and Finishing, which should also be weighted highly for a striker. I bet you'd find 10 Finishing points equals a lot of other attribute points aswell.

And here he is - completely right-footed Tunnicliffe.

Imagine what he'd look like if I directed his training as well...

He's still not as good as the other player, quite a distance off actually.

He's still not as good as the other player, quite a distance off actually.

But he's a much better finisher (20 compared to 14), so it's all swings and roundabouts.

Quite a bit of that will be his position-weighting - he's considerably better where it counts.

The question is - is he a better player now that he has 9 points less in his left foot?

Will he be more effective in the match engine because of it?

Why don't we just add a 'Weak Foot' attribute rating alongside the player? I understand they already have one but we may as well make it visible so that everyone can see.

Additionally, what if CA had absolutely no impact towards weaker foot at all and it was just there as a rating? Say if two players had a CA of 160, they could both have finishing of 17 for example. However, Player A has 20 weak foot rating and Player B has a 1 weak foot rating. When on their preferred side, their shots are equally powered - however when Player B is on his weaker side his shot is extremely poor and maybe struck with a 'finishing attribute of 3' or something.

Would this work? Someone to point out some flaws in it. I can't really see a problem.

The question is - is he a better player now that he has 9 points less in his left foot?

Will he be more effective in the match engine because of it?

Just bear in mind that tactics, his team mates and everything else in match, can affect this - if the majority of his chances are falling on his right foot he'll play better with left foot 1, if the chances are falling equally on both feet he'll play better with left foot 10.

But he's a much better finisher (20 compared to 14), so it's all swings and roundabouts.

yeah but still that simmons is a country mile ahead of him even with his footedness rating reduced. Finishing aside he is better at everything else sometimes by a very very long way. I highly doubt you would notice the difference in finishing from the two players in the ME.

I know, don't worry.

If anything, his performance for the rest of this season should be hampered as both of my assist kings have picked up long term injuries.

I'll post back his tally at the end of the season so we can compare.

yeah but still that simmons is a country mile ahead of him even with his footedness rating reduced. Finishing aside he is better at everything else sometimes by a very very long way. I highly doubt you would notice the difference in finishing from the two players in the ME.

Simmons is the better player, Tunnicliffe is the better striker.

It all depends on their roles in the team, but I'd pick Tunnicliffe ahead of Simmons (or ideally, have Simmons supplying him )

Incidentally, he's scored 9 goals in his last two games

Simmons is the better player, Tunnicliffe is the better striker.

It all depends on their roles in the team, but I'd pick Tunnicliffe ahead of Simmons (or ideally, have Simmons supplying him )

hahaha only because you know Tunnicliffe is a star for you, if you had the choice between signing one of them, based purely on the stats who would you choose?

Those two combined would be deadly!!! I'd have your guy as my poacher and the other as my complete forward, or deep lying forward, it would be beautiful!!

I'd still choose Tunnicliffe as the striker, he;s a lot better where it counts.

yeah but still that simmons is a country mile ahead of him even with his footedness rating reduced. Finishing aside he is better at everything else sometimes by a very very long way. I highly doubt you would notice the difference in finishing from the two players in the ME.

Yeah, but he's a country mile ahead in things like marking, tackling and long throws. You're far more likely to notice a 6 point different in finishing in a striker, than a big difference in marking. Tunnicliffe is a lot quicker as well (pace/accell of 20/19 compared to 17/15).