Are you happy with the current CA/PA system?

[RiverReveal666]

I posted this in another thread but think maybe it was a bit off-topic for what the OP was talking about, so instead of derailing it I'll set up a thread.

I would love to see a more dynamic CA/PA in FM. At the moment the current system of player having high PA, decent mental stats, or player just having low PA that has no chance of improving is just too basic and doesnt reflect real life. No one can predict where players will be in 5 years time in real life, sure there a few who are bankers but lets take James Vardy, where was he in FM 2012 for example? In how many peoples saves from FM 2012 did he become an England international in 2015?

By the same token I think the training of young players with a high PA in game is just much to easy. Its easy to find them, easy to train them, easy to mentor them and easy for them to reach their high PA. I want players with more dynamic stats, that they can come back to pre-season and had a drop off in ambition or determination or even just because I took over the club in the summer and we dont get on. I usually play as Man Utd, thats just my preference, but its always been easy in nearly every FM and the reason is how good and static the players mental stats were. Evra, Vidic, Ferdinand ect were a dream to manage when I took over as an unproven manager. In real life look at how dynamic there mentalities were when Moyes took over, a manager with an established reputation.

Personally I would love a dynamic career save where it wasnt always the same players doing well in the next 5 years based on the last data update everytime I start a new save. The data update should start with the snapshot of real world now and then get ready to change, just like real life will, just like the future data updates will.

How would you like to see the CA/PA change? Or are you happy with it and waiting for the data updates to reflect changes?

[hluraven]

CA/PA has served the franchise well, but I agree with you on all points. When you look at games like OOTP, they have so much more replayability and it feels so much more realistic in terms of player development, precisely because they have changeable potentials. OOTP isn't quite perfect, but it is massively better than FM.

All you have to do is compare any FM with the previous FM to see thousands of PAs changed from one db to the next. This cannot happen in-game, so each play through is very similar and very predictable.

[samdiatmh]

but is FM the type of game where replayability is a thing?

surely the whole point of it is to just go, bounding off into the future with no end goal

as a researcher, you should know what players look like they'll make it, and the others that looked like they've missed the boat (or lack certain skills to proceed to the next tier)

you kind of know that the likes of Barkley/Shaw are going to make it (they've made it in the FM world around 3-4 seasons ago)

and then you always get the unforeseen bolter types (Luca Toni, Vardy, Diego Costa [in FM11]) that come from obscurity

and then you get the likes of Cairney/Spence (2 from FM08-10 that I remember specifically) that haven't realised their potential due to not breaking through

it's always the bolters that this gets bought back to, but they're rated by people that (in the UK) watch most training sessions and tend to follow them religiously

I think we're limited with the CA/PA system, unless SI decide to completely rewrite it (more dynamic CA, harder to develop youngsters, more vague with the actual value [scout reports are doing this pretty well])

[Matshit]

I do think the randomness is what is lacking. I remember a older game where I ended up selling a b-team player from a Norwegian team to Liverpool for 20 million. He had a 0 CA and a 0 PA, so he ended up being randomly one of my best players after a few years. I would like to see more examples like that.

Players that turn out good in my game, but never again in any other game. One way would be to just boost the PA of some random players at the creation of the game. It might be a 32 year old Conference player who gets a 190 PA, that you never will notice in the game, or it is some random youth player at Manchester United who becomes the best player in the world even though he has a 80PA in the database.

Plus a much bigger possibility of big CA increases at an older age. So Di Natale can suddenly turn into a superstriker at 32, even if he never had that quality before. And when I am at it, a bigger chance of a player starting to decrease in CA at an earlier age even without injuries. So a player with a bad personality can become one of the best players in the world, but the lack of professionalism makes sure he stop trying to keep himself on top. Like basically every Brazilian attacking player known to man.

[mack4ever]

I think it needs to be changed but I am not smart enough, and don't know enough about how the games mechanics work, to suggest any actual changes that I think need to be made.

All I can say is that I would love to see a system in place that gives more scope for late bloomers. Players like Chris Smalling, Jamie Vardy and Charlie Austin, and those who have had an OK career but who really spark into life in their late 20s/early 30s.

Right now the game is far too predictable in that area. By about the age of 20 a player is either good enough to be a top player or they're not and if they're not then there is nothing you can do about it. You won't ever find a player at 20/21/22 who is playing for a non-league club but who could be a top player with the right training, and that's something I would love to see change.

[forameuss]

I do think the randomness is what is lacking. I remember a older game where I ended up selling a b-team player from a Norwegian team to Liverpool for 20 million. He had a 0 CA and a 0 PA, so he ended up being randomly one of my best players after a few years. I would like to see more examples like that.

Players that turn out good in my game, but never again in any other game. One way would be to just boost the PA of some random players at the creation of the game. It might be a 32 year old Conference player who gets a 190 PA, that you never will notice in the game, or it is some random youth player at Manchester United who becomes the best player in the world even though he has a 80PA in the database.

Plus a much bigger possibility of big CA increases at an older age. So Di Natale can suddenly turn into a superstriker at 32, even if he never had that quality before. And when I am at it, a bigger chance of a player starting to decrease in CA at an earlier age even without injuries. So a player with a bad personality can become one of the best players in the world, but the lack of professionalism makes sure he stop trying to keep himself on top. Like basically every Brazilian attacking player known to man.

While I can see that point, I could also see people screaming blue murder if a player - say Martial - ended up with a PA of 50 because of randomness, and ended up at a terrible club.

Having CA/PA the way it is is necessary IMO, with the way the system is written. It doesn't have to be written that way, of course, but it would require a major rewrite to change that. Also, PA was never supposed to be something so public. It might be that the solution is to purge all mentions of it from the official editors, and try and defensively code so that it's impossible to view from anything third party.

