This is why I don't like the newgens

[Guest El Payaso]

I usually don't play long careers on FM and I basically always quit playing when the newgens are starting to take over. The reason for this is the fact that I don't really enjoy how the attributes are spread through for newgens. If you look for example this thread and notice the same thing that always seems to be the case: with the good quality newgens you're never seeing low physical attributes. 

Usually straight away when the newgens spawn into the game the main strengths that they have are the physical attributes while in technicalls and mentals they might have some attributes as low as 1. The best ones actually even seem to have better physical attributes than some good senior players that might be ten years older. 

One other thing to note is also that you have the whole 8 years (before the newgen turns to 24) to improve the attributes and no, improving these attributes is not hard, they start improving rapidly straight from the beginning. So by this there will be no physically weak players in the game world. Yes they might have one or two low physical attributes (the best ones I mean) but generally they are way more physical than the players generally in real life.

In real life you can compare this for example to Spanish players generally. They are tactically and technically strong but usually they are lacking those physical attributes that players in some other countries seem to have. Such players as Iniesta, Xavi, Fabregas, Parejo etc. The game doesn't seem to recreate these kind of players but instead it seems to recreate more and more players without any weakness in their attributes.  Well at least no weaknesses in physical attributes.

[Jakarooney]

From a quick scan of my save I've noticed this. There are however some players that have low physicals. 

How long do you play saves for? Surely FM can't be too enjoyable for you if you're not playing saves for more than a few seasons? Each to their own I guess.

[Guest El Payaso]

52 minutes ago, Jakarooney said:

 

How long do you play saves for? Surely FM can't be too enjoyable for you if you're not playing saves for more than a few seasons? Each to their own I guess.

Has nothing to do with this conversation but usually three seasons is my maximum. For me there are couple of issues in the game that make long term saves unpleasant for me. Newgens being one and the state of the transfer system are the main ones. 

[turnip]

1 hour ago, El Payaso said:

I usually don't play long careers on FM and I basically always quit playing when the newgens are starting to take over. The reason for this is the fact that I don't really enjoy how the attributes are spread through for newgens. If you look for example this thread and notice the same thing that always seems to be the case: with the good quality newgens you're never seeing low physical attributes. 

Usually straight away when the newgens spawn into the game the main strengths that they have are the physical attributes while in technicalls and mentals they might have some attributes as low as 1. The best ones actually even seem to have better physical attributes than some good senior players that might be ten years older. 

One other thing to note is also that you have the whole 8 years (before the newgen turns to 24) to improve the attributes and no, improving these attributes is not hard, they start improving rapidly straight from the beginning. So by this there will be no physically weak players in the game world. Yes they might have one or two low physical attributes (the best ones I mean) but generally they are way more physical than the players generally in real life.

In real life you can compare this for example to Spanish players generally. They are tactically and technically strong but usually they are lacking those physical attributes that players in some other countries seem to have. Such players as Iniesta, Xavi, Fabregas, Parejo etc. The game doesn't seem to recreate these kind of players but instead it seems to recreate more and more players without any weakness in their attributes.  Well at least no weaknesses in physical attributes.

Your argument appears to rely on a facet of the game (newgens) that you admit yourself you don't really engage with. So there's something wrong with your reasoning straight away, but I'll indulge you anyway, because I'm drunk.

You argue that 'Physicals are stronger than mentals , which are bad'. Well, good newgens tend to have good physical attributes while bad newgens tend to have bad physical attributes. Is it possible that the newgens you're seeing are simply the good ones (i.e. the players your scouts would identify, not the crap ones they'd ignore) and therefore the ones who are most likely to have good physical attributes?

This feeds into your second point, about there being no 'weak' Physical players in the game world. I could point out literally hundreds of 'physically weak' players in my current save. But I won't. Because they're not 'good' players. Because most 'good' players have good physical attributes... because they're 'good'. And so, they appear in the best teams in the world. There are buckets of 'good' central defenders with bad Jumping Reach, mind you. But if you're complaining about there being no players with bad Physical attributes, you're either in a top league (and, therefore, facing 'good' players regularly), or you're in a lower league and just completely blind.

On to your third point. And yes, it would be nice if we could find a player on FM with the 'technical' skills of Iniesta. But if we did, there would be complaints about BUGS!!! because of the amount of time the player would spend on the floor, screaming about a foul that never happened. I would also point out that Xavi, at his best, had exceptional Stamina and would be at least 95% as good in the 90th minute as he was in the first, so your point doesn't really stand anyway. It is, in fact, very possible to develop a player with crap Physical attributes and great Technical attributes, but since they'd be useless in a top-tier league, I'm not sure why you'd bother, other than to make a stupid point on a forum.

[Jakarooney]

4 minutes ago, El Payaso said:

Has nothing to do with this conversation but usually three seasons is my maximum. For me there are couple of issues in the game that make long term saves unpleasant for me. Newgens being one and the state of the transfer system are the main ones. 

Fair enough, just wondering. I agree that the physicals are on the high side but I hadn't noticed it before.

[Guest El Payaso]

25 minutes ago, turnip said:

Your argument appears to rely on a facet of the game (newgens) that you admit yourself you don't really engage with. So there's something wrong with your reasoning straight away, but I'll indulge you anyway, because I'm drunk.

You argue that 'Physicals are stronger than mentals , which are bad'. Well, good newgens tend to have good physical attributes while bad newgens tend to have bad physical attributes. Is it possible that the newgens you're seeing are simply the good ones (i.e. the players your scouts would identify, not the crap ones they'd ignore) and therefore the ones who are most likely to have good physical attributes?

This feeds into your second point, about there being no 'weak' Physical players in the game world. I could point out literally hundreds of 'physically weak' players in my current save. But I won't. Because they're not 'good' players. Because most 'good' players have good physical attributes... because they're 'good'. And so, they appear in the best teams in the world. There are buckets of 'good' central defenders with bad Jumping Reach, mind you. But if you're complaining about there being no players with bad Physical attributes, you're either in a top league (and, therefore, facing 'good' players regularly), or you're in a lower league and just completely blind.

On to your third point. And yes, it would be nice if we could find a player on FM with the 'technical' skills of Iniesta. But if we did, there would be complaints about BUGS!!! because of the amount of time the player would spend on the floor, screaming about a foul that never happened. I would also point out that Xavi, at his best, had exceptional Stamina and would be at least 95% as good in the 90th minute as he was in the first, so your point doesn't really stand anyway. It is, in fact, very possible to develop a player with crap Physical attributes and great Technical attributes, but since they'd be useless in a top-tier league, I'm not sure why you'd bother, other than to make a stupid point on a forum.

I've had long term saves on previous ones and even on for example FM 2016 where there were loads of newgens available. I've seen lots of them for many years. What I've seen in young players is that they usually are good in technical attributes at the age of 15-16 while they (naturally) mainly lack on both physical and mental attributes. This is not a rule without exceptions but for me technical attributes should more likely to be the ones that a recently spawned newgen is strongest at and lack on physicals and mentals. 

