Potential Ability

[whilewolf]

He's playing well on a consistent, long-term basis - i.e. opponents are trying to adapt to him but he keeps delivering the goods.

In other words, he is slowly wading through a list of ever-increasingly-difficult obstacles,

So now not only does the way players develop need to be rewritten in a way that's going to need to be very finely balanced to stop virtuous and vicious circles occurring but the AI tactics are going to need to get much better at adapting to specific players to make it work. That's a lot of work to get underrated youngsters to perform above researchers estimates in some games.

[tylerazevedo]

Are you serious? How old are you?

does it matter? are you inherently smarter/more right than someone based on age?

1) Accusing anyone who doesn't agree with your position of being a cheater is ignorant

I WASN'T ACCUSING. If you were offended, that's your problem.

2) Your were obviously trolling

So anyone who tries to comment on a thread is trolling if they start posting halfway through the thread?

Truth hurts but luckily for us its in the thread. Next time don't make such absurd accusations and you won't get called out.

Am I talking to Barry Bonds??? Why does the word "cheater" provoke such hostility from you? I wasn't making an accusation to anyone. And in fact I said that my position was that I thought we should scrap the PA system, thus calling myself a cheater. Are you too dumb to realize that? (that is an accusation, see the difference?)

[Guest]

I think we can officially call this a train wreck.

[tylerazevedo]

Star ratings Tyler. You do not need anything but scouts and coaches and the ability to look at attributes and report cards. Take youth intake for example, you get 15 players and at a glance your coach tells you they all have a 1* PA. Thats means none will ever make an impact even as a back-up player and even worse than that most will probably never even secure a professional full time contract. That is because we, and the Ai, can accurately write them off at a glance. Why couldn't they all have 1/2* CA and the "ability to improve further due to young age"(that could be the extent of the scouts/coaches imput on PA) and then it will take the length of the youth contract to gauge whether this player is improving enough to become worth a professional.

These players still have the same PA ( 1*) as before and will not get contracts so the only thing that has changed is how easy is has been to come to the conclusion they are not good enough. But you had to keep them and check their development so you don't unwittingly release a future star. With star rating PA being as accurate as I believe it to be currently most users would never release a future star as they would have a star rating similar or higher than a first teamers CA rating at creation.

I don't check actual PA's for players and if I did I probably would not be asking for star ratings to be removed as it would be contradictory.

I hope you now understand me.

I do now, and I agree. It's just hard to tell the difference when people use CA interchangeably with star ratings. I assumed when you said PA, you meant...PA. Which you did, but the difference is you meant the star rating not the actual PA rating.

I do recall someone getting on to someone for using the words attribute and rating interchangeably. It's the same thing, but this time I really don't care.

[obinna]

That's a very valid yet entirely different subject, how would the AI transfer & player development record be any better under a flexible PA system?

The reason why I suggested a more flexible PA system is so that users are less accurate in pinpointing how good a player will pan out. As it stands, I just hire good scouts, look at a the difference between a player's CA and PA and buy. Way too easy.

Now I think about it, another solution would be to make scouting reports less accurate. Based on my experiences, scouts are usually within .5 stars of a players potential. Perhaps it should 1 star? I really don't have a concrete solution but I do think the system can be tweaked.

[tylerazevedo]

I think we can officially call this a train wreck.

It's actually kinda funny.

[marty78]

EDIT: I should mention, I think the PA system should be scrapped. But every time I come up with a better system or read an idea of how it should work, I take a step back and realize that the game already works that way if you don't look at a players PA.

I think we actually agree, at least to some extent. What I want is to hide that PA in game even if it is more loosely represented using simple star ratings. I want to leave the system as it is (unless of course a better method can be found) and just take PA star ratings out. CA star ratings should remain as they are and we should judge a players potential on the things we know. CA, personality, age, performance and training improvement. With scouting and new players/youth intake I would also like to see attributes displayed as a range rather than an absolute until further knowledge has been gained over time.

[obinna]

does it matter? are you inherently smarter/more right than someone based on age?

I WASN'T ACCUSING. If you were offended, that's your problem.

So anyone who tries to comment on a thread is trolling if they start posting halfway through the thread?

Am I talking to Barry Bonds??? Why does the word "cheater" provoke such hostility from you? I wasn't making an accusation to anyone. And in fact I said that my position was that I thought we should scrap the PA system, thus calling myself a cheater. Are you too dumb to realize that? (that is an accusation, see the difference?)

I wasn't offended. I just thought your post was ignorant and still do.

Your insinuation was clear. It's nice to see you backtracking though.

[tylerazevedo]

I think we actually agree, at least to some extent. What I want is to hide that PA in game even if it is more loosely represented using simple star ratings. I want to leave the system as it is (unless of course a better method can be found) and just take PA star ratings out. CA star ratings should remain as they are and we should judge a players potential on the things we know. CA, personality, age, performance and training improvement. With scouting and new players/youth intake I would also like to see attributes displayed as a range rather than an absolute unitl further knowledge has been gained over time.

What you are talking about is FIFA 12 manager mode. From my understanding of your post, that's almost exactly how it behaves. Not that that's bad. I love how the youth academy works in FIFA 12 more so than FM.

However, in real life young players are judged on a potential. If you remove potential from the game, then what's the need for scouts at all? You can figure out how good a player is based on their attributes, match ratings, etc. But how can you judge his potential?

[tylerazevedo]

I wasn't offended. I just thought your post was ignorant and still do.

Your insinuation was clear. It's nice to see you backtracking though.

Not sure how I can backtrack when I haven't changed my opinion. In fact in my original post i didn't even state my opinion, you just made the assumption that I didn't think the PA system should be scrapped since I threw the word "cheat" out there for those who think it should be and then started labeling me a troll and ignorant.