[gunner86]

There's nothing wrong with PA and how that works, as has been discussed many times it's an important tool for how the game works and is an absolute necessity.

CA is a different matter.

In my opinion the way that CA develops what makes youth development so much easier than it should be, and this is where the changes need to be made. Right now its almost like you can game the system with tutoring and using training plans and game time.

There needs to be more variety in the way players respond to certain things, and more obstacles to stop them from reaching their PA.

[Matshit]

Martial would never end up with a PA of 50 from my setup. Not unless he has a lower PA in the regular game. Boosting something will never make it lower than it is from the start.

He should however perhaps end up with a CA of 50 at his peak age in a very rare game if his attitude is too bad, he is unlucky with injuries, he ends up at clubs with no playing time and so on. That would not be due to randomness however.

Oh, and one more thing. Your scout should have NO ability to read the PA of the player. His PA-rating for a player should only be based on CA+age+other factors like injury proneness, determination and professionalism. If a 16 year old has 140CA and 141PA the scout should see him the same way as a player with 140CA and 200PA.

[Nocuous]

I feel like it should be more dynamic. The way FM does it is just a bit too restrictive. Look at someone like Jamie Vardy. He once had a PA of about 40 in FM10, and while it would have been completely unreasonable to expect the bloke making the judgements for Stocksbridge Park to know that he'd be a good Premier League player in the future as he hadn't shown that level of potential then, there should be something in the game that allows for latent ability to be uncovered, even if it is done from a bit of a random spot. I get that particularly as it relates to real players, those at SI take pride in making sure players are judged correctly and the future stars in the game will mirror reality as closely as can be predicted, but just personally I'd like to see a bit of variation where players can emerge from nowhere as that same thing happens in real life, and even if the names aren't the same, I'd like to see it possible in FM for a players to emerge from the semi-pro ranks in their mid 20s to reach the higher reaches of the game.

[Neil Brock]

People get CA confused with how players perform in FM. Someone like Jamie Vardy for example, nothing was stopping anyone from picking him when he had an awful CA and he could well have gotten a decent average rating and scored goals if used in the right way. A high CA doesn't guarantee a player will perform in a match.

It's not always about picking the out and out 'best' players you have, it's about picking players who suit the system and perform in the match engine. I've had players with insanely high CA's who don't have the right balance or attributes, so just aren't as suitable as a player with a lower CA with strong attributes in specific areas.

[HUNT3R]

The issue comes up often and has been discussed to death. CA is fine. PA is fine. The development could do with a revamp. It is too easy for us to develop players.

[DamianJMcGrath]

There is an argument to be made that everyone's potential is 200 and no one ever reaches it but as they improve through the seasons, their CA improves. Gareth Bale for example was once ridiculed as a player that cost Tottenham games. People may have thought he was good but his potential was probably only ever "good premier league player". Then he kicked on, and started to produce consistent world class performances and people realised his potential was huge.

Speaking to French journalists, they thought Martial had a ceiling in terms of how good he could become. After a few games at United, people are reviewing that impression and are now starting to think he might have potential above what they thought.

Admittedly, a player like Peter Crouch, at any stage of his career, will probably not have a 200 potential. But the point I'm making is that fixing potential to a number doesn't work as players might surprisingly surpass that. Setting everyone's PA high, 190-200 ish, means that everyone has the ability to grow past where people originally thought.

[Cougar2010]

The issue comes up often and has been discussed to death. CA is fine. PA is fine. The development could do with a revamp. It is too easy for us to develop players.

This but I'm all for a bit of random.

I've said it before but an option at the start of a save to give every player a random PA over & above their current CA in the database would be welcome to add some variation. Its something that PCM has included for several years now and works really well.

[Guest]

I think it needs to be changed but I am not smart enough, and don't know enough about how the games mechanics work, to suggest any actual changes that I think need to be made.

All I can say is that I would love to see a system in place that gives more scope for late bloomers. Players like Chris Smalling, Jamie Vardy and Charlie Austin, and those who have had an OK career but who really spark into life in their late 20s/early 30s..

If put that on the researchers & data team for not seeing the potential the players must have shown glimpse of when plying their trade in non-league football.

[Matshit]

Someone like Jamie Vardy for example, nothing was stopping anyone from picking him when he had an awful CA and he could well have gotten a decent average rating and scored goals if used in the right way.

Granted, although way more limited than it is in real life. I think the other problem here is how easily it is to see a players stats, so if Vardy has amazing stats for a Conference player, but is used wrongly everyone will still see that he has great stats. So if he had a 20 for finishing, but never had a single shot, you would still know he had a 20 for finishing. There is most likely no way any player in the game below at least League One level (at least over 20 years old), from the start or 20 years into the future, will ever turn into a England player. The fact that you COULD make him play decent, does not equate that the AI will ever decide to sign him on a higher level if he has a 40 CA. Not in a million years.

And no, CA/PA is not the total picture of a players quality, but that is like saying BMI is not the total picture of how fat a person is. It is technically true, but for the most part it gives at least a somewhat decent picture. A player with 180 CA is more likely to be good than one with 170. That doesn’t mean he will be, but the bigger the gap the bigger the likelihood.

Also, I would imagine the AI uses CA somewhat when selecting players. At least without full detail. But you probably know that better than me.

If put that on the researchers & data team for not seeing the potential the players must have shown glimpse of when plying their trade on non-league football.

If a researcher at level 7-8 gave a 23 year old a PA to reach the English national team, I would suspect some alarm bells would go off. And no human being could be able to predict it.

[HUNT3R]

This but I'm all for a bit of random.

I've said it before but an option at the start of a save to give every player a random PA over & above their current CA in the database would be welcome to add some variation. Its something that PCM has included for several years now and works really well.