'They're not good players' = exactly. The not good players may lack in physicals too as they are lacking on all the other areas because they are bad. World class players like Neymar and Messi lack on physicals IRL (they are not exactly weak on physical side of the game comprehensively) and shine on technical attributes. Same goes with many others while players like Bale and Ronaldo who are excellent on both areas are in my opinion in the minority. Look at for example players in La Liga (even the good ones) and notice that they usually are a lot better in technical attributes than in technicalls and these 'complete footballers' that have no weaknesses are hard to find. 

The third point is a bit laughable. Yes, Xavi had a good stamina but he was still lacking on some physical stats like strength and jumping. And these physical stats are dominated in comparison by his technical and mental attributes. Here's for example in FM 2010:

If you want to find a weakness in him, there you have it: physical attributes. And this seems to be really common for players from Latin America, Portugal and Spain etc. Most of the agile and skillful players are much better technically than they are physically. For me FM produces most of the good or great newgens so that they are great on both areas which should be in the minority. 

Second concern on newgens for me would be that I find them really easy to develop at young age. When they arrive to the club I can easily develop them into first team level in one or two seasons. There is too simple formula where you just have good coaches in the club, tutor them little bit, keep them match fit in the U-19 team and boom they reach that needed level really easily.

[turnip]

There's a genuine point to be made about 'real' players and how they're represented, particularly when it comes to freakishly good players. For those players, the researchers have to come to a compromise. In the image you've linked, Xavi's Physical attributes are good while his Technical and Mental attributes are excellent. From what I remember, Messi has a combination of very good Technical/Mental/Physical attributes. That is, as much as anything, a feature of having to categorise 'real' players according to an arbitrary 1-200 ranking system. The researchers have to show that an excellent player has great Technical skill, while still making sure that they're inferior to X player from a different club.

If anything, introducing newgens re-balances the playing field. No longer are we relying on researchers to say who's better than who, it's all about the numbers under the hood. And on that note, I find that the best prospects have a good all-round balance of attributes, rather than strengths in one area.

[herne79]

9 hours ago, El Payaso said:

One other thing to note is also that you have the whole 8 years (before the newgen turns to 24) to improve the attributes

Players don't necessarily stop developing at age 24.  All players have their own development cycles - some may stop at age 18, others won't stop until later in their careers.  Some may develop as late bloomers.  That's just a few examples.

The rate of attribute development may slow once attributes get to a certain level (eg., faster to develop 6-10 than it may be to develop 16-20) but that may not have anything to do with age.

Anyway, re. your main point: if you believe there are issues and you have examples head over to the Bugs Forum and let SI take a look.

[enigmatic]

I think it's more a general balancing issue than a bug, and certainly disagree that it's game breaking, but higher pace does seem to be one of the areas where newgens appear to be different on average to similar types of researched players (most notably central midfielders, and especially the non-trivial portion of midfielders with 15+ for pace/acceleration/agility/technique/touch who inexplicably haven't learned to dribble).

I think to some extent this could be mitigated by the development algorithm making it harder for already-quick players to add pace after their teens, even if they've got plenty of potential left

But world class players are always going to have impressive physicals. Messi's combination of agility, balance, acceleration and pace is spectacularly good in FM, Neymar's is also impressive and there's no shortage of newgen forwards that also lack height. The bigger question mark is over whether the players in the 120-150 range tend to be more physically dominant and less varied in style than their predecessors

[Guest El Payaso]

8 hours ago, herne79 said:

Anyway, re. your main point: if you believe there are issues and you have examples head over to the Bugs Forum and let SI take a look.

I've done this previously (I think in FM 2016) and they thought that there was no problem. 

But you can see by looking at the thread about newgens that the good and really good ones almost always seem to be physically really good even when they spawn. I think that it should be balanced a lot and also make it harder to spot the talent as the newgens would have lower attributes (especially physically) in the beginning, even the ones that have high PA.

You can compare this presented on the threads and notice that even before turning 18 most of these super ones have physically surpassed the 'real life players' like Messi, Neymar etc. Basically all of them remind Bale and Ronaldo etc. while the fast, skillful and agile players IRL usually lack on stamina, strength etc. 

For me it is not well balanced how the newgens end up in terms of attributes and for me it takes a lot of realism and variation out of the game. Again this is an area that used to be better in the game.

I think that there are two issues in this: the balancing of the newgen attributes and also the fact that the physical attributes develop completely in the same way with other attributes so these players who already are good physically at the age of 15-16 will be even more tank-likes as they mature.

[Guest]

The problem with using that thread as a reference point is that most users will tend to favour physical attributes & as a result newgen's who have an attribute focus more towards the technical &/or mental groups are probably less likely to feature.

[enigmatic]

There's also a selection bias with the newgens that already look quite good being the ones that people actually buy take screenshots of when they're 18. I'm playing around with the regen spawning for different countries at the moment, and it's noticeable that the high PA regens a slightly-boosted India occasionally produces (i) really don't look very good even for youngsters, both in terms of low starting CA by world standards and poor attribute distribution and (ii) don't get scouted and don't improve very much playing in India, and it'd probably never occur to anyone encountering them later in their career that they could have been a good Premier League player rather than a lightweight with glaring flaws in their game.

And it's simply not true to say that regen teenagers have "already surpassed" the physicality of Messi and Neymar. Messi has an Agility and Balance of 20, an Acceleration of 18 and a Pace of 15. There aren't many regens that get anywhere near that at their peak, even if they're players noted more for their physicality than their technical ability.  (Of course you'll get plenty with better jumping than Messi, but I had better jumping than Messi when I was 16)

[Guest]

Physical attributes are also the easiest to excel in without significant natural football ability & that probably should be somewhat reflected in their distribution among youth players & as irl many in game scouts may look favourably on physicals when assessing a player's potential which could result in more players with better physical traits showing up on scouting assignments with high PPA star values.

What the OP needs to do is conduct a full assessment of all youth intake players in a save if they wish to show that there is an issue with player generation & equally importantly AI player development.

[Guest El Payaso]

2 hours ago, enigmatic said:

And it's simply not true to say that regen teenagers have "already surpassed" the physicality of Messi and Neymar. Messi has an Agility and Balance of 20, an Acceleration of 18 and a Pace of 15. There aren't many regens that get anywhere near that at their peak, even if they're players noted more for their physicality than their technical ability.  (Of course you'll get plenty with better jumping than Messi, but I had better jumping than Messi when I was 16)

Yes, like I said. Players like Neymar and Messi and many others are fast and agile but they still lack on physicals:

Neymar for example: especially compared to his technicals and even mentals, physical side is his weakness. Same goes with Messi.

The stamina is quite low being 'just' 13 and strength also with 10.

For me the game is producing too many of the players that have no physical weaknesses:

Like this. While for me it's way more common that for example wide players have attributes like Neymar: fast, agile but lacking on stamina and strength and even balance. For me this has been the case for many years now that the game produces these 'tank' type of players that are like machines as athletes while it doesn't seem to create these players like Iniesta and Fabregas who will always lack on physicals even though they are at the top of the world in football. 

I think that there needs to be a better variation on this. Of course even in real life there are these physical freaks but they are not the majority even when we talk about world class footballers. 

