What is the actual difference between two numbers in an attribute, ie in percent terms (or otherwise)

[Duckywuckydoo]

In other words if one player has 10 strength and another player has 20 strength then does the second have 200% of the strength of the first? Or is it more weighted, ie there is a greater leap between 11-20 than there is from 1-10 so second guy has say 300% of the strength of the first?

Does this make sense?

[2feet]

Can I add a Q here?

If a player has 12 for pace, then a yellow arrow increase appears next to it for three months in a row... but it still says 12 pace, is his pace now quicker?

IE does each yellow arrow indicate 0.2? So he now has 12.6 pace... but its displayed as 12 until he reaches 13?

[Kloppy]

3 hours ago, Duckywuckydoo said:

In other words if one player has 10 strength and another player has 20 strength then does the second have 200% of the strength of the first? Or is it more weighted, ie there is a greater leap between 11-20 than there is from 1-10 so second guy has say 300% of the strength of the first?

Does this make sense?

Probably reading your question wrong but I think 1 rating is 5% increase on the one below 

[DementedHammer]

I can't answer the question directly. But what I do know is that 1 represents the minimum level of proficiency that you'd find in a professional footballer. So, a 1 is still pretty damn good compared with your average Sunday league player.  With that in mind, there isn't likely to be a massive difference between similar attribute ratings. 

 

Beyond that, how the ratings are calculated, and whether they are linear increments or otherwise is beyond my personal knowledge. 

Edited August 17, 2022 by DementedHammer

[fc.cadoni]

Current Ability & Potential Ability (CA, PA): Range 1-200

Attributes: Range 1-20

CA is the sum of all attributes. Not all attributes having the same weighting for each position; some of them having 0 weighting which means is a cost free for CA.

Increasing Acceleration (ST or AMRL position) from 9 to 10 will be easier from increasing 15 to 16.

The exact formula will remain hidden for obvious reasons from SI.

====

@2feet

Slight arrows down or up it's just a re-calculation / re-balancing of CA. Decimal numbers must be "under-the-hood" thing, but visual to you as far I can understand. 12.1, 12.2, 12.3, 12.2, 12.1 must be some factors like rest PA, training facilities, ambition, professionalism, determination etc etc. Things is being connected each other and how exactly is being calculated, as I said, must be remain hidden from public.   

[2feet]

Its not a rebalancing because the up yellow arrows are not accompanied by down orange ones.

And the CA goes up when lots of yellow arrows appear in one go.

And the Progress graph shows the attribute has slightly increased, but it still states the same number on the players profile.

EG Pace 12, (even though on the graph you can see a slight increase in Pace from the previous month)

1)

is each yellow allow worth 0.2?

2)

Is a 0.2 increase in an attribute immediately effective in the game or do you have to wait for the attribute to increase by 1.0 for it to then be operating in a match?

Edited August 18, 2022 by 2feet

[fc.cadoni]

@2feet

As I said; it's a re-balancing / re-calculation of CA based on RCA.

Not all attributes have the same weighting in all positions.

If a player with CA 80 (RCA 90) and PA 100; IF make a good process in training and matches; will try to match - catch his RCA (arrows slight up or full up or down). What attributes should get up or down is based on weighting of the attribute and other factors as well. Pace for DC is 5.0 and Pace for ST is 10.0 according to Pre-Game Editor (attributes weighting is available on Pre-Game Editor).

You should not worry if it's 12.1 or 12.8 in background; you should worry if you have a DC player with CA 150 (PA 150) and having Decisions 11 (or Positioning 10). If you focus on this two attributes as an example, game will try to decrease other attributes in order to make room for these two (and not only).  

[DP]

9 hours ago, DementedHammer said:

I can't answer the question directly. But what I do know is that 1 represents the minimum level of proficiency that you'd find in a professional footballer. So, a 1 is still pretty damn good compared with your average Sunday league player.  With that in mind, there isn't likely to be a massive difference between similar attribute ratings. 

 

Beyond that, how the ratings are calculated, and whether they are linear increments or otherwise is beyond my personal knowledge. 

This cannot be completely right. If someone has 1 for, say, professionalism or even heading that doesn’t mean it’s pretty dammed good. There are probably Sunday league players that are better in the air than some pro’s as the pro isn’t good in the air or plays in a position where it isn’t important. 

[XaW]

18 minutes ago, DP said:

This cannot be completely right. If someone has 1 for, say, professionalism or even heading that doesn’t mean it’s pretty dammed good. There are probably Sunday league players that are better in the air than some pro’s as the pro isn’t good in the air or plays in a position where it isn’t important. 

No, but it the LOWEST thinkable for a professional footballer. So a 1 is an extremely poor attribute for a professional, but it's not at a "pull a random person of the street and have them do it"-poor. So a 1 heading is very poor and means they can't really control it, but it's not the same as throwing a ball towards a kid who closes their eyes and hope to hit the ball. There is a subtle difference there.

[DP]

18 minutes ago, XaW said:

No, but it the LOWEST thinkable for a professional footballer. So a 1 is an extremely poor attribute for a professional, but it's not at a "pull a random person of the street and have them do it"-poor. So a 1 heading is very poor and means they can't really control it, but it's not the same as throwing a ball towards a kid who closes their eyes and hope to hit the ball. There is a subtle difference there.