Still not much point to it. You'll still be able to identify the better players and have no problem turning them into superstars.

To take the earlier example, there would never be a Gareth Bale situation (apart from the fact that he was played as a left back) because he'd just develop with no issues.

Edit: Forgot the other point I wanted to add, this CA/PA issue won't affect regens at all, where a development revamp will affect real players and regens.

[Cougar2010]

And no, CA/PA is not the total picture of a players quality, but that is like saying BMI is not the total picture of how fat a person is. It is technically true, but for the most part it gives at least a somewhat decent picture. A player with 180 CA is more likely to be good than one with 170. That doesn’t mean he will be, but the bigger the gap the bigger the likelihood.

Although it sounds like it should be in theory it isn't actually true.

Its where users go wrong in simply looking at the CA/PA or the stars in game rather than seeing the bigger picture.

[Matshit]

Of course it is true. CA is used to decide how many points are available to distribute, and some stats take more CA than others.

Now, you can easily design a player with a weaker CA to be great by min-maxing a bit. (For example a lightning fast striker who is unable to jump or head).

And you can create a player with high CA where a lot of the points are wasted (20 jumping with 1 heading and strength for example), but with more CA you have more to work with. If you only have information about CA and has to choose between 180 and 150 you will always choose 180. That does not mean the 150 CAN’T be better, but that he most likely won’t. I am pretty sure that at every point in the game a list of highest average CA in the game would be pretty close to the way the league would end up.

Having said that, I feel the game should have more of the sort of bizarre CA-distribution. The super strong League two defender who fight his ass of in every duel, and is a nightmare to meet, but is slow as a turtle. Or the striker who is 20/20-fast, but so technically weak that he only plays in the Conference League. Or the player with the most amazing technical ability who are way too do anything but pass the ball around the center circle.

[Cougar2010]

I'm afraid it isn't, some of the reasons why it isn't:

A) Poor distribution of attributes resulting in CA points being wasted.

B) Poor use of a player within a tactic, not making best use of the CA points.

C) Poor consistency meaning the player doesn't play to his CA level very often, ie underperforms regularly.

D) Issues with other hidden or mental attributes leading to him not performing to his CA regularly.

Pretty sure I'm missing something else as well but I can't think what it is atm.

[Matshit]

All of those are true. But all of them are just as likely if your player has a 150 CA as with 180.

You shouldn't use CA as your guide, but it is not like the quality of players when compared to CA is totally random.

There is a reason the best clubs has the highest CA-players on average.

[martinji]

The issue comes up often and has been discussed to death. CA is fine. PA is fine. The development could do with a revamp. It is too easy for us to develop players.

completely agree. It's the development towards PA (and the ease with which high PA players can be spotted when young) that most needs fixing, not the CA/PA system itself. If this was changed though, I do then think some randomness might be interesting. Like 1 in 1000 (say) players chosen completely at random in the database when a game is initialised, get their PA boosted to 170+. Some of them would already be too old for this to matter, some would be young and would just then become unexpectedly high potential youngsters, but those in the middle would have a chance of being real late bloomers.

[samdiatmh]

If put that on the researchers & data team for not seeing the potential the players must have shown glimpse of when plying their trade in non-league football.

and for each PA thread, that's essentially what it boils down to

you get players IRL (Smalling, Vardy, Austin, Costa) that show very little before making a big break - and people want this break replicated within FM

claiming that there is no way Smalling had no where near the PA to eventually turn out for (insert Vanarama club here) much less ManUtd

as you said, it's difficult to blame researchers for not seeing it, particularly as (in England, overseas seem less thorough from reading) they're watched in training, and given accurate ratings based on live performances

I'm happy to see those rare players break out, rather than FM to overrate players to see them fail (for every post about Vardy, there could be 10 about the failings of Cairney/Spence/Lascalles/Whoever)

----

and Neil, there's nothing saying that about the human manager (who can exploit the ME) but some people want to see the likes of Vardy move to the likes of AI-controlled Leicester, which wouldn't have ever happened back in those editions

[Nocuous]

A good way of phrasing it is that no player is hurt by an increase in CA. You get situations where a 150 CA player can be better than a 180 CA counterpart, however if you to use an editor to boost that first players CA to 180 with everything else being the same, he would be a superior player for it. CA isn't the be all and end all, but it certainly helps.

[CWR15]

There's nothing wrong with PA and how that works, as has been discussed many times it's an important tool for how the game works and is an absolute necessity.

CA is a different matter.

In my opinion the way that CA develops what makes youth development so much easier than it should be, and this is where the changes need to be made. Right now its almost like you can game the system with tutoring and using training plans and game time.

There needs to be more variety in the way players respond to certain things, and more obstacles to stop them from reaching their PA.

Spot on. I want to see more players with higher potential, but more players frustrating the managers. and not getting close to their potential. One of the killers with long terms games is, as the op states, it is easy to find 5 star youths and turn them in to world beaters. It seems I can pluck a 16 year old newgen from Australia move him half way across the world and it doesn't affect him. I want more homesick players (especially youngsters) I want 18/19/20 year old players with 18 determination to fight tooth and nail to get in the team, but if their professionalism is low once they establish themselves, or get a big money move, the determination falls.

I want to see newgens to be given a perceived PA range of 20 points either side of there actual PA that is a widely accepted 'fact' for example Francis Jeffers it wasn't just Wenger that thought he was the next big thing, lots of people did. I want FM to overlay his PA with a link to his reputation so even the top scouts say he will have a 5 star PA when infact it should be 2 or 3 stars. Similarly, I want players like Gareth bale who has a PA of say 175 but the game hides 20 points of this because he had a shalky start at Spurs. I think distance between PA and this new PA mask I am suggesting should be higher for players with a higher PA.