Maybe this also requires change in training players by making the physical attributes harder to develop. But for many years of experience I would claim that this is a fact and that thread above also shows us all some proves and those things also occur on my saves.  

[herne79]

For further information, different factors can influence the type of attributes that newgens are "born" with.  It's not just random.  

Having a "technical" type of Head of Youth Development (as one example) may lead to a tendency towards technical skills in newgens.  Of course if you have a "physical" type of HoYD then the tendency may favour physical skills.

I'm just using the HoYD as one example - there are many factors which can influence newgen attributes.

It's also worth bearing in mind there can be a tendency towards increasing physical attributes faster in youth players early on compared to mental/technical skills, which can also be true in real life of course.

So again, like I said above, if you believe you have proof which demonstrates the attribute spread in newgens is off, then the best thing to do is open a thread in the bugs forum and let SI take a look at your evidence.  But at least follow Barside's advice above before doing so.

[bowieinspace]

14 hours ago, herne79 said:

Players don't necessarily stop developing at age 24.  All players have their own development cycles - some may stop at age 18, others won't stop until later in their careers.  Some may develop as late bloomers.  That's just a few examples.

The rate of attribute development may slow once attributes get to a certain level (eg., faster to develop 6-10 than it may be to develop 16-20) but that may not have anything to do with age.

Anyway, re. your main point: if you believe there are issues and you have examples head over to the Bugs Forum and let SI take a look.

This is something I feel has really improved in recent versions of FM. In my current save I've got a left winger who I felt had good potential but his coach/scout reports never really got him ever going beyond 3 stars. At 24 he picked up an achilles tendon injury and was out for something like 4-5 months...at that stage he was still improving well and I thought he could eclipse his potential, but when he got injured I thought he would at best end up as a squad player. My 'FM experience' from years of playing the game told me he wouldn't develop any further given he would be nearly 25 when he came back from injury. 

So he came back from injury and I worked him back into the team, he started performing really well so I gave him plenty of minutes. Between 25-26 he went from 3 stars (edit, I'm pretty sure after his injury he was 2.5 stars) to 4 stars with excellent attribute improvement across the board. I've never seen someone develop so late like that, he's now world class!

Either way to the OP's original point, I have my issues with the newgen system but overall think the model is fairly good. You do see some great physical specimens but equally you would expect a world class player, like those being posted about on the newgen thread to have amazing physicals. We might be looking at the single best player of his generation there on that particular save...that databases equivalent of the teenage wonderkid who is physically well beyond his years, so we'd need to look at a large sample size to judge it. From my personal save with Athletic, I have plenty of newgens with average physicals who look like they're going to be good players. I would say I don't see too many technically/mentally gifted regens with very weak physicals...especially in Spain you might expect a few of those. That being said, Messi at 14 or 15 would have had insanely good balance/agility/acceleration...you watch video of him from that age and you can see it. Other physicals might have needed development but if Messi at 15 spawned in as a newgen to my save I would expect him to have exceptional physicals in those categories

[Seb Wassell]

As Barside says, we need to be very careful judging the Newgen system on a thread that is completely focused on picking out the single best Newgen from that particular save. That would be like judging football as a world sport on Messi or Ronaldo alone. It is not really possible to extrapolate any useful data at all from such an exercise.

However with that being said, we would certainly be interested in looking into any larger scale evidence that helps us improve the Newgen model. Internally this is one of the areas that is constantly under review - we have gameworld-wide data sets that show us mean attributes, extreme attributes, positions, etc. for future seasons compared to the original DB.

Herne also makes some good points, any perceived imbalances in the Newgen model could in fact be Training or Development related and worth considering from that perspective.

[enigmatic]

Rather than waste any more time arguing about whether Messi is physically better than a newgen teenager or whether tank like players are actually pretty common IRL or focusing too closely on human-selected players amongst the world's best, let's look at my 2029 save (small database, England-centric, player masking off, using the in-game "hidden attributes" search).

Only 5 players between 21 and 29 years of age with a CA of over 120 (i.e. top division class) have a "strength" in single digits. Two of those are real players (i.e. they were amongst the tiny proportion of players who were 16 years old in the starting database). That's an issue. There's also no players in that range with single digit Agility.

On the other hand there's an abundance of good players with poor jumping or natural fitness which appear to be naturally limited by the development model, and the 24  good players (~2.5%) with single digit balance includes one of the world's best defenders.

Good players in their prime with single digit pace/acceleration aren't exactly common in the starting database so I'd expect these figures to be low, but in 2029 they're nearly all goalkeepers, though France have a world class international defender with an acceleration of 9.

There are still plenty of top-notch central defenders with pace/acceleration in the unremarkable 10-13 range and some central midfielders (but probably not enough of the latter). There are still Fabregas-type players who have a lot more skill than speed, though they're a bit rarer and tend to be a little short of world class.

I've stopped short of doing a full statistical comparison because (i) I don't have the equivalent sized starting database and (ii) I'd expect the average numbers might be a bit higher in 2028 as the the development model produces more high PA players period, which I've always assumed is completely intentional. For similar reasons, a player development model that errs on the side of creating well-rounded players is probably better than one producing supposedly world class players easily exposed for their glaring lack of mobility, but there's definitely a problem with not many players in the upper tiers of the game being physically weak or lacking agility until they hit their 30s. 

-

I was about to get my magic lamp to summon @Seb Wassell but he beat me to it!

I think this is a development issue rather than a starting attribute issue as there's an abundance of less physically gifted players at youth level, and I've been monitoring some of the now world class and physically imposing players since they were too slow and weak to get called up for my England U21 squad. Strength probably should be naturally limited by the development model for smaller players just like jumping (realism would imply a lot of very-focused gym time to make a small player as strong as some of their bigger peers, weight-gaining which would tend to come at the cost of not gaining agility or speed) and perhaps to a lesser extent agility development more limited

 

[Seb Wassell]

30 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

Rather than waste any more time arguing about whether Messi is physically better than a newgen teenager or whether tank like players are actually pretty common IRL or focusing too closely on human-selected players amongst the world's best, let's look at my 2029 save (small database, England-centric, player masking off, using the in-game "hidden attributes" search).

Only 5 players between 21 and 29 years of age with a CA of over 120 (i.e. top division class) have a "strength" in single digits. Two of those are real players (i.e. they were amongst the tiny proportion of players who were 16 years old in the starting database). That's an issue. There's also no players in that range with single digit Agility.

On the other hand there's an abundance of good players with poor jumping or natural fitness which appear to be naturally limited by the development model, and the 24  good players (~2.5%) with single digit balance includes one of the world's best defenders.

Good players in their prime with single digit pace/acceleration aren't exactly common in the starting database so I'd expect these figures to be low, but in 2029 they're nearly all goalkeepers, though France have a world class international defender with an acceleration of 9.

There are still plenty of top-notch central defenders with pace/acceleration in the unremarkable 10-13 range and some central midfielders (but probably not enough of the latter). There are still Fabregas-type players who have a lot more skill than speed, though they're a bit rarer and tend to be a little short of world class.

