Jump to content

Player development makes zero sense to me in this game.


Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Marko1989 said:

For example - I create new save game with Sassuolo. I go to u18, sort players by reports, and just by looking at the number of stars I already know who will improve a lot and who will not.

The coach's star assessment of who has potential can be wildly different from a player's actual PA.

7 hours ago, Marko1989 said:

I've played in Serie C with Pordenone I think FM 2015. I had one 16y old with 14 passing and 14 technique, and I already knew, I am managing Pordenone, I know for sure that they don't have any wonderkids or players with high PA, because, again, I am managing team in Serie C and almost never in any FM version there are young players with decent PA in Serie C, so there is no point spending time trying to develop him because he will never be good enough once I reach Serie A. 

Maybe they will, maybe they won't.  There is no way you can know that even with cheating.  They may or may not turn into a leading player for you but they could very well be at least a squad player or back up player when you reach Serie A.

All you seem to be doing is instantly dismissing players as hopeless without giving them a chance.

15 minutes ago, Dundalis said:

I gave plenty of detail about how it should functionally work in my first post.

I just re-read that first post.  How would removing PA impact it's 2 primary functions, those being 1) preventing exponential player growth and 2) maintaining a balance and healthy population of players at all levels of the game?  In your proposal it would be quite possible to have players with 20 for every attribute and immensely talented players playing in the lower leagues.  How would that be prevented?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 276
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Just now, XaW said:

You know what? For all your brashness and to be fair, quite impolite way of trying to make your point, your final paragraph does contain some good things so I'll try to focus on that. I will advise you to try to keep things much more constructive than you do, because your points would be much clearer and easy to take in if they weren't wrapped in all that uncouth attitude.

Breaking down professionalism and/or other attributes is what I consider a good idea for player development, at least in theory. I can see a lot of issues and problems with it, but I also think it makes sense. I can also see an amazing maze of legal issues concerning real players, but for newgens at least, it could be great. It will still be some artificial limits somewhere, at least in the tutoring/mentoring aspect, otherwise it's just to gather as much professional players and have them mentor random youngsters into superstars on a regular basis. I think some of your suggestions would improve this (although I'm not sold on removing PA), and think it would be wise of you to post them, in a far more constructive and less combatant way, in the suggestions sub forum.

Fair enough. I have been around this forum long enough, that the fanboy buy-in nature of the way the game is defended is to me, at least somewhat irritating. As far as I'm concerned it feeds into what IMO is the lack of progressive development of the game over the years, and the way valid points have constantly got shot down or ignored on this forum to me is worthy of the "attitude" you say is evident in my posts. Plenty of fans of this game are frustrated at the way critique of many different aspects of the game have been shot down or ignored, to where as far as I'm concerned some combativeness when criticising aspects of the game that have been defended for years and even decades, is legit warranted, because the inevitable backlash to said critique is pretty much inevitable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, herne79 said:

I just re-read that first post.  How would removing PA impact it's 2 primary functions, those being 1) preventing exponential player growth and 2) maintaining a balance and healthy population of players at all levels of the game?  In your proposal it would be quite possible to have players with 20 for every attribute and immensely talented players playing in the lower leagues.  How would that be prevented?

Is that a serious question? Very very easily. Every single attribute can be coded in exactly the way the developers want it to function. A players career is only yay long. A players career has critical development points. You code each attribute dependant on player growth accordingly. Say you have a player with 100 CA at 15 years old. No PA. You break professionalism into it's own category of attributes devoted to player development. Each stat contributes to the growth of that player. Environmental factors play into the growth of the player. You have the combination of attributes that have a major say in for example how quickly a player develops. Maybe a player gets cut off in terms of progression to the first team, but has a high natural fitness or an equivalent attribute that controls for late career growth where you see some of these players that have late career development into top class players that did not start off as wonderkids. You literally control for EVERYTHING via Q&A. This is part and parcel of video game development. I don't see why it's so hard to grasp. How does a player with 40 CA at 15 not develop into a superstar with 20's in every stat? By coding and balancing and doing Q&A on every aspect developed to support the new player development model. If such a thing happens, the game developers have failed at their job. That is literally their job. To code a video game, balance it and make the functions work correctly to produce the best product for their customers.

Edited by Dundalis
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Marko1989 said:

I've played in Serie C with Pordenone I think FM 2015. I had one 16y old with 14 passing and 14 technique, and I already knew, I am managing Pordenone, I know for sure that they don't have any wonderkids or players with high PA, because, again, I am managing team in Serie C and almost never in any FM version there are young players with decent PA in Serie C, so there is no point spending time trying to develop him because he will never be good enough once I reach Serie A.