I am not sure how easily I explained myself. Basically I am suggesting that every player should have a CA and PA as they do now, but with Newgens the game generates a CA a PA and a MaskedPA so you might have

CA 95 PA 150 MPA 130 - This means that many scouts and coaches in the game would perceive that this player can hit 150CA but in fact he is limited to 130 (Francis Jeffers example)

CA 100 PA 175 MPA 140 - This means that the scouts and coaches in the game would think this player can max out at 140CA but he has a higher PA and can infact reach 175 (Gareth Bale example)

[swansongs]

As a researcher, I believe that the game would benefit from having some wider "random" PA ranges available, as the current -5/-6/-7 etc. system is a bit restrictive for the bulk of 16-18 year old players that are still undergoing significant physical developments (which may not end up being significant at all). If I've got a 5'5, 100lb 16 year old in the youth system it's hard to assign him a PA value within a 20 point range when he's still got his fingers crossed for a 6" growth spurt. More random randoms (without resorting to 0s) would be exciting (to me).

I agree that PA should be harder to visualise in-game as well, but it's not like the star ratings we have are particularly accurate. They are influenced by a range of factors, and are just a shorthand approximation. Honestly I'd probably be happier if they didn't exist at all and we had to judge all our development players on their development to date, their age and faith.

[Jimbokav1971]

it's about picking players who suit the system and perform in the match engine.

Well said Neil. I was hoping that someone would have said this before I got to the end of the thread.

From my point of view, I think the system works quite well. I don't usually play multiple saves, and certainly not in the same Nations with similar levels of teams. My game really starts to get going when I start getting half the line-up made up of Newgens. My current FM14 save in (SMR) is in May 2045 and the only other FM14 save I have had was a (GIB) save that is in mid 2030's I think, (probably not going back to that). As a result, whether a lower league Vardy is good in one save and poor in another and excellent in 1 in a 100, doesn't really make any difference to me. All I care about is that 1 save.

I have a very limited knowledge of how things work under the hood, but I understand, (I think), that players with quite low reputations, (as Vardy would have had in his non-league days), have a certain amount of randomness linked to their CA and PA. As a result, there is every possibility that he would have a high PA, (at least very high for a non-league player). I think this is realistic.

From my point of view I have won World Cups with tiny Nations and seen the Top-scorer and Top-player at the World Cup be an old San Marino player on the verge of retirement now plying his trade somewhere in Scandinavia, (no longer able to cut it in the big leagues). He was never listed for the Ballon D'oR or Golden Ball or whatever it is called in the game, yet again and again he simply tore up the rest of the World Cup for no apparent reason, other than that his very limited skills seemed to fit exactly what I needed in that wide position.

Part of me thinks that there has to be a certain amount of randomness about young players playing in the lower leagues and non-league. Of course there has to because nothing is nailed on and injury and mediocrity could be just round the corner.

Look at the N.Irish striker Magennis who scored one of the goals that saw them qualify for the World Cup recently. I first discovered him in FM while he was still a GK. How is the researcher for that level of football meant to anticipate that? They can't. No way can they!

There is a player that I am really interested to see on FM16. He is Matt Stevens and he is a striker on the books of Barnet, (my club), in League 2. He scored 50+ goals for the Youth Team last season and is attracting lots of interest. Swansea have already had a £0.25M bid rejected, (as have Palace), (that's a lot of cash at that level), speaking of which can anyone else remember getting a bid of £0.25M for a player when they were managing in League 2? I certainly never have! He us regularly watched by Man Utd & Man City.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3109333/Swansea-City-250-000-bid-17-year-old-Barnet-striker-Matt-Stevens-rejected.html

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/598173/Manchester-United-Transfer-News-Matt-Stevens-Barnet-Striker-Manchester-City-Transfers

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/swansea-city-transfer-news-barnet-9390568

Now just for a minute forget that I am telling you that this bloke is going to be a star.

What is he doing at Barnet FC? He isn't from Barnet and wasn't there the previous season, so where did he come from? Reading is where he came from.

Well why did he leave Reading? They have a better than decent Youth system and wouldn't they have seen the promise in him? We no, apparently not. They released him surplus to requirements. (For the record he is small, but also for the record he is a small "lump"). He is an ex boxer who won 2x Golden Gloves and remains unbeaten.

So basically, the powers at be at Reading decided that he was never going to be good enough, and less than a season later, 4 Premiership clubs are sniffing around him and offering cold hard cash.

Also for the record, he seems to have an excellent attitude and is not one of those who is going to slip through the cracks. The point I am trying to make is that the guys at Reading, who run a really excellent set-up, have probably made a mistake here. It's really easy to do, (and I'm guessing that they have at least 1 good striker in the same age-group, (and I bet he is bigger than Matty).

Now let's look at the Vardy example. Does he have silky skills, an amazing touch, or does he just work unbeleivably flippin hard with phenomanal physical attributes and a modicum of technical ability? Yes, I think that just about sums him up. He is performing excellently at the moment, (and long may it continue), but even if he scored... let's say 40 goals this season, you were never going to suggest that he was World Class or anything like that.

What I'm trying to say, (not very well), is that just as in real life, there is no such thing as PA or CA. There is however PPA and PCA. Perceived PA and Perceived CA. It's one person's perception that creates the player in the database via the research and it's just my personal perception that this bloke is going to be a star, (but i thought that about Nicky Bailey and Josh Wright and didn't think it about Jason Puncheon and Yannick Bolasie so what do I know!).

In the game it's exactly the same. The CA and PA, (unless you start fiddling with the editor), is actually the PCA and PPA of 1 single member of staff. Whether you agree with it or think they are wrong, often they are not good at judging ability because they look at overall skill and not the very specific attributes that you want to make use of as a player.