I've stopped short of doing a full statistical comparison because (i) I don't have the equivalent sized starting database and (ii) I'd expect the average numbers might be a bit higher in 2028 as the the development model produces more high PA players period, which I've always assumed is completely intentional. For similar reasons, a player development model that errs on the side of creating well-rounded players is probably better than one producing supposedly world class players easily exposed for their glaring lack of mobility, but there's definitely a problem with not many players in the upper tiers of the game being physically weak or lacking agility until they hit their 30s. 

-

I was about to get my magic lamp to summon @Seb Wassell but he beat me to it!

I think this is a development issue rather than a starting attribute issue as there's an abundance of less physically gifted players at youth level, and I've been monitoring some of the now world class and physically imposing players since they were too slow and weak to get called up for my England U21 squad. Strength probably should be naturally limited by the development model for smaller players just like jumping (realism would imply a lot of very-focused gym time to make a small player as strong as some of their bigger peers, weight-gaining which would tend to come at the cost of not gaining agility or speed) and perhaps to a lesser extent agility development more limited

 

Could you possibly post your findings in our bugs forum @enigmatic with accompanying save? Thank you.

The Strength point is one we have identified and have under review internally.

[Mr U Rosler]

I'm doing an Academy challenge at Stockport and my team is exclusively newgens.

I can personally vouch that good acceleration/pace is certainly not a given with newgens, I've had a raft of solid but slow Centre Backs and I had to retrain the best player I've produced as his 9 acceleration does not fit the profile of the strikers I like to use as I move through the leagues. (he makes a great AMC).

I'll take a look at my squad later, I think you're probably right about 'strength' but will be interesting to see.   

[Guest El Payaso]

1 hour ago, enigmatic said:

 

 

This is basically what I was after. Thank God that someone else also sees it. Although I still also claim that the starting attributes might be on the high side for some of the players. And by tutoring and getting a good personality the development seems to be really rapid. Certainly there are things to balance here so that the variation would be better. I'm not saying that it is completely awful at the moment but when you see a clear pattern year after year after year the annoyance grows. I would like to see more players that would first be technically ready to senior level and then might never develop that great physique yet they still would be really good players.

And @Seb Wassell I'm really pleased to hear that.

I think that everyone can see this by having a save, simulating it to a point where most players in the world are newgens and then check the attributes of the best players in the world and compare it to the players IRL in the original database. I bet that there is a clear difference in favor of the newgens physically.

But yeah, a better balance is always a better game and also it would be lot harder to spot talent if the good PA newgens also might have low physical attributes. 

[Seb Wassell]

16 minutes ago, El Payaso said:

This is basically what I was after. Thank God that someone else also sees it. Although I still also claim that the starting attributes might be on the high side for some of the players. And by tutoring and getting a good personality the development seems to be really rapid. Certainly there are things to balance here so that the variation would be better. I'm not saying that it is completely awful at the moment but when you see a clear pattern year after year after year the annoyance grows. I would like to see more players that would first be technically ready to senior level and then might never develop that great physique yet they still would be really good players.

And @Seb Wassell I'm really pleased to hear that.

I think that everyone can see this by having a save, simulating it to a point where most players in the world are newgens and then check the attributes of the best players in the world and compare it to the players IRL in the original database. I bet that there is a clear difference in favor of the newgens physically.

But yeah, a better balance is always a better game and also it would be lot harder to spot talent if the good PA newgens also might have low physical attributes. 

Just worth noting here that many Users often "game the system" a little and end up with better Newgens than might be expected on average, which is only natural. Therefore anecdotal evidence suggesting that Newgens are either generated with too high a CA or develop too quickly must of course be taken with a pinch of salt.

The solution would be two-fold. Attempt to level the playing field between Human and AI further and attempt to balance Newgen production/development further. Both of these are ever evolving areas of the game.

Thank you for the information thus far. Any solid examples that anyone has over a decent scale would be well placed in the bugs forum, we can then take it from there.

[enigmatic]

2 minutes ago, Seb Wassell said:

Just worth noting here that many Users often "game the system" a little and end up with better Newgens than might be expected on average, which is only natural. Therefore anecdotal evidence suggesting that Newgens are either generated with too high a CA or develop too quickly must of course be taken with a pinch of salt.

The solution would be two-fold. Attempt to level the playing field between Human and AI further and attempt to balance Newgen production/development further. Both of these are ever evolving areas of the game.

Thank you for the information thus far. Any solid examples that anyone has over a decent scale would be well placed in the bugs forum, we can then take it from there.

Will put this save (managed England U21s for duration so every player is entirely AI-trained and no tweaks to players or regen-spawning abilities) up on the bugs forurm but I imagine you can also find similar patterns in some of the large scale tests run at SI HQ if you try some more focused comparisons more narrowly (e.g. comparing specific attribute distributions within age and ability ranges) rather than just looking at overall distributions and CA progression.

If you're already working on looking at strength that's a good start.

[Seb Wassell]

Just now, enigmatic said:

Will put this save (managed England U21s for duration so every player is entirely AI-trained and no tweaks to players or regen-spawning abilities) up on the bugs forurm but I imagine you can also find similar patterns in some of the large scale tests run at SI HQ if you try some more focused comparisons more narrowly (e.g. comparing specific attribute distributions within age and ability ranges) rather than just looking at overall distributions and CA progression.

If you're already working on looking at strength that's a good start.

We do  

[Guest El Payaso]

2 hours ago, Seb Wassell said:

Just worth noting here that many Users often "game the system" a little and end up with better Newgens than might be expected on average, which is only natural. Therefore anecdotal evidence suggesting that Newgens are either generated with too high a CA or develop too quickly must of course be taken with a pinch of salt.

The solution would be two-fold. Attempt to level the playing field between Human and AI further and attempt to balance Newgen production/development further. Both of these are ever evolving areas of the game.

Thank you for the information thus far. Any solid examples that anyone has over a decent scale would be well placed in the bugs forum, we can then take it from there.

Yes I understand that too but mainly I'm talking based on my own experience throughout the years. I find it really pleasant that this discussion kicked off well and we're having also someone from SI taking part to it. Much appreciated. 

I don't myself have a save going on anymore with many newgens but I can post some screenshot examples from FM 2015 and show by that what I was meaning with my writing. I don't know if those things are legit anymore but I don't feel that the newgens have changed much from that time and with Oviedo basically all my better newgens every year were physical tanks and also reaching high physical level really early on (and with having great physical attributes straight from the beginning).

[Seb Wassell]

Just now, El Payaso said:

Yes I understand that too but mainly I'm talking based on my own experience throughout the years. I find it really pleasant that this discussion kicked off well and we're having also someone from SI taking part to it. Much appreciated. 

I don't myself have a save going on anymore with many newgens but I can post some screenshot examples from FM 2015 and show by that what I was meaning with my writing. I don't know if those things are legit anymore but I don't feel that the newgens have changed much from that time and with Oviedo basically all my better newgens every year were physical tanks and also reaching high physical level really early on (and with having great physical attributes straight from the beginning).

Obviously a detailed example with accompanying save is most useful to us, but even the highlighting of issues in a constructive manner (as has been done here) can help us to identify and solve any imbalances.