@Jimbokav1971 had a player come through his youth system in the English non-league (even lower than the Vanarama National N/S) who went on to play regularly for PSG, Manchester United and England.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Dundalis said:

Fair enough. I have been around this forum long enough, that the fanboy buy-in nature of the way the game is defended is to me, at least somewhat irritating. As far as I'm concerned it feeds into what IMO is the lack of progressive development of the game over the years, and the way valid points have constantly got shot down or ignored on this forum to me is worthy of the "attitude" you say is evident in my posts. Plenty of fans of this game are frustrated at the way critique of many different aspects of the game have been shot down or ignored, to where as far as I'm concerned some combativeness when criticising aspects of the game that have been defended for years and even decades, is legit warranted, because the inevitable backlash to said critique is pretty much inevitable.

I can't do anything about how you conceive things to be, but the fact is that criticism of the game is most welcome, but it needs to be constructive and with some reasoning behind it. As I said, I think you have some good and valid points in your posts, but they are not easy to pick out, and especially from the point of taking in that criticism when it's wrapped like it is.

And I know there are users who are frustrated if they think something is wrong, or experience bugs and the like. But still, while the internet as a whole are getting more and more vile and tribalist, we do expect some civility here. Because while seemingly social media as a whole goes criminally undermoderated, we do want to keep it as positive as possible here on the forum. Way back in the day most of the devs (and Miles!) came in here and had discussions with everyone about anything, (and some still do!). But that type of interaction, which is the best possible between creators and users, will strain very fast if all the feedback are worded as you did at certain times, or as the case have been too often, much worse. Why would the devs interact (mostly on a volunteer basis AFTER work) with us users if all they do is read how lazy or incompetent some people think they are?

And at the same time, that push is then pushed back by the ones who will defend, and then you have a trench war. That only escalates and the deep rooted tribalism comes out and it's impossible to see that anyone else have another opinion and that both can, in fact, be valid opinions with good points on either side.

So we mods try to deescalate this as best we can, and in some cases we let the users know in the thread (as I did to you), other times we remove things or give official warnings and/or timeouts.

I do hope you can take this advise in, and try to extract your good ideas and form suggestions in a way that makes them easy to take in, and not immediately invalidated because you tell the readers that they are idiots if they don't agree with everything. It just makes this a nicer place, one step at a time! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, XaW said:

I can't do anything about how you conceive things to be, but the fact is that criticism of the game is most welcome, but it needs to be constructive and with some reasoning behind it. As I said, I think you have some good and valid points in your posts, but they are not easy to pick out, and especially from the point of taking in that criticism when it's wrapped like it is.

And I know there are users who are frustrated if they think something is wrong, or experience bugs and the like. But still, while the internet as a whole are getting more and more vile and tribalist, we do expect some civility here. Because while seemingly social media as a whole goes criminally undermoderated, we do want to keep it as positive as possible here on the forum. Way back in the day most of the devs (and Miles!) came in here and had discussions with everyone about anything, (and some still do!). But that type of interaction, which is the best possible between creators and users, will strain very fast if all the feedback are worded as you did at certain times, or as the case have been too often, much worse. Why would the devs interact (mostly on a volunteer basis AFTER work) with us users if all they do is read how lazy or incompetent some people think they are?

And at the same time, that push is then pushed back by the ones who will defend, and then you have a trench war. That only escalates and the deep rooted tribalism comes out and it's impossible to see that anyone else have another opinion and that both can, in fact, be valid opinions with good points on either side.

So we mods try to deescalate this as best we can, and in some cases we let the users know in the thread (as I did to you), other times we remove things or give official warnings and/or timeouts.

I do hope you can take this advise in, and try to extract your good ideas and form suggestions in a way that makes them easy to take in, and not immediately invalidated because you tell the readers that they are idiots if they don't agree with everything. It just makes this a nicer place, one step at a time! :)

Fair enough, though IMO the customer, as with anything, always should be given the leeway in every situation. Because we are the ones purchasing the game. If some get a little extra frustrated, then IMO, it's simply the suppliers responsibility to take that on the chin. Not saying there shouldn't be a line that isn't crossed, but when you get too strict with it, you basically end up just alienating sections of your own support base. Frustrated critique should not only be allowed, but expected, because you simply cannot expect a customer paying you for anything to simply come back at you minus emotion to what they have spent their money on if they have something they aren't happy with.