Jamie Vardy is a perfect example of this. Play him in a different team or in a different sort of set-up and style and I really think you might dull his threat.

[CWR15]

Well said Neil. I was hoping that someone would have said this before I got to the end of the thread.

From my point of view, I think the system works quite well. I don't usually play multiple saves, and certainly not in the same Nations with similar levels of teams. My game really starts to get going when I start getting half the line-up made up of Newgens. My current FM14 save in (SMR) is in May 2045 and the only other FM14 save I have had was a (GIB) save that is in mid 2030's I think, (probably not going back to that). As a result, whether a lower league Vardy is good in one save and poor in another and excellent in 1 in a 100, doesn't really make any difference to me. All I care about is that 1 save.

I have a very limited knowledge of how things work under the hood, but I understand, (I think), that players with quite low reputations, (as Vardy would have had in his non-league days), have a certain amount of randomness linked to their CA and PA. As a result, there is every possibility that he would have a high PA, (at least very high for a non-league player). I think this is realistic.

From my point of view I have won World Cups with tiny Nations and seen the Top-scorer and Top-player at the World Cup be an old San Marino player on the verge of retirement now plying his trade somewhere in Scandinavia, (no longer able to cut it in the big leagues). He was never listed for the Ballon D'oR or Golden Ball or whatever it is called in the game, yet again and again he simply tore up the rest of the World Cup for no apparent reason, other than that his very limited skills seemed to fit exactly what I needed in that wide position.

Part of me thinks that there has to be a certain amount of randomness about young players playing in the lower leagues and non-league. Of course there has to because nothing is nailed on and injury and mediocrity could be just round the corner.

Look at the N.Irish striker Magennis who scored one of the goals that saw them qualify for the World Cup recently. I first discovered him in FM while he was still a GK. How is the researcher for that level of football meant to anticipate that? They can't. No way can they!

There is a player that I am really interested to see on FM16. He is Matt Stevens and he is a striker on the books of Barnet, (my club), in League 2. He scored 50+ goals for the Youth Team last season and is attracting lots of interest. Swansea have already had a £0.25M bid rejected, (as have Palace), (that's a lot of cash at that level), speaking of which can anyone else remember getting a bid of £0.25M for a player when they were managing in League 2? I certainly never have! He us regularly watched by Man Utd & Man City.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3109333/Swansea-City-250-000-bid-17-year-old-Barnet-striker-Matt-Stevens-rejected.html

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/598173/Manchester-United-Transfer-News-Matt-Stevens-Barnet-Striker-Manchester-City-Transfers

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/swansea-city-transfer-news-barnet-9390568

Now just for a minute forget that I am telling you that this bloke is going to be a star.

What is he doing at Barnet FC? He isn't from Barnet and wasn't there the previous season, so where did he come from? Reading is where he came from.

Well why did he leave Reading? They have a better than decent Youth system and wouldn't they have seen the promise in him? We no, apparently not. They released him surplus to requirements. (For the record he is small, but also for the record he is a small "lump"). He is an ex boxer who won 2x Golden Gloves and remains unbeaten.

So basically, the powers at be at Reading decided that he was never going to be good enough, and less than a season later, 4 Premiership clubs are sniffing around him and offering cold hard cash.

Also for the record, he seems to have an excellent attitude and is not one of those who is going to slip through the cracks. The point I am trying to make is that the guys at Reading, who run a really excellent set-up, have probably made a mistake here. It's really easy to do, (and I'm guessing that they have at least 1 good striker in the same age-group, (and I bet he is bigger than Matty).

Now let's look at the Vardy example. Does he have silky skills, an amazing touch, or does he just work unbeleivably flippin hard with phenomanal physical attributes and a modicum of technical ability? Yes, I think that just about sums him up. He is performing excellently at the moment, (and long may it continue), but even if he scored... let's say 40 goals this season, you were never going to suggest that he was World Class or anything like that.

What I'm trying to say, (not very well), is that just as in real life, there is no such thing as PA or CA. There is however PPA and PCA. Perceived PA and Perceived CA. It's one person's perception that creates the player in the database via the research and it's just my personal perception that this bloke is going to be a star, (but i thought that about Nicky Bailey and Josh Wright and didn't think it about Jason Puncheon and Yannick Bolasie so what do I know!).

In the game it's exactly the same. The CA and PA, (unless you start fiddling with the editor), is actually the PCA and PPA of 1 single member of staff. Whether you agree with it or think they are wrong, often they are not good at judging ability because they look at overall skill and not the very specific attributes that you want to make use of as a player.

Jamie Vardy is a perfect example of this. Play him in a different team or in a different sort of set-up and style and I really think you might dull his threat.

It is so tough for researchers. I do the data for Gillingham and a few years ago we had a diamond of a 16 year old (You may have read this on another thread) I personally saw him play against other academy sides and then reserve matches and he was the best player almost every time. He was linked with Liverpool, United, Chelsea and Spurs to name a few and even a 6 figure sum was mentioned. I had a little debate with my head researcher who advised caution and in the end we met somewhere in the middle. I was convinced this kid would make it and I looked forward to reminding the head researcher. 4 or 5 years later, that player is in non league and is a car salesman. Fortunately the agreement was I would give him good premier league potential, but limit his mental stats which meant, on almost every save for about 3 versions, my coaches would tell me how amazing this player would be, but he always end up in non league. Did I over estimate his abilities early on (I still say no, and blame a lack of professionalism) or did something that no one without a connection to the player or club know about happen?

I think CA and PA is fine, but the distribution of attributes can make or break a player.