Unfortunately FM15 is probably a bit too long ago to be relevant to current work, a lot has changed since then, but thank you.

[Mr U Rosler]

This is a squad of new gens in 2024.

Probably only strength is a bit OTT, the rest of the physical attributes are probably consistent with someone playing first team football since they were 16 years old.

Not massively helpful in isolation but I can upload the save if need be.

[Guest El Payaso]

1 hour ago, Seb Wassell said:

 

Unfortunately FM15 is probably a bit too long ago to be relevant to current work, a lot has changed since then, but thank you.

Aye. I basically meant that I will show the other writers what I mean. I think that @enigmatic will be helping you with the current situation and of course anyone can test it by themselves in a way we have already told about. 

 

20 minutes ago, Mr U Rosler said:

This is a squad of new gens in 2024.

Probably only strength is a bit OTT, the rest of the physical attributes are probably consistent with someone playing first team football since they were 16 years old.

Not massively helpful in isolation but I can upload the save if need be.

 

You also need to take into account that you are playing in League 1 level and these are not the players that we are talking about. We talk about the top quality players and really good players. I don't know how it goes with League 1 level footballers. 

One thing I would also like to point out in newgens is that in every intake you also have those players that are maybe 2,5 stars and below and they again are quite well in physicals basically always but the thing to note in these ones is that the technical attributes often look like they have never played football. I remember for example multiple full-backs that come in for a professional football club's youth intake (with not that much potential) and having 1 for example for crossing and dribbling and really low technicals generally. Anyone else noticed this? I think that this shouldn't be the case as I doubt that professional football teams bring in youngsters that are technically worse than most 8-year-olds. 

[enigmatic]

Have crunched some numbers in this thread

TLDR some attributes like Pace and Natural Fitness and Jumping not substantially different, a lot more players with high balance and stamina (but still similar numbers at the lower end), less glaring issues with high acceleration and high stamina being more common, and no CA>120 players at all who don't have double digit agility.

The issue with DCs' passing and technique is much, much worse though...

Havent seen too many remarkably low technical abilities at the top academies, but ElPayaso reminded me to look at fullback crossing, and that's alarmingly different to the starting database at moderate levels of ability too. Of course, the attributes are all related by a CA weighting algorithm and some sort(s) of training prioritisation schedules, so fullbacks that don't have the capability to improve their strength all the way up to 16 have more scope to use up CA bebecoming fairly skilled crossers (and fullbacks who are supposed to be devoting more effort to improving their crossing spend less time in the gym!)

 

[alanschu14]

55 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

Have crunched some numbers in this thread

TLDR some attributes like Pace and Natural Fitness and Jumping not substantially different, a lot more players with high balance and stamina (but still similar numbers at the lower end), less glaring issues with high acceleration and high stamina being more common, and no CA>120 players at all who don't have double digit agility.

The issue with DCs' passing and technique is much, much worse though...

Havent seen too many remarkably low technical abilities at the top academies, but ElPayaso reminded me to look at fullback crossing, and that's alarmingly different to the starting database at moderate levels of ability too. Of course, the attributes are all related by a CA weighting algorithm and some sort(s) of training prioritisation schedules, so fullbacks that don't have the capability to improve their strength all the way up to 16 have more scope to use up CA bebecoming fairly skilled crossers (and fullbacks who are supposed to be devoting more effort to improving their crossing spend less time in the gym!)

 

I wonder if this is because the primary center defender role doesn't train either of those as a focus (I seem to get good improvement if I focus on a BPD in my own experience).  I'm surprised crossing is as low as it is, but it does echo my experience (most of my full backs cross at 10-11 though they are still young).

I wonder if part of this is also that (IIRC) physicals develop more quickly at younger ages, so they end up gobbling up a lot of the PA?

[bowieinspace]

43 minutes ago, alanschu14 said:

I wonder if this is because the primary center defender role doesn't train either of those as a focus (I seem to get good improvement if I focus on a BPD in my own experience).  I'm surprised crossing is as low as it is, but it does echo my experience (most of my full backs cross at 10-11 though they are still young).

I wonder if part of this is also that (IIRC) physicals develop more quickly at younger ages, so they end up gobbling up a lot of the PA?

I can definitely echo your findings with centre backs from FM17 in particular, I love a ball playing defender, but all of my decent newgens have extremely low technical attributes...they're all bruisers. I had one CB come through with a semi-respectable passing stat who I trained as a BPD from 16 but he is no where near an ideal BPD. I have Laporte in my team and once he retires at the end of my current season, my days of having a BPD will be over.

My full backs in FM17 are actually quite decent going forwards (albeit they're world class and not 15+ in crossing, I think they're maybe 11-13 crossing), so personally I've not noticed this issue quite so significantly in FM17, but in FM16 I had huge problems only ever being able to get defensive full backs with no quality going forwards.

[enigmatic]

2 hours ago, alanschu14 said:

I wonder if this is because the primary center defender role doesn't train either of those as a focus (I seem to get good improvement if I focus on a BPD in my own experience).  I'm surprised crossing is as low as it is, but it does echo my experience (most of my full backs cross at 10-11 though they are still young).

I wonder if part of this is also that (IIRC) physicals develop more quickly at younger ages, so they end up gobbling up a lot of the PA?

I think it's more the former than the latter: if you ever do a save/experiment where you're monitoring player development over the long time with the hidden attributes available to you, you'll notice players who are Premiership standard but have bags of unused potential and they're just as bad technically as the rest of them. 

Starting attributes might be an issue (I remember seeing a Brazilian defender with a PA ~180 and a starting technique of 4 once, which seems a bit silly really: if you've the potential to be Brazil's best ever centre half you're probably not the least skilful footballer on the Copacabana even if you're a very raw 16 year old) but I think the main problem is that the AI general approach to training defenders is much like the default defender training template: technique and passing get completely ignored.

I give young defenders specialist training on passing if it's quite weak at the start and teach them to play short simple passes if it's very weak and I don't think the player has the potential to improve it enough; would be nice if the AI development algorithm tried to do the same. (I'm not personally bothered about technique, but for the sake of realism the AI should probably care about that too)

[Guest El Payaso]

On 13.8.2017 at 02:05, bowieinspace said:

2019/20 Season Update:

La Liga - Another fantastic season winning the title for the 2nd year. We finished on 89 points which is an excellent haul, but Real and Barca (the latter to a lesser degree) underperformed and allowed us to take the league with some comfort towards the end of the season. Villareal emerged as a real contender this season finishing in 3rd, they gave us a number of tough games throughout the season in league and cup! Real Madrid probably were the shock of the season, finishing 5th.

In the Champions League we lost in the semi final to Bayern. We gave them a very tough game and I would consider us unlucky to have gone out, we were the better side in both games, perhaps marginally so at their place, but we didn't convert our chances and their quality going forwards told. We drew 1-1 at our place after conceding an early set piece goal, and then at their place we took the lead early on and took a 1-0 lead into half time. Sadly goals from Muller and Lewandowski in the second half saw us lose 2-1. We had some late chances to win it on away goals but sadly it got away from us.