It's not really the same as just describing the internet in general where people complain about anything regardless of actual personal monetary investment in what is being discussed. Ultimately I think it's obvious what I'm talking about is an improvement in the game to make it better, rather than simply some baseless this game is stupid type comment. The frustrated tone sometimes just comes with the territory and is the unavoidable human element sometimes.

Edited by Dundalis
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

If you have an idea for how it can be improved, the best place for it would be our Feature Request forums here - https://community.sigames.com/forums/forum/680-football-manager-feature-requests/

How CA/PA and how player progression has worked has changed substantially over the years within the code. And so far nobody has suggested a system which we feel works better than what we already have. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Neil Brock said:

If you have an idea for how it can be improved, the best place for it would be our Feature Request forums here - https://community.sigames.com/forums/forum/680-football-manager-feature-requests/

How CA/PA and how player progression has worked has changed substantially over the years within the code. And so far nobody has suggested a system which we feel works better than what we already have. 

We can't figure out how that system could work, we can just make points on how the system is flawed. It is clear, the system is limited, but it I think it is on development team/company to figure out how it could be improved.

As I said, after you play a couple of save games you can easily learn who are wonderkids and who are not, who will improve a lot and who will not. Again, let's take for example a player scores 30 goals in a season. You would increase his attributes dramatically in next FM. But here, if that player does the same, and for example he goes to Barcelona, and wins every possible team and individual award, he will not improve, because he is limited by fixed PA. 

PA should dynamically increase for example in the game if the player is playing above all the expectations constantly, if he is leading his team to overachieve on a long term, because in cases like that, as I said, in the next FM version you would increase his attributes anyway.

But how exactly that system could work, I think only you guys from SI and experienced programmers could figure out.. 






 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dundalis said:

Is that a serious question? Very very easily. Every single attribute can be coded in exactly the way the developers want it to function. A players career is only yay long. A players career has critical development points. You code each attribute dependant on player growth accordingly. Say you have a player with 100 CA at 15 years old. No PA. You break professionalism into it's own category of attributes devoted to player development. Each stat contributes to the growth of that player. Environmental factors play into the growth of the player. You have the combination of attributes that have a major say in for example how quickly a player develops. Maybe a player gets cut off in terms of progression to the first team, but has a high natural fitness or an equivalent attribute that controls for late career growth where you see some of these players that have late career development into top class players that did not start off as wonderkids. You literally control for EVERYTHING via Q&A. This is part and parcel of video game development. I don't see why it's so hard to grasp. How does a player with 40 CA at 15 not develop into a superstar with 20's in every stat? By coding and balancing and doing Q&A on every aspect developed to support the new player development model. If such a thing happens, the game developers have failed at their job. That is literally their job. To code a video game, balance it and make the functions work correctly to produce the best product for their customers.

So basically instead of 'PA', the hard limit on potential is still there but it's a hidden function of lots of researcher-set variables like professionalism (some of them sounding even more abstract and deterministic like "equivalent attribute that controls for late career growth") and FM code which changes from week to week during development.

So it's still certain players consistently  developing to the same levels, the only difference is that the researcher, an unpaid volunteer who has a decent idea of which of his clubs' players are expected to improve to become first teamers and no idea about the game code, cannot set his young squad player to [most likely] improve enough to be a first teamer but not to start getting big club interest. 

It's literally SI's job to allow researchers to give their best estimates of the career trajectories of its players and avoid having to update thousands of player attributes every time the development model gets a minor tweak to how quickly players recover from injury or increase training intensity in response to happiness. It literally isn't SI's job to eliminate PA - a variable you don't even see when playing the game normally - just because some people on internet forums have difficulty in grasping its utility

 

1 hour ago, Marko1989 said:

As I said, after you play a couple of save games you can easily learn who are wonderkids and who are not, who will improve a lot and who will not. Again, let's take for example a player scores 30 goals in a season. You would increase his attributes dramatically in next FM. But here, if that player does the same, and for example he goes to Barcelona, and wins every possible team and individual award, he will not improve, because he is limited by fixed PA. 

If a player scores 30 goals and wins every possible team and individual award IRL, this is nothing to do with how his attributes are set in FM, and so a researcher may decide his attributes were not good enough in the last version of the database

If a player scores 30 goals and wins every possible team and individual award in game, he does so because he is already a very good player in the game, so it makes no sense to suggest his attributes are not good enough and need to change.