[CWR15]

As a researcher, I believe that the game would benefit from having some wider "random" PA ranges available, as the current -5/-6/-7 etc. system is a bit restrictive for the bulk of 16-18 year old players that are still undergoing significant physical developments (which may not end up being significant at all). If I've got a 5'5, 100lb 16 year old in the youth system it's hard to assign him a PA value within a 20 point range when he's still got his fingers crossed for a 6" growth spurt. More random randoms (without resorting to 0s) would be exciting (to me).

I agree that PA should be harder to visualise in-game as well, but it's not like the star ratings we have are particularly accurate. They are influenced by a range of factors, and are just a shorthand approximation. Honestly I'd probably be happier if they didn't exist at all and we had to judge all our development players on their development to date, their age and faith.

I agree, I have asked about the possibility of removing the - system for young players and giving us full control over the PA range. ie RCA 100 CA100 PA 110-145 (we pick the bottom and top of the range) and this should remain for all players but the allowable gap should get smaller as the player ages.

[YKW]

I think that an idea that doesn't get enough discussion would be including some kind of "growth curve" element.

Justification would be that player development, both in terms of easiness and predictability, is perhaps the "real" problem.

Introducing some kind of growth curve would also allow SI to stop scouts being able to see the PA value, and instead they would be able (depending on ability) to "see" the players possible CA at X years into his curve. For example, imagine a player with the following "curve."

Year1:120

Year 2: 124

year 3: 127

year 4: 135

year 5 150

year 6 160

year 7 170

Year 8 Peak 180

Year 9 175

etc

If a good scout can "see" further into the players development curve, then a bad scout may report back on this player with a PA of around 130. A good scout may report it at 160, or maybe even the proper 180.

[Jimbokav1971]

It is so tough for researchers. I do the data for Gillingham and a few years ago we had a diamond of a 16 year old (You may have read this on another thread) I personally saw him play against other academy sides and then reserve matches and he was the best player almost every time. He was linked with Liverpool, United, Chelsea and Spurs to name a few and even a 6 figure sum was mentioned. I had a little debate with my head researcher who advised caution and in the end we met somewhere in the middle. I was convinced this kid would make it and I looked forward to reminding the head researcher. 4 or 5 years later, that player is in non league and is a car salesman. Fortunately the agreement was I would give him good premier league potential, but limit his mental stats which meant, on almost every save for about 3 versions, my coaches would tell me how amazing this player would be, but he always end up in non league. Did I over estimate his abilities early on (I still say no, and blame a lack of professionalism) or did something that no one without a connection to the player or club know about happen?

I think CA and PA is fine, but the distribution of attributes can make or break a player.

Brilliant post.

[macca72]

I do like the idea of the removal of PA for example.

Potential could be determined by CA + Mental Atts (hidden and visible) + Age + Physical Att distribution.

It'd be complicated (very, actually) but it would be fun to see how the FM world would turn out.

EDIT: Form over a period of time could affect this also.

[Matshit]

The thing is, even how much distribution is the most important, CA still play a massive role, and is a very easy way to look at progression. My problem isn't the system of having a CA and a PA in it self, it is the fact that they are to predictable. This will affect how good the player is, and even if distribution is more important, the CA/PA is a way easier way to talk about it.

What I would like to see is the following:

- PA being distributed more randomly. I think the big clubs should have talents with way higher CA and a bigger chance of reaching their PA, but at least some players in the Conference youth teams should have a high Man United might have more players who start out with 100/180, but perhaps a Conference team get a player with 30/180. This player might never get anywhere close to even reaching 100, but with a lot of luck he might end up as a superstar.

- Progression being less linear so that players like Di Natale and Ronaldinho will emerge.

- PA being generally way higher, so that very few players reach their peak at all. Basically every player in the United youth setup should have a theoretical chance of reaching Premier League quality, but perhaps no one will.

The big difference should be in the starting CA, and how good the player develops.

- Scouts should have less ability to see the players PA.

I think all of those things are important, and all of them are just as true if you remove the words CA and PA and talk about how well the player plays in your team. Refusing to talk about CA\PA just because they are just part of the equation is stupid as they influence all the other parts.

[samuelawachie]

The current system is good enough for now.

The randomness you seek is already present when regens are created and replace all the original players. That's enough randomness.

If you make it so that PA can now reach non-finite heights, then super teams will become even more common and will just ruin the game.

Some people need to think a bit more before posting about things they don't fully understand /:

[Kelron]

I don't think randomness is the answer, but is there room for more dynamic player development? Currently a player can fail to reach his apparent potential, but as far as I'm aware can never really surpass it.

I get that it's basically impossible for the researchers to point at a lower league player and say he's suddenly going to turn out to be international level in 5 years, but that kind of possibility has always been a big part of FM in other areas. Players can take semi-professional teams on successive promotions to the premier league, strong clubs and players can suddenly implode. The fact that these things are incredibly unlikely to happen in real life doesn't take away from the simulation nature of the game, because they're based on systems and not just dice rolls. The same could be applied to player potential - the right personality, the right events, the right manager could bring out something no one saw before.

[Guest]

It is so tough for researchers. I do the data for Gillingham and a few years ago we had a diamond of a 16 year old (You may have read this on another thread) I personally saw him play against other academy sides and then reserve matches and he was the best player almost every time. He was linked with Liverpool, United, Chelsea and Spurs to name a few and even a 6 figure sum was mentioned. I had a little debate with my head researcher who advised caution and in the end we met somewhere in the middle. I was convinced this kid would make it and I looked forward to reminding the head researcher. 4 or 5 years later, that player is in non league and is a car salesman. Fortunately the agreement was I would give him good premier league potential, but limit his mental stats which meant, on almost every save for about 3 versions, my coaches would tell me how amazing this player would be, but he always end up in non league. Did I over estimate his abilities early on (I still say no, and blame a lack of professionalism) or did something that no one without a connection to the player or club know about happen?