In the Copa Del Rey, our young guns performed admirably, losing in the semi finals to Barca.

Here's a look at some of our up and coming youngsters. We have a few too many around the 3 star region to post them all, so here's the top prospects at this stage:

Ibai Garcia - He's now our 3rd choice CB and plays a lot of games for the first team. Looks like he's going to be a stalwart in our squad for many years with plenty of room to develop further.

 

Erik Salgado - Yet to make his first team debut, but he should be our left back for years to come and our long term replacement for Azpilicueta, looks like an absolute gem.

 

Benat Ugarte - On the other flank we have this youngster coming through. Again yet to make his first team debut but it won't be too long. I have another excellent RB who you will see in a moment, so they will very much compete for that spot, but if they both develop as expected I imagine I will retrain one of them, but that's a decision I'll took at later.

 

Ander Bilbao - When I think of some of the best newgens I've had come through on FM in my many years of Athletic Club saves, I think this guy will be up there in the top tier. He's only 18 but is already our starting right back, taking the place of De Marcos/Lekue this year. Currently 3* at 18, with massive potential, if he stays injury free I fancy he is going to be the best full back in the game.

 

Ibon Alvarez - Great striker prospect with a superb attribute spread. His composure needs some work but that will come with time. In a few years he should be well placed to challenge Villalibre for the striker spot.

 

Xabier Intxausti - New through our youth intake this year, complete with the 'best of his generation' tag which always warms the heart. Looks like he could be a monster and is already developing well.

 

There's unlikely to be any interesting developments in the summer window. The only player I'd like to sign is Mikel Oyarzabel but he doesn't want to leave Sociedad (or join us), and as a Socieded fan, I don't think we have much chance here. The only other potential option I could look at is Griezmann, but I'd need to pay an insane amount of money for him and he's nearing thirty, plus Man City have no interest in selling. So the 20/21 season will be all about bringing our youngsters through!

Okay, I don't think that these are the worst examples but examples anyway. You can clearly see that the physicals are rapidly growing and that all of these are going to be physically really good in year or two. Also some of these players really should have clear physical limitations as they are really short and light weight so there really should be limitation how good they can physically become. 

http://footballmanagerstory.com/scout/best-fm-2017-wonderkids/

There's a quite compherensive list of wonderkids on FM 2017 with screenshots. You can clearly see that many of them even in close or over 20s still have quite low physical attributes. Like for example Dembele: 10 for balance, 12 for stamina and 8 for strength at the age of 19. Or 20-year-old Asensio: 11 for balance, 12 for stamina and 10 for strength. Of course there are also those physically strong ones like Renato Sanches. 

Would claim that most of these real life wonderkids are physically not that good and probably never will be. Especially the ones that are 16-18 generally are physically quite weak to be honest. Even the ones that are going to be fast in the future (for example Ben Woodburn) are not necessarily that fast at the age of 16.

Also the difference is that players like Dembele and Asensio will never turn too physical in the game as their physical attributes lose quite clearly to for example technicals and also with Asensio to his intelligence (vision) while the newgens seem to develop their physical attributes more and even these 160cm and 50kg players that are newgens seem to become physically good without any knock-ons. Like for example too much strength influencing on their agility or pace...

I wrote a little bit about these knock-ons and general causation in training before:

 

 

[Seb Wassell]

31 minutes ago, El Payaso said:

Okay, I don't think that these are the worst examples but examples anyway. You can clearly see that the physicals are rapidly growing and that all of these are going to be physically really good in year or two. Also some of these players really should have clear physical limitations as they are really short and light weight so there really should be limitation how good they can physically become. 

Just a note on this. Physicals should be the ones growing the most rapidly in teenagers, it is designed that way. This rapid physical growth should not (on average) continue right through their twenties, as Technicals and Mentals respectively take over as the areas of most gain.

[Guest El Payaso]

22 minutes ago, Seb Wassell said:

Just a note on this. Physicals should be the ones growing the most rapidly in teenagers, it is designed that way. This rapid physical growth should not (on average) continue right through their twenties, as Technicals and Mentals respectively take over as the areas of most gain.

I wonder why? In my opinion (and also by looking at that list of wonderkids) many young players are first ready to senior level on technical attributes while they still usually are lacking on physicals on their early 20s (and maybe through their whole career). This also maybe should mean that the starting attributes on physicals should be lower as by the examples we can see quite clear pattern that the newgens are physically considerable better than the wonderkids that are real. 

Also one thing to consider is that there shouldn't be a pattern that for every young player the physicals are the ones increasing rapidly at that age as not every player enjoys that part of the training. Wilfried Bony for example:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/nov/28/swansea-city-wilfried-bony-interview-strong

Some players develop their physique earlier, some later and some never.

[Seb Wassell]

1 hour ago, El Payaso said:

Also one thing to consider is that there shouldn't be a pattern that for every young player the physicals are the ones increasing rapidly at that age as not every player enjoys that part of the training. Wilfried Bony for example:

Some players develop their physique earlier, some later and some never.

As has been stated previously and on several occasions, we have a lot of variation in this area, even more post-FM17, which means that not all players develop at the same rate or in the same way. Some peak early, some peak late, some experience rapid Physical improvements at various ages, others do not, and so on. In the context of this conversation however, we are referring to the "average" outcome.

1 hour ago, El Payaso said:

I wonder why? In my opinion (and also by looking at that list of wonderkids) many young players are first ready to senior level on technical attributes while they still usually are lacking on physicals on their early 20s (and maybe through their whole career). This also maybe should mean that the starting attributes on physicals should be lower as by the examples we can see quite clear pattern that the newgens are physically considerable better than the wonderkids that are real. 

Generally speaking footballers do not improve the physical side of their game after the age of 21 anywhere near as much as they do before 21. For example, has Dele Alli improved physically at all in the last two years? Of course there are exceptions, and attributes such as Strength certainly can develop later - a player "filling" out as it is sometimes referred to. Although we need to be careful even here, many examples of young players "filling out" are often commentator/pundit hyperbole based purely upon physical appearance or age and not supported substantially by the statistics or the actual output of the player.

When it comes to Pace/Acceleration almost all athletes are at their quickest before other parts of their game have even come close to peaking; after the age of 24 it is very unlikely for this to improve any further. In terms of literal physical development the vast majority of Caucasian males have reached their full height by 16 years old, of course it can take a few more years for a teenager to then match this in body weight.
This is obviously all relative to a footballing context, so despite the fact that male "strength" peaks around 35 we need to reflect this a little differently in FM in order to account for how Strength functions in a footballing scenario. However, Strength should certainly be held onto much longer than other physical attributes as a player declines.

Similarly there are many accounts of seasoned football coaches reporting that realistically players are "technically complete" by even the age of 18. After that point they claim you are simply adding to their consistency, decision making and tactical understanding of the game. And you can see the logic in that; again has Dele Alli actually improved his footballing skills in the last two years? I would imagine if we recreated this model in FM however (only Mental attributes improve post-18 years old) there would be outrage. As ever it is a balancing act.

It's also important to separate what are Progression/Training related observations and what are Newgen related observations when we consider this discussion.