Edit: And isn't it ignorant to make an assumption about me and my position without knowing my position?

[Guest]

However, in real life young players are judged on a potential. If you remove potential from the game, then what's the need for scouts at all? You can figure out how good a player is based on their attributes, match ratings, etc. But how can you judge his potential?

That's part of the problem, in most situations you should not be able to judge potential.

You can take a best guess based on current ability, recent progression & past experience but the actual potential should be an unknown, what appears to be an issue is the accuracy of scouting & on that point I do agree.

I cannot agree with the idea of a flexible PA because it is far too open to abuse through glitches & focused training once the rules of the system are unlocked.

Edit: Almost forgot, stop with the petty bickering.

[TheBetterHalf]

That's part of the problem, in most situations you should not be able to judge potential.

You can take a best guess based on current ability, recent progression & past experience but the actual potential should be an unknown, what appears to be an issue is the accuracy of scouting & on that point I do agree.

I cannot agree with the idea of a flexible PA because it is far too open to abuse through glitches & focused training once the rules of the system are unlocked.

Edit: Almost forgot, stop with the petty bickering.

Totally agre with this. I think The scouts should provide information about his progress and current standard along with à description Of his character. By using this info, make à recommendation about how good he is now, and how good he would be if he continued to grove as à player, but more in the lines Of roles. Like stating that he " already at the age Of 18, he looks like à good choice as à starting Poacher/attacking wingback etc for our club/ à club in the league one. With some guidance, I see no reason why he could not make it at the top level in the future, having got some more experience".

[tylerazevedo]

That's part of the problem, in most situations you should not be able to judge potential.

Agreed for under 14. But in this game it only generates 15 and up (or 14 and up, I can't remember). Either way, by that time most scouts start making serious predictions of talent.

You can take a best guess based on current ability, recent progression & past experience but the actual potential should be an unknown, what appears to be an issue is the accuracy of scouting & on that point I do agree.

Absolutely right. The only change I would make to this game would be the accuracy of player's star potential under the age of 18.

I cannot agree with the idea of a flexible PA because it is far too open to abuse through glitches & focused training once the rules of the system are unlocked.

aaaaaagreed

Edit: Almost forgot, stop with the petty bickering.

I'd love to, but for some reason he won't let me have the last word, and I'm an internet troll so I'm trying to live up to expectations. /sarcasm

[marty78]

What you are talking about is FIFA 12 manager mode. From my understanding of your post, that's almost exactly how it behaves. Not that that's bad. I love how the youth academy works in FIFA 12 more so than FM.

However, in real life young players are judged on a potential. If you remove potential from the game, then what's the need for scouts at all? You can figure out how good a player is based on their attributes, match ratings, etc. But how can you judge his potential?

How can you judge potential though that is the question? Players potential are estimated by scouts/researchers IRL by their performances(CA) combined with what they can find out about the players strengths, weaknesses and personality. They only believe a player has a lot of potential if they are performing to a high standard.

[Guest]

Totally agre with this. I think The scouts should provide information about his progress and current standard along with à description Of his character. By using this info, make à recommendation about how good he is now, and how good he would be if he continued to grove as à player, but more in the lines Of roles. Like stating that he " already at the age Of 18, he looks like à good choice as à starting Poacher/attacking wingback etc for our club/ à club in the league one. With some guidance, I see no reason why he could not make it at the top level in the future, having got some more experience".

The key aspect would be removing the scouts ability to see the actual PA value while still allowing them to make a best guess at what they think it could be, might be an interesting train of thought to follow & in particular how this would affect the AI in its transfer decision making process.

Agreed for under 14. But in this game it only generates 15 and up (or 14 and up, I can't remember). Either way, by that time most scouts start making serious predictions of talent.

You've just stumbled across another aspect of the game I do not like, we [senior team manger] get to see & influence a player at too young an age, newgens being visible at 14/15 is IMHO too young & we certainly should not be able to ask our 26 year star striker to mentor some 14 years kid.

The game should generate them at 14/15 but they should not be hitting the final stage youth team until they are 16/17, before then they should be developed solely by the youth coach(es), if you want to ensure that they get the best training possible then you need to ensure you have the right man running your youth system.

[achilles-the-victorious]

If I pay a scout $1m a year, and I send him specifically to watch a kid (for whatever length of time) then I am going to put some stock into what that scout says. to have it any other way makes it a waste to pay the scout $1m a year. Or to have scouts, or to send scouts to watch kids, when you could just look at his stats and attributes, and decide!

Its really not a bad system. If you aren't happy with the PA of your team, you can always use an editor. If you think the AI teams don't have high enough PA you can always use an editor. I don't see why the game mechanics are what should be changed.

[tylerazevedo]

How can you judge potential though that is the question? Players potential are estimated by scouts/researchers IRL by their performances(CA) combined with what they can find out about the players strengths, weaknesses and personality. They only believe a player has a lot of potential if they are performing to a high standard.

Since FIFA has an overall attribute (which should be dropped IMO anyway) the youth are given an overall range that they could reach. Once they are promoted from the youth squad, you can't even see the potential (which is kinda annoying). All you can see is their current ability. From then whenever they stop progressing you can assume they have reached their potential. That is eerily similar to how FM works, except for the youth academy part. I like FM's progression system much better than FIFA, but in regards to youth academies, its not even close as FIFA wins hands down IMO.

In real life, would any high quality youth academy accept a player they didn't believe had the potential to be a first teamer one day? Whether or not they reach the first team remains to be seen, but why would they pay for a player they know they have no use for? That's the only flaw in FM, which is why I like FIFA's scouting and youth academy implementation.