I think CA and PA is fine, but the distribution of attributes can make or break a player.

I imagine that it was your correct use of mental attributes that meant his FM counterpart tended to go the same way as he did irl, always pleases me to hear about restraint & caution being offered, just wish it was the same in the higher divisions where short term form does seem to carry more weight.

Also a shame to hear about a highly rated talent never making it or at the least straying.

[netking]

Of course it is true. CA is used to decide how many points are available to distribute, and some stats take more CA than others.

Now, you can easily design a player with a weaker CA to be great by min-maxing a bit. (For example a lightning fast striker who is unable to jump or head).

And you can create a player with high CA where a lot of the points are wasted (20 jumping with 1 heading and strength for example), but with more CA you have more to work with. If you only have information about CA and has to choose between 180 and 150 you will always choose 180. That does not mean the 150 CAN’T be better, but that he most likely won’t. I am pretty sure that at every point in the game a list of highest average CA in the game would be pretty close to the way the league would end up.

Having said that, I feel the game should have more of the sort of bizarre CA-distribution. The super strong League two defender who fight his ass of in every duel, and is a nightmare to meet, but is slow as a turtle. Or the striker who is 20/20-fast, but so technically weak that he only plays in the Conference League. Or the player with the most amazing technical ability who are way too do anything but pass the ball around the center circle.

There is a player exactly like that in the lower leagues. I ALWAYS sign him for LLM in England. Jordan Patrick. He pretty much has 15 for pace and acceleration, 10 or so for jumping and determination and workrate, 6 or so for finishing, and most of the others are bare 2s, yet he eats up all the way to VC N/S.

I don't know his CA/PA because I never checked.

[jeesh]

The current system works, but if SI wants to make the game more realistic and real life then perhaps a re-think should be on the cards.

Particularly i feel the system doesnt support the idea of late bloomers/developers or unknown players who can turn out to be world class performers.

Now i know Michu might not be the best example considering his current situation, but imagine a player like him who came out of nowhere and peaked like he did at Swansea. Can the current system address this? Sometimes circumstance, experience at a team can change the situation of a player beyond the PA assigned to player. This is why perhaps the dynamism factor must be there.

[samdiatmh]

The current system works, but if SI wants to make the game more realistic and real life then perhaps a re-think should be on the cards.

why?

CA and PA is completely unknown to the general player, unless you either:

a) actually look them up on an editor

or b) get someone else to do the work for you (those 'talented youngster' threads is essentially an editor dump)

if you purely look at the attributes (ie without opening the editor)

then you'll see that XYZ is a decent player, the scouts rate him for what I want, and it's a decent price (or more, because he's higher rated)

people get too hung up on the CA/PA, because they're constantly looking for Messi's

I personally have had a 110CA right winger get 20+ assists for me in the premiership, yet some people wouldn't even touch him (granted, he was 34 at the time and declining) - all I needed him to do was beat the man and whip in the crosses (and he could score crucial FKs)

edit:

at #37

Michu's a great example of an average player that fit the system that Swansea were playing at the time, which is why he was frozen out there last season, and hasn't got anywhere near that first Swansea season since

does he deserve a high CA/PA due to a fluke season (which he hasn't come close to competing with)? no - he's the prime case of someone who's attributes outweigh his PA

- did Forssell get a high PA in FM05 after his 24-league goals in 2003-04? no

- did Andy Johnson get a high CA in FM05 after his 21-league goals in 2004-05? no

neither player have come close to anywhere near that since, so both players were a result of a system being built around a player

at #36 - thank you for proving my point

you sign him because he fits a role, rather than because he's well rated

if you found out that he was a 70CA player, would you look at him any differently than if he was a 50CA player?

and for a CA/PA debate - Balanta has been capable of playing regular Premiership football for the last 2 versions now, so why has he not made the move IRL?

also why did he not appear for Columbia in key games at the world cup - surely he's good enough to stop the likes of Suarez/Neymar?

no, instead an similar CA player like Yepes played instead of him (who didn't even play every game for Atalanta that season)

[jeesh]

As i said, Michu might not be the best example. But there are many other cases like that. Take another-Jonas Goncalves who was signed by Valencia for a mere 1.25 Mill. No one knew anything about him-yet he turned out to be superb for Valencia and now Benfica. Or consider a more recent experience in Andre Gomes. The lad is slowly developing into one of Europe's finest midfielders. You can bet someone will end up paying 50 Mill for him soon. But there is no way SI researchers would have known this a year or two back. This is why keeping the PA dynamic and subject to conditions might be helpful.

Yes i do agree with you, you do get players with average PA and attributes who might end up with better performances than someone with a high CA/PA. But at the end PA is there for something-and thats the limit to which a player can grow. This SI can never 100% predict.

[Rub Rub]

Yes Yes Yes....Ive been saying this for years. CA and PA should not have a numeric value that the player can only fit between. Rickie lambert and michael owen are fine examples. Lamberts career was pretty steady up until his southampton glory days and his england call up. he peacked in his 30s, this does not happen in FM.

owen on the other hand, (rooney too) burst on the scene, he was at his peak from the year he scored the goal against argentina to when he left liverpool, at which point injurys took their toll and he declined. whilst FM's stats do decline with age, they dont decline at a dynamic rate.

I find players on football manager are almost like RPG characters, they get better over time, with mental stats and the enviroment they are playing in having a factor in how well and fast they develop. in real life its not that simple

[Cougar2010]

Yes Yes Yes....Ive been saying this for years. CA and PA should not have a numeric value that the player can only fit between. Rickie lambert and michael owen are fine examples. Lamberts career was pretty steady up until his southampton glory days and his england call up. he peacked in his 30s, this does not happen in FM.

owen on the other hand, (rooney too) burst on the scene, he was at his peak from the year he scored the goal against argentina to when he left liverpool, at which point injurys took their toll and he declined. whilst FM's stats do decline with age, they dont decline at a dynamic rate.