[Guest El Payaso]

Fair play @Seb Wassell and thanks a lot for the replies. They do make sense. More variation, different scenarios for players is all I ask for and I believe that this will get better in the future. Less players with superior overall physicals and on the other hand really good player with not that good physicals, just like in real life. 

[Seb Wassell]

Just now, El Payaso said:

Fair play @Seb Wassell and thanks a lot for the replies. They do make sense. More variation, different scenarios for players is all I ask for and I believe that this will get better in the future. Less players with superior overall physicals and on the other hand really good player with not that good physicals, just like in real life. 

Certainly keep the discussion coming though, can never have too much data.

[itay.bing]

it also has some to do with the height\weight mechanism.we obviously pick the best players we can, and scouting in fm is fairly easy compared to real life, because of the accurate numerical representation of attributes.than we can pick the players that seem good to us,but our (or at least my) tendency is to pick the all around physically good player.it might even be related with the colors, so players (myself) are more likely to pick the player with green and dark green players (11 and above) than if some odd 10 or 9,not to mention 4, will appear in one or two of the attributes,at least subconsciously.but for the height\weight mechanism it seems that (from my playing experience,no data. i also play a mediocre european club so i play 18-19 year olds and sell them while they are young,at least for now,so my apologies if a later growth spurt happens at the age of 23,which i did not notice):

a.height is correlated with jumping reach.confirmed, and is similar to real life.

b.height is correlated somewhat with strength.it's probably due to linkage of height to being a CB rather something intentional. i don't monitor the weight of my players that closely but i think it doesn't have anything to do with strength, which is different from real life.

c.pace,acceleration,stamina and agility are not penalized by height\weight.that's the big problem.

    you can see that most of these "great athletes" are either central forwards or CBs. some of the regen patterns for these positions are the 184-188 cm target man\complete forward or 190-195 CB with overall good physique. in real life being 195 cm tall will most definitely mean you will lack agility and acceleration,especially if you are a teenager in the middle of a growth spurt without the muscle to support your weight.just look at those serbian 15 year old players that are scouted by NBA teams every once in a while because "he is already 2 m tall". they can barely move! taller players are stronger, but only because they weigh more.  the tall skinny peter crouchs they are at 16 are usually very weak, and they develop the strength while they gain weight.the generation and growth of some players do not represent that.they are heavier,and so have worse stamina,since they carry the "extra" weight every step they run. also,they are prone to be technically disadvantaged  if they have bad feet coordination.

so while short players are limited in game and real life in physical growth of their jumping reach (height) and strength (they are usually not generated as CBs or target man [men?] in game and can't weigh 90 kg in real life.), tall players are limited in game only by their pa,and if generated with good starting physical attributes can easily develop all of their stats to a good amount, while they should lack agility,acceleration and stamina. the ones that don't lack in these elements,well, they play for real madrid.     

sorry for the grammar mistakes (if any), i'm drunk foreign  

[enigmatic]

27 minutes ago, itay.bing said:

in real life being 195 cm tall will most definitely mean you will lack agility and acceleration

!?!

 

 

 

 

(OK, yeah, on average height probably slightly decreases acceleration but increases pace, and on average might actually decrease balance and strength if they're skinny with it. But it's only averages...)

 

 

 

[Cougar2010]

20 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

(OK, yeah, on average height probably slightly decreases acceleration but increases pace, and on average might actually decrease balance and strength if they're skinny with it. But it's only averages...)

Its nowhere near that simple tbh.

Most sprinters are taller than average with one study calculating the optimal height as 6'3" for a world class sprinter. 

[Guest El Payaso]

Spotted these on the tactics forum and these are again good examples. Small players (based on the jumping stat that all these have, these all are small players) should have some physical limitations. These all are physically superior while (maybe) being close to 170cm tall. The one player that comes into mind in this category at the top level and is a 'bulky' one is Alexis Sanchez and he is physically superior and an exception for sure in this category of small wide players but his strength for example is 'only' 11. These though reach close to the physical level that much bigger players like Ronaldo and Bale have. 

The smaller players like this should face difficulties reaching 10 on strength and a relatively high attribute maybe also on stamina and balance. But the only physical weakness these small players have is the jumping. These players for me are far too machine like players instead of looking like realistic footballers and they aren't even rare like @enigmatic already proved in his excellent thread in the bugs forum.

 

And because of cases like this I would so much love to have a training system in the game where you can actually make mistakes. Like for example training the strength too much for a small player and by that ruin some parts of his abilities by losing mobility.

 

[itay.bing]

bolt does have a problem with his acceleration. and you know nothing about his agility(as defined in fm),he runs in a straight line with no stops.his pace is great,and that's why he ends up winning,but he is never first after the first 30-40 m and usually even further. 100 m sprinting is not a good comparison, when comparing to 60 m runs you can see that the runners are usually (not always, specifically the ones that also run 100 m)shorter than 180 cm. if you play in an amateur team,and it measures once in a while the times of 30 m and 10x4,you can see that players who are shorter than 175 cm will constantly get the best scores.from NFL 19 best scores in 40 yard dashes documented since 1999 at the NFL Scouting Combine (i guess those the trials they do before the draft, i don't know much about american football, data from wikipedia), 4 were above 6 ft, non was above 6'2. and that still does not measure the average of players from different heights or agility at any level. 

of course not every tall player should have 4 agility, just like not every short player should have 4 jumping reach. after all the difference between a "short" 175 cm  to a "tall" 190 cm is only 15 cm. every player has a unique physique, some players will be short and strong and and some players will be tall and agile.and i agree that the best tall players will have more impressive physical stats than the best short players. but to me it's weird that i (again, medium rep and finance club,not barca.the players i am talking about were purchased from africa,colombia,free signings from usa,one from georgia and one or two from Balkan countries.non above 1 mil.as far as i know non of them was ever offered to participate in the Olympics.) can easily find 10 cheap tall 18 years old players with 14 and above in pace,acceleration, agility and balance (all of them or at least 3 of them,the other will be over 11), and above 15 strength and jumping reach,while some shorter players that i bought (178 or so) have identical physique but 5 jumping reach.if someone wants i can upload screenshots of the players. the average tall player will not be agile,and only the cream of the crop manage to overcome this.and they are the ones that have a 15 overall physical attributes.they are the ones that play for real madrid and man united. they are not the ones i sign for my israeli league team for 180k.

fm represent height as something that does not have any disadvantages . think about it as attribute distribution. rare players will have a great physical pa and will be able to have high physical stats at everything,like ronaldo,bale and my 195 cm 90 something kg CB with 15 acceleration and 14 agility. some short players with the same pa won't be able to have as high jumping reach and strength, so their pa will go to having 20 agility 20 balance,like messi. most tall players with not so good pa will have poor agility and acceleration,or strength and balance if they are skinny. most short players with not so good pa will have very low jumping reach and low strength, and average pace and acceleration.they should adapt and have great technical ability and mental attributes if they want to play at high levels. you just can't have 20 in everything,because the pa (in real life our body bio-mechanics) limits us.  

edit:only now read el payaso comment,that's exactly what i meant. all that short height does is cripple the player regarding his jumping reach. height should have advantages regarding jumping reach and strength and disadvantages regarding some movement attributes. these are not absolute,and some tall players can be very mobile and some short players can be very strong. but the sights of super athletic short players with 5 jumping reach and tall players that weigh like uzbekian weight lifters with 17 agility must end.