[TheBetterHalf]

The key aspect would be removing the scouts ability to see the actual PA value while still allowing them to make a best guess at what they think it could be, might be an interesting train of thought to follow & in particular how this would affect the AI in its transfer decision making process.

Exactly. Along with à more dynamic way Of how the players develop( making it possible for more factors to play its part), one would also see late bloomers.

[Guest]

If I pay a scout $1m a year, and I send him specifically to watch a kid (for whatever length of time) then I am going to put some stock into what that scout says. to have it any other way makes it a waste to pay the scout $1m a year. Or to have scouts, or to send scouts to watch kids, when you could just look at his stats and attributes, and decide!

Real life scouts make mistakes, FM scouts generally do not, this is what needs to change.

[marty78]

Since FIFA has an overall attribute (which should be dropped IMO anyway) the youth are given an overall range that they could reach. Once they are promoted from the youth squad, you can't even see the potential (which is kinda annoying). All you can see is their current ability. From then whenever they stop progressing you can assume they have reached their potential. That is eerily similar to how FM works, except for the youth academy part. I like FM's progression system much better than FIFA, but in regards to youth academies, its not even close as FIFA wins hands down IMO.

In real life, would any high quality youth academy accept a player they didn't believe had the potential to be a first teamer one day? Whether or not they reach the first team remains to be seen, but why would they pay for a player they know they have no use for? That's the only flaw in FM, which is why I like FIFA's scouting and youth academy implementation.

I have played Fifa manager mode but not enough to form an opinion. It is completely different anyway as you can control players making a conference striker top scorer in the premier league if you are good enough. I do remember though that they have ranged attributes for players which I like but even if it is ranged the overall PA is a numerical figure meaning you have an exact value that player will never go beyond. I don't care that there is a figure but I don't wanna know that in any game. Give me some suspense and some nice surprises and disappointing duds.

[tylerazevedo]

The key aspect would be removing the scouts ability to see the actual PA value while still allowing them to make a best guess at what they think it could be, might be an interesting train of thought to follow & in particular how this would affect the AI in its transfer decision making process.

Isn't he goal of scouts is to give us some idea of how good a player will be with all the factors taken into account (PA, CA, Professionalism, etc). So I don't think removing their ability to see the actual PA would work. Rather, youth shouldn't even be given an actual PA at all (rather a -10 or something) until some arbitrary set of circumstances are reached (first team football, youth academy training, current CA, etc). If you think about it, if your youth squad intake consisted of a bunch of -9 & -10 players, you would be pretty excited until 90% of them generated PA's on the low side of the range. Which brings me to another point, the negative PA range would need to be expanded...in other words, a -10 could be from 150 to 200 or something.

You've just stumbled across another aspect of the game I do not like, we [senior team manger] get to see & influence a player at too young an age, newgens being visible at 14/15 is IMHO too young & we certainly should not be able to ask our 26 year star striker to mentor some 14 years kid.

Completely agree with the mentor stuff.

The game should generate them at 14/15 but they should not be hitting the final stage youth team until they are 16/17, before then they should be developed solely by the youth coach(es), if you want to ensure that they get the best training possible then you need to ensure you have the right man running your youth system.

But the problem with that is when you have people like Fabregas who are playing first team football at age 16. Would you rather the game hide these kids and then all of a sudden they are playing first team football for a team like Arsenal? He was picked up from the Barcelona youth squad. To mimic that in the game, you have to be able to see players at the age of 14/15 and be able to purchase them.

[tylerazevedo]

I have played Fifa manager mode but not enough to form an opinion. It is completely different anyway as you can control players making a conference striker top scorer in the premier league if you are good enough. I do remember though that they have ranged attributes for players which I like but even if it is ranged the overall PA is a numerical figure meaning you have an exact value that player will never go beyond. I don't care that there is a figure but I don't wanna know that in any game. Give me some suspense and some nice surprises and disappointing duds.

Agree that the FIFA system can be worked to the players advantage if the person playing the game is good enough. However, I do think showing us a numerical range for a player is actually a good idea as long as it's done correctly (which FIFA does pretty well for the youth academy).

The reason a numerical range can work is because it mimics the real life terms that real scouts use when judging potential: floor and ceiling.

Say FM adopts some hybrid of this model, then we would see that all of our youth intake has a range of 2-5 stars with some having a higher floor (3*) and some having a lower ceiling (4*). As they play (and CA increases), their floor and ceilings converge on what their actual potential is. Add the ability for scouts to be wrong, and you can have a guy with a floor of 3* and a ceiling of 5* while their actual star rating should be a 2.

However, that's just a different representation of the exact same engine that we are using today. The current CA/PA model would work just fine in this case (unless you cheat and use a 3rd party app to look at their actual numerical PA).

[Guest]

But the problem with that is when you have people like Fabregas who are playing first team football at age 16. Would you rather the game hide these kids and then all of a sudden they are playing first team football for a team like Arsenal? He was picked up from the Barcelona youth squad. To mimic that in the game, you have to be able to see players at the age of 14/15 and be able to purchase them.

I probably wasn't all that clear on the last point you quoted, a 14/15 year old is still generated & is visible put as the senior team manager you have no control over his development or contractual status at the club, that will be the responsibility of the bloke you employed to look after your youth system & to an extent will reduce some of the advantage we have over AI managers.

[marty78]

But the problem with that is when you have people like Fabregas who are playing first team football at age 16. Would you rather the game hide these kids and then all of a sudden they are playing first team football for a team like Arsenal? He was picked up from the Barcelona youth squad. To mimic that in the game, you have to be able to see players at the age of 14/15 and be able to purchase them.