Edited by enigmatic
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Dundalis said:

Is that a serious question? Very very easily. Every single attribute can be coded in exactly the way the developers want it to function. A players career is only yay long. A players career has critical development points. You code each attribute dependant on player growth accordingly. Say you have a player with 100 CA at 15 years old. No PA. You break professionalism into it's own category of attributes devoted to player development. Each stat contributes to the growth of that player. Environmental factors play into the growth of the player. You have the combination of attributes that have a major say in for example how quickly a player develops. Maybe a player gets cut off in terms of progression to the first team, but has a high natural fitness or an equivalent attribute that controls for late career growth where you see some of these players that have late career development into top class players that did not start off as wonderkids. You literally control for EVERYTHING via Q&A. This is part and parcel of video game development. I don't see why it's so hard to grasp. How does a player with 40 CA at 15 not develop into a superstar with 20's in every stat? By coding and balancing and doing Q&A on every aspect developed to support the new player development model. If such a thing happens, the game developers have failed at their job. That is literally their job. To code a video game, balance it and make the functions work correctly to produce the best product for their customers.

Everything you write about here, and more, is already in the game.  The player progression model is very complex, involves all manner of environmental factors, attribute coding, balancing and Q&A.  That doesn't mean it's perfect by any means but it can already produce greater variety in player progression than you seem to realise.

Anyway, to progress your idea the way to do it is to start a new thread in the feature requests forum.  SI won't even consider actioning anything unless it's raised there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If a player scores 30 goals and wins every possible team and individual award in game, he does so because he is already a very good player in the game, so it makes no sense to suggest his attributes are not good enough and need to change.

 

this would be an interesting way to adapt the CA/PA system without ripping it up. implement awards having a possibility to trigger players traits, morale boosts, additional team work boosts to a dominant defensive line etc

 

i get so sick of reading that my player who scores 20+ for 2-3 years is inconsistent. let a golden boot trigger boosts to more than reputation, a lot of attributes it could effect dont even need CA/PA

 

golden boot - consistency and composure boost

assists - consistency and vision boost

golden glove - consistency and command of area boost

 

any additional bonuses to defense or striker partnerships would make every season more interesting, rather than just replacing anyone with a new signing will an extra 10 CA on a new central defender be better than keeping your old guy? at the moment a good pre season sets EVERYTHING to max in team work, with nothing offered for years of playing and winning together

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The suggestions in this thread have so far basically been asking to replace the current system with a different system that does the same thing.

Also people the PA is hidden for a reason. If you play the game without looking at it you literally wouldnt know if a player will become a wonderkid. Ive had many players who coaches think will become world class and they hardly improve. The exceptions to that are normally those who are absolute beasts at 16. I've also managed in the Vanarama South and seen players go from that league to premier league starters.

I need to go a bit further in my current save to see if there are late bloomers in FM21 though.

Edited by francis#17
Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that performances is one of the factors which drives consistency improvement, in a less deterministic and more general way than simply getting a massive boost for awards (I do think the consistency attribute could probably improve more than it does, but that's mostly guesswork based on reports...) 

I can just about buy recognition for goalscoring exploits improving the composure of a striker whose composure is their biggest weakness, but not sure why a keeper's Command of Area would get better from winning a golden glove, normally an award given to a keeper who sits behind a good defence with fewer balls into the box to deal with than the other keepers. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

For me the biggest issue is that players dont develop much after 24 which is nonsense.  It ruins a big part of the game for me and i wont touch a player near this age if he has a decent bit of developing still to do, which is just absurd.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
47 minutes ago, Flumpy_85 said:

For me the biggest issue is that players dont develop much after 24 which is nonsense.  It ruins a big part of the game for me and i wont touch a player near this age if he has a decent bit of developing still to do, which is just absurd.  

They absolutely can over the age of 24 under the right development circumstances.

That in part will depend on some of their hidden attributes, but also will depend on training facilities, the level their club is playing at and the coaching staff. 

Something I really think gets lost here is that in-game, how 'good' a player is seen is largely dependent on how they perform in matches (so average rating) and their reputation. CA/PPA and PA of course have influence, but so to do those other factors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Neil Brock said:

Something I really think gets lost here is that in-game, how 'good' a player is seen is largely dependent on how they perform in matches (so average rating) and their reputation. CA/PPA and PA of course have influence, but so to do those other factors.