I find players on football manager are almost like RPG characters, they get better over time, with mental stats and the enviroment they are playing in having a factor in how well and fast they develop. in real life its not that simple

and that is all to do with CA development, nothing to do with PA.

[OBONGO]

I don't mind there being a set in stone PA, simply because you don't really know it. However right now it feels very easy to develop players. Just get some who aren't absolutely rotten, and play them.

I'd prefer if player development was much more wild. If player form was reflected in attributes, if attributes changed more often. Both ways. I'd love for much greater swings in attributes overall. Right now it feels like there's only one way for the attributes to move, and that's relatively slowly up (assuming PA hasn't been hit/player isn't old). Few if any ups and downs, just a gradual improvement. No reasons to go beyond the numbers you see (and maybe the personality reports, obviously).

Like, why would anyone ever buy an in form striker in FM if you can see he has 10s across the board if there's a guy available with 13s. Now if the former guy was actually on an 'attribute upswing', then I might get him. It might be a risk because it might be a temporary boost, sure. It might add some depth, trying to foster and keep his form up, things like that. Or things like early peakers, late bloomers.

I feel there just isn't enough variety. Or rather it is not pronounced, visible, 'tangible' nowhere near enough.

Also more 'wild' and 'variety' goes for other aspects of the game, like player development, feels like it's extremely rare (or does it ever happen?) for players to undergo shifts in 'skillsets' or positions etc. unless you mould them yourself... but you have guys like Bale, Jankulovski, Lahm in real life, that's what I mean.

[Rub Rub]

and that is all to do with CA development, nothing to do with PA.

Not at all, CA is currently capped by the PA ceiling

[El Presidente]

I'm happy with ca/pa. Don't see anything wrong with it.

I think the game is over complicated as it is. The problem with very complicated things is that it's easier to cause a break down.

[santy001]

The problem with any system in almost any game that would allow for some flexibility in an upper "power" limit is that if its possible to find a short-cut route which guarantees considerable rewards it will be found.

In FM there could be a combination of factors such as facilities, coaches, training and mental attributes that were all small factors but it simply wouldn't stand up to the player base trying to find the dead-set way to break it.

The systems are changed, down the years the player base has already overwhelmed the old tactical interface with the nigh unbeatable tactics of yesteryear, the attribute weighting system which could be exploited by training players to be competent at DC/MC/ST depending on where they played, the corner routine of just a few seasons ago which saw an enormous amount of goals scored from corners and then even last year on release crossing was just too effective. It was resolved very quickly, but just in a mess about game getting a feel for tactics last year just creating a formation that hurtled crosses (60+ per game) into the box was enough to win just about every game.

It happens in any and every game where there is any weaknesses in any "power" development system. The FM player base often falls into the trap of believing CA is all important so any system which gives the average player an edge in that regard would largely be taken. It'd also probably create more frustration for those who embraced these but still weren't able to dominate because they were failing to correctly use the right formations or playing to their strengths.

The alternative would be something along the lines of researchers just speculatively flagging up potential candidates for this late blooming development, which would be based on nothing more than a guess.

CA & PA are always changing and shifting within that 200 range though, just often not in ways players are aware of as most of it is hidden because if something has changed from FM X to FM Y with CA/PA then the players don't really need to know about it.

[Cougar2010]

Not at all, CA is currently capped by the PA ceiling

As it should be.

SI say in testing at least 90% of players never reach their PA so it doesn't ever become an issue.

Many human users have a different opinion and I suspect its because they are far more efficient at identifying the players who are likely to progress well & developing them. If the CA development was improved you would have a situation where it wouldn't matter how good human users are at identifying & developing talent it would be rare that the players actually reached their PA.

[Jean-Luc]

The system itself is fine, but it feels too clinical and too much like an Excel calculation for the "real messy world of football".

Character development is very easily predictable. If you treat your young hot prospect right, he will never disappoint you. This does not reflect all those reality cases, where players' careers suddenly and a bit unexpectedly derail because they spent too much time with their friends in pubs and nightclubs - or any other of those stories we have heard and witnessed in the past, where "future stars" suddenly start to stagnate, because they can't cope the pressure.

Also, in general, the player's character is not visible enough. Starting with the fact that on default screens, it's not even on the landing page. But even with those words like "professional" and "sporting", it's simply to shallow and too much data oriented to grasp. Football players are, in reality, a lot about character. There is not a lot of "character" in FM. Occasionly it plays a role ("thrives in important matches", etc.), but the game lacks a screen that makes all this character visible. Or players, who want a word with their coach and display "character" in those talks. Most talks feel very generic, it's always the same lines and the same answers. FM2015 was a bit better in this, but there is still a lot to improve.

[mchbitil]

Absolutely unhappy, as well as with "star" system that makes it so easy to sign really good teenagers.

There should be much more variety in young players development, and it should be much less clear who has greater potential.

[HUNT3R]

So, again, the CA/PA system is fine. The development is the issue.

[Harv88]

People get CA confused with how players perform in FM. Someone like Jamie Vardy for example, nothing was stopping anyone from picking him when he had an awful CA and he could well have gotten a decent average rating and scored goals if used in the right way. A high CA doesn't guarantee a player will perform in a match.

It's not always about picking the out and out 'best' players you have, it's about picking players who suit the system and perform in the match engine. I've had players with insanely high CA's who don't have the right balance or attributes, so just aren't as suitable as a player with a lower CA with strong attributes in specific areas.

Never thought of it this way myself, a few things have really mad sense, like why my academy product out performs my 'world class' winger