Arsenal probably (I don't have Wenger's phone number so can't check) would of signed Fabregas because he had a high CA for his age and perhaps they found out he was a hard worker, very professional and loved football. That is all the information they can gather and how he would develop from then on was completely unknown. If his high potential was that easy to see at the time then Barcelona would have moved Heaven and Earth to keep him and if he had still gone they would of sued Arsenal for a high compensation fee.

[tylerazevedo]

I probably wasn't all that clear on the last point you quoted, a 14/15 year old is still generated & is visible put as the senior team manager you have no control over his development or contractual status at the club, that will be the responsibility of the bloke you employed to look after your youth system & to an extent will reduce some of the advantage we have over AI managers.

Ahh I did misunderstand. However, to do what I think you're talking about, the only thing that would need to happen would be to hide the training schedules for youth players all together. Would that be preferable? I'd rather be able to properly train a player so that he isn't messed up when I finally get him in the first team. But then again, that's just my opinion.

[tylerazevedo]

Arsenal probably (I don't have Wenger's phone number so can't check) would of signed Fabregas because he had a high CA for his age and perhaps they found out he was a hard worker, very professional and loved football. That is all the information they can gather and how he would develop from then on was completely unknown. If his high potential was that easy to see at the time then Barcelona would have moved Heaven and Earth to keep him and if he had still gone they would of sued Arsenal for a high compensation fee.

But since Messi and Fabregas were in the academy at the same time, why would they pick up Fab over Messi? Maybe Arsenal's scouts thought that Fabregas had a higher ceiling than Messi (jury is still out on that, but it's looking painfully obvious that Messi will end up the better player as both seem to be finished progressing, but ya never know)

[Guest]

Ahh I did misunderstand. However, to do what I think you're talking about, the only thing that would need to happen would be to hide the training schedules for youth players all together. Would that be preferable? I'd rather be able to properly train a player so that he isn't messed up when I finally get him in the first team. But then again, that's just my opinion.

That's pretty much how I'd like to see youth development changed, as things stand we have a huge advantage over the AI & this would be a small step in redressing the balance.

I'd be surprised if there are any managers who are as actively involved in youth coaching as we are currently allowed to be, the idea certainly needs more thought to cater for those you like to have some input on youth development.

But since Messi and Fabregas were in the academy at the same time, why would they pick up Fab over Messi? Maybe Arsenal's scouts thought that Fabregas had a higher ceiling than Messi (jury is still out on that, but it's looking painfully obvious that Messi will end up the better player as both seem to be finished progressing, but ya never know)

Work permit issues & probably Messi's uncertain physical growth.

[tylerazevedo]

That's pretty much how I'd like to see youth development changed, as things stand we have a huge advantage over the AI & this would be a small step in redressing the balance.

I'd be surprised if there are any managers who are as actively involved in youth coaching as we are currently allowed to be, the idea certainly needs more thought to cater for those you like to have some input on youth development.

That's an excellent point. It would actually be cool if you could start out as a youth coach as well and only control the progression of the youth squad.

Work permit issues & probably Messi's uncertain physical growth.

True, I didn't think of the work permit issues. But by the time he moved to Barcelona they had already decided to cover the medical costs for his physical growth.

Which makes me wonder, maybe the star ratings for youth should be based more on how quickly they progress rather than what their actual final potential could be. It'd be like seeing a 14 year old kid who's pretty good, and then in 6 months he's completely dominating his field. Just throwin out ideas though.

[marty78]

But since Messi and Fabregas were in the academy at the same time, why would they pick up Fab over Messi? Maybe Arsenal's scouts thought that Fabregas had a higher ceiling than Messi (jury is still out on that, but it's looking painfully obvious that Messi will end up the better player as both seem to be finished progressing, but ya never know)

Why wouldn't a club like Barcelona keep both? They have a great acadamy, plenty of money and a history of blooding their own talent. It seems more likely they misjudged his potential and his transfer back there for a massive fee, and that he claims he always loved the club and was desperate to play for them seems to back that up. Messi is out on his own as the player of his generation and arguably the best ever though IMO.

I'm not against your ranged PA star rating idea either a long as it is very vague, open to error and combined with ranged attributes (narrowing to accurate as player knowledge improves). I wouldn't want any star ratings at all if attributes are visible like they are now.

[tylerazevedo]

Why wouldn't a club like Barcelona keep both? They have a great acadamy, plenty of money and a history of blooding their own talent. It seems more likely they misjudged his potential and his transfer back there for a massive fee, and that he claims he always loved the club and was desperate to play for them seems to back that up. Messi is out on his own as the player of his generation and arguably the best ever though IMO.

Actually the fee wasn't massive considering how good Fabregas was at the time and how long he had left on his contract. Fabregas actually kinda screwed Arsenal out of money by refusing to go to another club. Not that he was trying to screw Arsenal in anyway, it's just Barcelona could get him for 35 mil rather than the 60 mil a player of his caliber could reap in the transfer market at the time.

I'm not against your ranged PA star rating idea either a long as it is very vague, open to error and combined with ranged attributes (narrowing to accurate as player knowledge improves). I wouldn't want any star ratings at all if attributes are visible like they are now.

Oh it's completely vague if you look at how FIFA shows you. By the time the player in the youth academy is ready to be moved to the first team, his actual overall ratings are like 60-70 and his potential is like 82-85. Of course the ranges differ where you have some guys who have a 50-55 overall CA and a 78-86 PA. If you think about those two players, who would end up the better player? Possibly the 78-86 guy, but he could also be much worse. And sometimes you get a pretty close range, like 84-86 potential, but thats rare.