Yep and I think this is purely an educational issue as this is how it should be imo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Flumpy_85 said:

For me the biggest issue is that players dont develop much after 24 which is nonsense.  It ruins a big part of the game for me and i wont touch a player near this age if he has a decent bit of developing still to do, which is just absurd.  

Absolutelly agree with this. Players very rarely improve after that age, no matter what the club/facilities/coaching stuff is. It just becomes boring when you know that the player will stop developing at that age. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Marko1989 said:

Absolutelly agree with this. Players very rarely improve after that age, no matter what the club/facilities/coaching stuff is. It just becomes boring when you know that the player will stop developing at that age. 

 

See Neil's post 2 above yours.  If you have some game saves which show things in a different light then upload them to the bugs forum :thup:.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Neil Brock said:

They absolutely can over the age of 24 under the right development circumstances.

That in part will depend on some of their hidden attributes, but also will depend on training facilities, the level their club is playing at and the coaching staff. 

Then why does this literally never happen? It does not happen in teams with highest PA players, it does not happen in teams with one of the best training facilities, youth recruitment, good coaching staff etc. I have played enough (different) saves to say that

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
52 minutes ago, Beuthen said:

Then why does this literally never happen? It does not happen in teams with highest PA players, it does not happen in teams with one of the best training facilities, youth recruitment, good coaching staff etc. I have played enough (different) saves to say that

Literally took me 20 seconds looking at my own career save to find an example.

Dwight McNeil at Burnley at the age of 26 (year is 2026), has a

Spoiler

155 CA

Joins Man City, after a season his CA is up 10 points and now at his PA maximum. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dbuk1 said:

Out of interest if someone current ability goes up say 10 points how many in game attribute points would that be as an estimate as I know different attributes have different weights etc?

This is impossible to quantify. It'll depend on the position(s) the player can play, the attributes themselves (what you've focused on etc) and how high these attributes are. As you say, attributes have different weightings depending on position, but also how easy it is to increase an attribute. It's very easy to go from 1 to 2, but a lot more difficult from 19 to 20.

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Beuthen said:

Then why does this literally never happen? It does not happen in teams with highest PA players, it does not happen in teams with one of the best training facilities, youth recruitment, good coaching staff etc. I have played enough (different) saves to say that

I would have shown how this can be shown how to be false but Neil did it, if you try to train and improve 24+ year olds you defo can do ti with some players. But Please please don't post uninformed things like this or at least be open to being wrong as worst case is that it leads SI to changing things like this so that it becomes unrealistic. An example of when this happen is with injuries that are now reduced so that they occur 20% less than real life.

( @Neil Brock I never understood why there wasn't an option to make injuries occur 100% of the time, ill also post this in the features forum but would be appreciated if this could be an option in the editor at least) 

Edited by Platinum
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Beuthen said:

Then why does this literally never happen? It does not happen in teams with highest PA players, it does not happen in teams with one of the best training facilities, youth recruitment, good coaching staff etc. I have played enough (different) saves to say that

I had a striker who got better until age 30 where he finally learned to play as a Complete forward after playing advanced forward all his career. It was a newgen that came through the youth recruitment of dulwitch hamlet and was doing fine in premier league. I a new screenshot in my origonal post on page 2 of this thread. If he stopped getting better at age 24 I would not have kept him around.

Edited by Speedyol
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 28/12/2020 at 09:31, Jervaj said:

I find the sytem is ok in general. The only issue really is that age is too impactful. This goes mainly in two ways.

It makes sense that the fastest development, specially in some areas happens at a younger age, and that older players barelly change anymore or start declining. But I feel like the ffects are too harsh too soon. Like players in the middle of their carreers 25-26 are barelly developping even when they have potential left. I feel like some slower developping, specially mental should still be possible if they are still training well and playing regularly.

And older players physical decline also seems too hardcoded. Like this is easily noticeable with starting old players that have good physicials and they all drop dramatically in the first season. I had in my save 4 players between 31 and 36, all with decent pace/accelaration of around 12-13 (2nd league team) and similar or better in other physicials (one was even my strongest player). Despite the varying specific ages and personalities they all dropped consistently. All of them were below 10 in pace/acceleration and had taken around a 2 point hit in all the others.  

It seems impossible organcially after a few years in to have older players with similar physical values to the ones at the start in the database because after a certain age the game seems to make them fall no matter what.

I think there should be more influence from other factors. Personality and quality of training should affect this decline instead of been so guaranteed at 29-30. Maybe also peak values (17-20) could be harder to maintain, but the lower they are its easier.

 

Please do all of this SI, great post 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...