[Seb Wassell]

19 hours ago, itay.bing said:

it also has some to do with the height\weight mechanism.we obviously pick the best players we can, and scouting in fm is fairly easy compared to real life, because of the accurate numerical representation of attributes.than we can pick the players that seem good to us,but our (or at least my) tendency is to pick the all around physically good player.it might even be related with the colors, so players (myself) are more likely to pick the player with green and dark green players (11 and above) than if some odd 10 or 9,not to mention 4, will appear in one or two of the attributes,at least subconsciously.but for the height\weight mechanism it seems that (from my playing experience,no data. i also play a mediocre european club so i play 18-19 year olds and sell them while they are young,at least for now,so my apologies if a later growth spurt happens at the age of 23,which i did not notice):

a.height is correlated with jumping reach.confirmed, and is similar to real life.

b.height is correlated somewhat with strength.it's probably due to linkage of height to being a CB rather something intentional. i don't monitor the weight of my players that closely but i think it doesn't have anything to do with strength, which is different from real life.

c.pace,acceleration,stamina and agility are not penalized by height\weight.that's the big problem.

    you can see that most of these "great athletes" are either central forwards or CBs. some of the regen patterns for these positions are the 184-188 cm target man\complete forward or 190-195 CB with overall good physique. in real life being 195 cm tall will most definitely mean you will lack agility and acceleration,especially if you are a teenager in the middle of a growth spurt without the muscle to support your weight.just look at those serbian 15 year old players that are scouted by NBA teams every once in a while because "he is already 2 m tall". they can barely move! taller players are stronger, but only because they weigh more.  the tall skinny peter crouchs they are at 16 are usually very weak, and they develop the strength while they gain weight.the generation and growth of some players do not represent that.they are heavier,and so have worse stamina,since they carry the "extra" weight every step they run. also,they are prone to be technically disadvantaged  if they have bad feet coordination.

so while short players are limited in game and real life in physical growth of their jumping reach (height) and strength (they are usually not generated as CBs or target man [men?] in game and can't weigh 90 kg in real life.), tall players are limited in game only by their pa,and if generated with good starting physical attributes can easily develop all of their stats to a good amount, while they should lack agility,acceleration and stamina. the ones that don't lack in these elements,well, they play for real madrid.     

sorry for the grammar mistakes (if any), i'm drunk foreign  

Jumping Reach links to Height

Strength links to Weight

I fundamentally disagree that tall players have to lack Accelaration/Pace/Stamina. Bale, Ronaldo, Aubameyang, every winger in Rugby Union nowadays being good examples.

[itay.bing]

2 hours ago, Seb Wassell said:

Jumping Reach links to Height

Strength links to Weight

I fundamentally disagree that tall players have to lack Accelaration/Pace/Stamina. Bale, Ronaldo, Aubameyang, every winger in Rugby Union nowadays being good examples.

they don't have to, but they will find it hard to excel. the ones that you mention are the exceptions, and that's why they are where they are. when managing at the danish\Romanian\english 3rd division you should find it noticeably harder to find player with this kind of physique.also, ronaldo and bale are "only" 185 and 183, and even they can't dream about (maybe ronaldo at an earlier age) 18 agility.i can find players who are 190 and above,who weigh over 90 kg and still have high agility. it does not effect all players at the same level and way,but there is a level of height where most players can't keep up with both acceleration and agility. i also don't think that many players that weigh over 95 kg can have a great stamina, but it has to do more with weight and age than height. it is not black and white, some tall players will be agile, some shorts player will have 16 jumping reach, but it is next to impossible to have mertesacker's body and messi agility. 

[MBarbaric]

indeed, a low center of gravity allows shorter player to turn faster. that is why you teach footballers to bend their knees when they turn or, in general, have to change their direction fast. 

[enigmatic]

The centre back templates already seem to produce quite a few tall, fairly quick but slow off the mark players: that's the bit that seems to work pretty well. Plenty of tall players are quick off the mark IRL though (and most rugby union wingers" isn't really a smaller sample or less relevant than the 19 fastest American footballers)

Another issue, probably bigger

At the high end of player ability (CA 150 and above) "either" footed players are quite common IRL (about 20% of players) and very one footed players ("right only" or "left only") much rarer (less than 10%, and half of them goalkeepers)

10 years into the future in a similar database and the reverse is true (nearly 20% very one footed, mostly outfield players) and under 10% comfortable on either foot

I think this one probably needs flagging up more and is probably easier to fix as I don't think player development is to blame, it's all down to the starting model: high potential players should very rarely start off one footed

(the AI does occasionally train people on their weaker foot, but I believe the development model is right in assuming most players won't significantly improve on their weaker foot. Foot priority is significantly influenced by how your brain is already wired by the time you're 16, and if your weaker foot's just for standing on, you probably don't have world class potential in the first place)

[alanschu14]

8 hours ago, enigmatic said:

At the high end of player ability (CA 150 and above) "either" footed players are quite common IRL (about 20% of players) and very one footed players ("right only" or "left only") much rarer (less than 10%, and half of them goalkeepers)

10 years into the future in a similar database and the reverse is true (nearly 20% very one footed, mostly outfield players) and under 10% comfortable on either foot

I think this one probably needs flagging up more and is probably easier to fix as I don't think player development is to blame, it's all down to the starting model: high potential players should very rarely start off one footed

Footedness should also improve based on playing time and position I would expect?

I'm not a footballer, but I'd expect younger kids (under 20) playing in midfield positions should still find themselves using their off foot enough that it'd get progressively better, unless they specifically avoid using their weaker foot.  I mean, i noticed a marked improvement in my left handed dribbling in basketball when I moved from a low post forward at 14/15 and moved to a guard.  I mean, even without my coach saying "you should work on dribbling with your left hand" I also knew it was important to develop and by virtue of practice and playing games it got a lot better pretty quickly.

[MBarbaric]

4 hours ago, alanschu14 said:

Footedness should also improve based on playing time and position I would expect?

I'm not a footballer, but I'd expect younger kids (under 20) playing in midfield positions should still find themselves using their off foot enough that it'd get progressively better, unless they specifically avoid using their weaker foot.  I mean, i noticed a marked improvement in my left handed dribbling in basketball when I moved from a low post forward at 14/15 and moved to a guard.  I mean, even without my coach saying "you should work on dribbling with your left hand" I also knew it was important to develop and by virtue of practice and playing games it got a lot better pretty quickly.

depends on player. if they aren't trained to use it then they won't be better with it and will stick to their strong foot. then, there are players who will train it for years and only marginally improve.

[alanschu14]

4 hours ago, MBarbaric said:

depends on player. if they aren't trained to use it then they won't be better with it and will stick to their strong foot. then, there are players who will train it for years and only marginally improve.

Was more referring to real life than the game itself.