I just think their idea for determining potential is extremely well thought out.

Edit: and when you first sign a prospect to your youth academy, you hardly even know what position he plays, you usually get a few different possible positions and then a player type, IE Technically Gifted, Physical, Defensive Minded, etc. It's just brilliant and is the best representation of assessing potential in a video game to date IMO.

[marty78]

£35m is quite big compared to the £0 they got for Fabregas. They basically loaned Arsenal a world class player for 8 years and gave them £35m for the privelage. i know what you mean though he could have perhaps fetched more. I'm gonna have a look at Fifa tomorrow and jog my memory. Its been a while.

[tylerazevedo]

£35m is quite big compared to the £0 they got for Fabregas. They basically loaned Arsenal a world class player for 8 years and gave them £35m for the privelage. i know what you mean though he could have perhaps fetched more. I'm gonna have a look at Fifa tomorrow and jog my memory. Its been a while.

It's pretty well done, but the scouting is limited to 3 at a time (which is lame IMO). If FM could just incorporate some of the youth squad ideas from FIFA 12 into the game, it would make FM darn near perfect IMO.

[Harper]

EHM, before it was an SI product, had a feature that at the end of the season occasionally re-evaluated a player's potential and increased or decreased it accordingly. Perhaps something similar could be reflected in FM?

Obviously should happen with every player, but a combination of things could be taken into consideration: transferring to a club with better training and/or coaches, increased quality of competition, effective tutoring, quality of appearances at u18/reserve/first team/national team level.

Injuries, lack of game time, etc could decrease PA.

[bleventozturk]

The players actual potential does not increase though just the researchers view has changed from judging CA.

X42bn6 can't understand this, therefore it is hopeless to convince him that his idea of increasing the PA's as a result of good performance is probably the worst idea ever I've heard in these forums.

[MSCCG]

Why not take researcher opinion out of it and create an algorithm that assigns semi-random PA levels to all real players at the beginning of the game? Match performance should impact CA, not PA. By definition, PA cannot change.

[hursty2]

How about PA levels, each player has the potential to become the best player in the world but the chances vary from player to player.

For example, let's take a young player that is so promising that in real life they are potentially world class; Neymar, only 19 but you could see when he was younger that he had the potential to be a star.

[font=courier new]NEYMAR, Santos, Brazil.
PA Levels        Percentage Chance of Reaching Level (%)

  10                             100

  20                             100

  30                             100

  40                             100

  50                             100

  60                             100

  70                             100

  80                             100

  90                             100

  100                            100

  110                            100

  120                            100

  130                            100

  140                            100

  150                             97

  160                             88

  170                             85

  180                             60

  190                             58

  200                             40[/font]

Now this shows that he is guaranteed to become a good player, or that he has already reached this PA and this is his current ability. It also shows that he still has a very good chance of becoming one of the best players in the world but it is not guaranteed at all but with the correct training and game time there is a good chance that he will. This can all be worked out inside the game with complex algorithms and these percentages can increase and decrease as the game progresses. Let's say he moves to a team with the best youth facilities and coaches with a manager that has 18+ for working with youngsters his chance of becoming a better player increases. The percentage chance of reaching PA level 200 increase by 5% maybe even 10%, meaning that he has a 50/50 chance of becoming the best player in the world. However let's say that he breaks his leg and remains in Brazil these percentages go down and he still has this chance of being the best but the percentage is slashed.

I'm calling it Dynamic Potential Ability.

Now let's looks at a player that no one thinks will become a world beater but who knows? Nick Powell, who has just won the league 2 young player of the year award.

[font=courier new]Powell, Crewe Alexandra, England.
PA Levels        Percentage Chance of Reaching Level (%)

  10                             100

  20                             100

  30                             100

  40                             100

  50                             100

  60                             100

  70                             100

  80                              95

  90                              91

  100                             87

  110                             75

  120                             69

  130                             52

  140                             48

  150                             30

  160                             23

  170                             16

  180                             12

  190                             6

  200                             2[/font]

He clearly is not as good as Neymar but he has shown glimpses of becoming at least a very good player. However the chances of this are low but like with Neymar if some team, with all the attributes that will help him develop into a much better player, comes in for him his percentage of being a good player are greatly increased. That's not to say that even with good training and coaching that he will be a good player but the chance for him to be that 140+ PA player have massively improved.

I hope this is within what people are looking for.

[marty78]

The problem I see with your idea is that all players should not be able to reach 200PA even if those chances are only 1% for most. Also with a flexible PA system with % chances such as that Neymars example shows too high a percentage for top PA. I think all players should have a ceiling set and a league two player such as Powell should never be able to reach the PA of Neymar due to the fact that Neymar is already identified as a wonderkid.

If % are going to be used then I think Neymar should look more like this:

Starting CA - 150

Potential PA - 150 = 100%

160 = 80%

170 = 60%

180 = 40%

190 = 20%

200 = 0%

The only way he is going to each 190+ is if he moves to a high rep European team in a high rep league with superb facilities and has almost perfect progression with no injuries or sustained poor form.

Edit - actually after thinking about it I don't like this idea because how would you decide which players got what % chances of increasing? At what stage does a percentage scale get decided on for individual players as all players would need their own scale? It sounds too complicated a change for too little reward and also there could be potential problems compared to the current system which, by and large, actually works.

Why not just give slightly higher PA's in general but make it less likely for that potential to be realised? Couple that with hiding star ratings and then, without looking at an editor, you won't know whether you have a world class or a championship player until he hits his maximum CA and "finds his level". This way the current mechanics do not have to change just the representation of those hidden numbers to the user.

[TOUGHGUY]

For a long time I have thought a dynamic PA should be somehow implemented - but I realized that it would ultimately lead to the same thing we have now, i.e. a certain limit, basically what PA is now. Only calculated differently. The only difference would be that some players (high professionalism etc.) at some clubs (with top staff and facilities) would get a high PA (in current terms). Sure it would be a nice addition but ultimately nothing that revolutionary or huge.

Not content with the system in place now either, however, I think the whole CA-PA-form dynamic being much more, err, dynamic, would be the solution.

There should be much more fluctuation in stats, players should reach their total peak much slower and/or undergo several transitions and iterations of their stat distribution as opposed to what we have now, where they 'get good at 23 and never get any better'. Perhaps above all, form should be something much more 'tangible' for a lack of a better word. It should have some sort of actual impact on player's ability, on how the game rates him and more importantly how you rate him. Players are bought based on form in real life, in FM, you will only look at the attributes you see on a player's profile.

You know what I mean. 'That guy scored 30 in 30 last season but I'm Chelsea and he has 13 composure and finishing, makes no sense for me to buy him.' If the game somehow acknowledged his form and presented this to you in a manner you could work with, it would be great.

I don't really have an idea as to the 'how', maybe something like 'This guy actually has 13 finishing/composure but his form over the past three months has improved because he works hard in training and yadda yadda so he's more like 16/16 but pushing above his weight and this won't last forever or whatever,' I'm just thinking aloud here.

Or something. I don't know. Make the cold numbers intertwined with the malleable form much more, have CA/PA/form provide a much more interesting challenge than just buying the highest numbers.

[r0x0r]

If a player is hitting 8.50 ratings, upping his PA/CA will only increase his ratings, thus forcing his CA/PA up, in an unending cycle.

If a player is performing as well as Messi and has 150CA, who cares? He's performing as well as Messi. He doesn't need to be a 180CA player with better stats. Otherwise he'd outperform Messi.

As long as you don't use external tools, the current PA system works okay for real players (with the caveat that people misjudge, but there's no good solution here) and perfectly for regens.

The system even already accounts for things like a Mansfield player moving to Man U automatically becoming better because who he's surrounded by / coached by. Once a player hits his PA, he can still improve as a player if he learns better PPMs, picks up a new position, or just via the "training points" aspect of stats. Two players with equal CA/PA could have 14's all round and 15's all round based on who is at the better club with better facilities. Buy mr.14 and train him alongside mr.15 and he'll also become a mr.15.

[marty78]

As long as you don't use external tools, the current PA system works okay for real players (with the caveat that people misjudge, but there's no good solution here) and perfectly for regens.

Already been discussed. External tools are not required to gauge a players approximate potential via star ratings. While there may be some innaccuracies within these, they are still too accurate and along with being able to see accurate attributes (other than hidden atts) it is pretty easy to see whether a player will reach that potential. The current system does work well on the whole and what some, myself included, have suggested is removing the potential star rating from all coach and scout reports. This would mean having to gauge a younger players potential from nothing but there current star rating and attributes, their personalities and there current development.

My issue is more to do with scouting and coaching reports and the accuracy of them with regards potential. The CA star accuracies are fine since it is much easier to judge a players current ability simply by watching but potential is something that is an educated guess at best and and a wild speculation at worst. I would be happy for the current system to remain unchanged if just the way that the information is displayed to the user was tweaked.

No potential star ratings? People wouldn't be so quick to discard their own youth intake the second they can if they didn't have a good idea immediately they were not good enough.

I would also like to see "fog of war" taken one step further alongside this. Instead of getting a report card and being able view all a players attributes it should take many matches of scouting a player to reveal accurate attributes. So when you first start scouting a player it would show attributes in ranges. For example they have passing

13-18 and after scouting for a number of matches scouted they show passing as 14-15. If a player was scouted for a long time the final figure could end up being revealed as passing 15. Of course if you want that player before others show an interest you can take a chance without viewing attributes accurately but thats presents more risks for failed transfers and rightfully so.

I would also like to see the youth players (under 18's) have the same ranged attributes that slowly reveal themselves over the course of their youth contract and along with no PA stars I would actually have to think about what players deserve a contract. At the moment I get my intake, view the squad page and offer one or two contracts, if I am lucky, and allow the rest to leave.

[x42bn6]

So now not only does the way players develop need to be rewritten in a way that's going to need to be very finely balanced to stop virtuous and vicious circles occurring but the AI tactics are going to need to get much better at adapting to specific players to make it work. That's a lot of work to get underrated youngsters to perform above researchers estimates in some games.

Ooh, poor SI, too much work!

I don't think it matters how much work it is. You're not doing it.

A game that fixes both these issues sounds awesome, don't you agree?

X42bn6 can't understand this, therefore it is hopeless to convince him that his idea of increasing the PA's as a result of good performance is probably the worst idea ever I've heard in these forums.

Oh, I do understand. The researcher's opinion has changed, therefore it was wrong to begin with. Which isn't surprising, given there is a degree of uncertainty about the figure in the first place - both optimistic and pessimistic uncertainty. Sadly, the game only models optimistic uncertainty.

The problem I see with your idea is that all players should not be able to reach 200PA even if those chances are only 1% for most.

Isn't that true, though? There exists a probability for everyone to reach Messi's level - it is just that for 99.9% of the population, you are probably more likely to win the lottery.

At no point does the probability hit zero (except when the person dies).

Also with a flexible PA system with % chances such as that Neymars example shows too high a percentage for top PA. I think all players should have a ceiling set and a league two player such as Powell should never be able to reach the PA of Neymar due to the fact that Neymar is already identified as a wonderkid.

If % are going to be used then I think Neymar should look more like this:

Starting CA - 150

Potential PA - 150 = 100%

160 = 80%

170 = 60%

180 = 40%

190 = 20%

200 = 0%

How would you decide where the 0% is

The only way he is going to each 190+ is if he moves to a high rep European team in a high rep league with superb facilities and has almost perfect progression with no injuries or sustained poor form.

Edit - actually after thinking about it I don't like this idea because how would you decide which players got what % chances of increasing? At what stage does a percentage scale get decided on for individual players as all players would need their own scale? It sounds too complicated a change for too little reward and also there could be potential problems compared to the current system which, by and large, actually works.

Modelling and testing.

Why not just give slightly higher PA's in general but make it less likely for that potential to be realised?

Because you can never every rule out a player hitting CA 200. At no point does it hit probability zero. Although it can certainly be a very small number.

Couple that with hiding star ratings and then, without looking at an editor, you won't know whether you have a world class or a championship player until he hits his maximum CA and "finds his level". This way the current mechanics do not have to change just the representation of those hidden numbers to the user.

A player doesn't "find their level" when they hit a point where some random third party thinks they will peak. A player "finds their level" when they can no longer progress any further. A researcher just guesses where that will be. But we do not have to make that a solid guess.

If a player is hitting 8.50 ratings, upping his PA/CA will only increase his ratings, thus forcing his CA/PA up, in an unending cycle.

Not true. A player that plays really well becomes more tightly-marked/heavily-closed down/etc. This results in players' ratings usually dropping after a while. Look at second-season syndrome - the opposition now sees the overachieving team as a threat and starts to play more tight and controlled. One-trick ponies or one-season wonders will struggle. True class, however, shines through - players who can still consistently perform should still develop

If a player is performing as well as Messi and has 150CA, who cares? He's performing as well as Messi. He doesn't need to be a 180CA player with better stats. Otherwise he'd outperform Messi.

You should care because the implication is that this player isn't learning.

As the player's reputation increases, the scrutiny increases by the opposition, and if he is still consistently making them look stupid, then he has adapted to a more difficult situation - therefore he is learning.

As long as you don't use external tools, the current PA system works okay for real players (with the caveat that people misjudge, but there's no good solution here) and perfectly for regens.

Nope. The difficulty bug was partly solved using an external tool. Things can be wrong under the hood. You don't get to sweep things under the carpet.

The system even already accounts for things like a Mansfield player moving to Man U automatically becoming better because who he's surrounded by / coached by. Once a player hits his PA, he can still improve as a player if he learns better PPMs, picks up a new position, or just via the "training points" aspect of stats. Two players with equal CA/PA could have 14's all round and 15's all round based on who is at the better club with better facilities. Buy mr.14 and train him alongside mr.15 and he'll also become a mr.15.

Yes, but this player won't develop as well as a player who actually has "spare CA". A player who is 120/120 will only develop with red arrows compensating for green arrows, while a 120/140 player will develop with more green arrows and fewer (if any) red arrows, regardless of performances. If these two players were playing and training exactly the same, why should the latter develop better than the former? Because the researcher thought he would? Why should the researcher's opinion override what is happening in your virtual world, where the virtual world could be very, very different to the real world?

[Guest]

Isn't that true, though? There exists a probability for everyone to reach Messi's level - it is just that for 99.9% of the population, you are probably more likely to win the lottery.

I showed some promise as a footballer in my youth but there was not a single set of circumstances in existence that could have aligned in a way that I would ever have reached the ability of Messi.

You're talking utter nonsense & it's to such an extent that I truly question your knowledge of elite sport & more specifically football.

[milnerpoint]

Ah the old "everyone has the potential to be as good as messi" line. To be honest, that alone sums up why that particular suggestion is terrible, if that is in mind when devising this system then it will fail. I showed no promise as a kid, none at all, there isnt anything in the world that could have been done to make me a player of that caliber, anyone who says different knows very little about football.

[achilles-the-victorious]

All I can think is imagine the exploits if PA wasn't fixed.

"You should care because the implication is that this player isn't learning."

A player's job is to perform, not learn. Once they perform at a high level it is usually near impossible to continue to make big strides in all-round development. At some point you have to spend LESS time doing physical work so that you can spend MORE time, for e.g. analysing your own game, and your upcoming opponent. So the player doesn't stop learning, really, what happens is they have to start prioritizing their development, sacrificing one sort of training for another.

Re: scouting accuracy, I already related my (FM11) story of a player who I signed that was rated as having 2.5 stars potential by my scouts. Then my coaches rated his potential as 2.5 stars for years, even when he became a regular member of the starting XI and was banging in just under a goal a game (as a hard-working, physical goal poacher) and an assist (from corners) every 3 games. Well, he is now 26 and he is undeniably world class, IMO, but the game still rates him as a $13m player, while I consider him probably a $30 or $40m player. He is FINALLY rated 3 stars by my staff, but even then, the level he performs at is as good as any 3.5 star poacher I have ever had. So whats the problem? The scouts were wrong, the player overachieved, and I had to go on developing him based on my gut for YEARS.

[tylerazevedo]

I showed some promise as a footballer in my youth but there was not a single set of circumstances in existence that could have aligned in a way that I would ever have reached the ability of Messi.

You're talking utter nonsense & it's to such an extent that I truly question your knowledge of elite sport & more specifically football.

Honestly I agree that not everyone has the potential to reach Messi level. However, I do think that more people do than most of us realize...say some arbitrary 60% of young professional footballers (young = U17). The case with that 60% is that 99.9% of them will not reach it due to different circumstances. Now that doesn't mean that I think 60% of youth prospects in the game should be -10 potential. However, the number of -10 potential guys is quite limited. My suggestion would be to increase the range for -10,-9,etc by 10 or so on each end and then bump most prospects up a level or two. It would create more prospects that have great potential, but still the math would produce roughly the same amount of actual super stars.

Again, those numbers are random that I just threw out.

[obinna]

For a long time I have thought a dynamic PA should be somehow implemented - but I realized that it would ultimately lead to the same thing we have now, i.e. a certain limit, basically what PA is now. Only calculated differently. The only difference would be that some players (high professionalism etc.) at some clubs (with top staff and facilities) would get a high PA (in current terms). Sure it would be a nice addition but ultimately nothing that revolutionary or huge.

Not content with the system in place now either, however, I think the whole CA-PA-form dynamic being much more, err, dynamic, would be the solution.

There should be much more fluctuation in stats, players should reach their total peak much slower and/or undergo several transitions and iterations of their stat distribution as opposed to what we have now, where they 'get good at 23 and never get any better'. Perhaps above all, form should be something much more 'tangible' for a lack of a better word. It should have some sort of actual impact on player's ability, on how the game rates him and more importantly how you rate him. Players are bought based on form in real life, in FM, you will only look at the attributes you see on a player's profile.

You know what I mean. 'That guy scored 30 in 30 last season but I'm Chelsea and he has 13 composure and finishing, makes no sense for me to buy him.' If the game somehow acknowledged his form and presented this to you in a manner you could work with, it would be great.

I don't really have an idea as to the 'how', maybe something like 'This guy actually has 13 finishing/composure but his form over the past three months has improved because he works hard in training and yadda yadda so he's more like 16/16 but pushing above his weight and this won't last forever or whatever,' I'm just thinking aloud here.

Or something. I don't know. Make the cold numbers intertwined with the malleable form much more, have CA/PA/form provide a much more interesting challenge than just buying the highest numbers.

Good post and the bolded is completely true. This is what happens in real life. Look at how much the ratings of players fluctuate from different versions of FM. Player development isn't so linear and rigid in real life so why should it be so in game world?

But then again, according to tylerazevedo, we only see these issues b/c we cheat. lol

[Guest]

This isn't what happens irl, people need to separate changes in research opinion from in-game player progression/regression & the vagaries of form which IMHO FM simulates quite well.

[obinna]

IRL and in every FM version a players attributes (or the perception of them) changes continuously based on his form. For people to argue that this shouldn't be true in the game world is absurd. In FM, Demba Ba 2 years ago wouldn't have a chance of being the players they are today.

[whilewolf]

Good post and the bolded is completely true. This is what happens in real life. Look at how much the ratings of players fluctuate from different versions of FM. Player development isn't so linear and rigid in real life so why should it be so in game world?

But then again, according to tylerazevedo, we only see these issues b/c we cheat. lol

For a long time I have thought a dynamic PA should be somehow implemented - but I realized that it would ultimately lead to the same thing we have now, i.e. a certain limit, basically what PA is now. Only calculated differently. The only difference would be that some players (high professionalism etc.) at some clubs (with top staff and facilities) would get a high PA (in current terms). Sure it would be a nice addition but ultimately nothing that revolutionary or huge.

Not content with the system in place now either, however, I think the whole CA-PA-form dynamic being much more, err, dynamic, would be the solution.

There should be much more fluctuation in stats, players should reach their total peak much slower and/or undergo several transitions and iterations of their stat distribution as opposed to what we have now, where they 'get good at 23 and never get any better'. Perhaps above all, form should be something much more 'tangible' for a lack of a better word. It should have some sort of actual impact on player's ability, on how the game rates him and more importantly how you rate him. Players are bought based on form in real life, in FM, you will only look at the attributes you see on a player's profile.

You know what I mean. 'That guy scored 30 in 30 last season but I'm Chelsea and he has 13 composure and finishing, makes no sense for me to buy him.' If the game somehow acknowledged his form and presented this to you in a manner you could work with, it would be great.

I don't really have an idea as to the 'how', maybe something like 'This guy actually has 13 finishing/composure but his form over the past three months has improved because he works hard in training and yadda yadda so he's more like 16/16 but pushing above his weight and this won't last forever or whatever,' I'm just thinking aloud here.

Or something. I don't know. Make the cold numbers intertwined with the malleable form much more, have CA/PA/form provide a much more interesting challenge than just buying the highest numbers.

Sounds to me that you two don't really want a dynamic PA but player attributes that are generated by what the player does in matches you observe. Players real attributes would be hidden from gamers the way CA is now, instead we would see a player profile that reflects the players recent observed performances. For example if you scouted a guy for one match and he missed two open goals you would see a Finishing attribute of 3 if you managed him and say that he scored one chance in two all season you would see he had a finishing attribute of eighteen.

That would certainly make scouting more interesting and long term scouting more important but It would add a hell of a lot of extra processing to keep separate observed player profiles for every AI entity that looks at a player.

[marty78]

Isn't that true, though? There exists a probability for everyone to reach Messi's level - it is just that for 99.9% of the population, you are probably more likely to win the lottery.

At no point does the probability hit zero (except when the person dies).

If the probability ends when he dies then it starts when he is born. After being born that player has 15/16 years before entering the game where their development will be different from anyone else and therefore, by the time we get them, they have already lost some of their initial potential. This means that at the stage of entering the game it is impossible already for them to be the best player of all time(200). Of course a player can still develop but physically the way the player has grown as a child will already be set and also a persons intelligence is pretty much set by then also. Of course they can still learn things but if your stupid at 16 you will be at 26.