What about jumping reach if the player is 5’4? Get a random 6’7 person off the street and they’ll be better. 

[XaW]

5 minutes ago, DP said:

What about jumping reach if the player is 5’4? Get a random 6’7 person off the street and they’ll be better. 

Yes, because that is directly linked to height and the jumping reach is the highest point they could reach. So a random person of the street _might_ be better than a pro in certain things, but 1 is the lowest you'd expect from a professional.

[gunner86]

2 hours ago, fc.cadoni said:

 

If a player with CA 80 (RCA 90) and PA 100; IF make a good process in training and matches; will try to match - catch his RCA (arrows slight up or full up or down). 

 

My understanding of this was the other way round. If a player has a higher RCA than his CA his attributes will drop to match his CA. CA is the metric used to define what the combined attribute spread is, not the attributes defining what the CA is, if that makes sense.

I always interpreted it as CA is basically like the amount of points you can ‘spend’ on attributes. As you say, depending on position, certain attributes cost more to improve than others. RCA is essentially the amount of points ‘spent’. If a players CA drops below the RCA they then become ‘overdrawn’ so to speak. So the result is that attributes are then forced to drop to a point where there is no CA overspend or the players CA recovers.

I’m not sure which way round is right though.

[santy001]

There is no incremental measure which can be provided on the attribute scale in terms of going from 1 to 2 = X% and 10 to 11 = Y%. The gap between 1 and 20 isn't so large to begin with for the majority of attributes, and there will never be a situation in which you can think an attribute of X would've made a certain difference over an attribute of Y. 

It's not even universally true that a higher attribute is always better. When playing lower league teams I will always try to acquire a fast forward (acceleration/pace) and a positionally intelligent forward (anticipation/off the ball/decisions) to the best that I can. One real problem you can encounter at those levels is such a poor utilisation of the pace and acceleration that the forward is caught offside so often when if they were a bit slower might not have ended up offside. 

Equally there are times when a high or low vision/flair etc can be a benefit and a detriment. There just isn't a catch-all criteria that can be applied to attributes. It will always be circumstantial in matches. 

[DP]

2 hours ago, santy001 said:

There is no incremental measure which can be provided on the attribute scale in terms of going from 1 to 2 = X% and 10 to 11 = Y%. The gap between 1 and 20 isn't so large to begin with for the majority of attributes, and there will never be a situation in which you can think an attribute of X would've made a certain difference over an attribute of Y. 

It's not even universally true that a higher attribute is always better. When playing lower league teams I will always try to acquire a fast forward (acceleration/pace) and a positionally intelligent forward (anticipation/off the ball/decisions) to the best that I can. One real problem you can encounter at those levels is such a poor utilisation of the pace and acceleration that the forward is caught offside so often when if they were a bit slower might not have ended up offside. 

Equally there are times when a high or low vision/flair etc can be a benefit and a detriment. There just isn't a catch-all criteria that can be applied to attributes. It will always be circumstantial in matches. 

Flair is a bit of an edge case though right? Finishing, passing, tackling, positioning, determination - most of them, if not all - you want as high as possible. 

[santy001]

From time to time how often do you hear things like "struck it too well almost" - as a general rule of thumb of course you would want them to be higher. But there are times when an untidy/scuffed finish might beat the keeper because they weren't able to anticipate that particular shot. A great passer might be right in seeing a pass across the pitch he can play without a problem for his ability, but the opposition might have a defender who can read that brilliant pass and intercept it. Meanwhile the poorer passer plays something different.

That's what I mean by it being circumstantial and how you can never know. 

Across thousands of examples, a better finisher should get more goals, a better passer should have a higher completion rate etc. But attributes don't work in isolation, so a poor finisher with amazing positional/reactional abilities could easily score bagfulls more than the technically brilliant, physical monster of a forward. 

[Rashidi]

On 18/08/2022 at 02:59, Duckywuckydoo said:

In other words if one player has 10 strength and another player has 20 strength then does the second have 200% of the strength of the first? Or is it more weighted, ie there is a greater leap between 11-20 than there is from 1-10 so second guy has say 300% of the strength of the first?

Does this make sense?

The danger with treating attributes like this is that sometimes you could think that a small difference in attributes can make a huge difference, actually this couldn't be further from the truth


This defender is currently my best defender, in fact he finished the season in Serie A as the best defender this season.

To top it off he has ALWAYS produced a good rating


In his 347 appearances for the club he has never given me a season where he has finished lower than 7.11, and to make things more interesting he has been playing with me since he was 17 when we were in the Serie A, even then he was no wonderkid. He was only a 3 star player.

There are many factors that go into understanding how attributes affect play. Attributes work in combination, never in isolation. Some attributes may even take more importance during certain phases of play or during development. 

And we also need to bear in mind that a player also has a position rating, a versatility rating, plus other hidden attributes which can also impact on his overall performance.

When people reduce the game to only the visible attributes that make up his profile, they make the critical mistake of not understanding that everything about the player could affect his performances. Sometimes you need to play to the strengths of a player. Lets take this further

I wanted to evaluate the performances of my defender vs the rest of the league when the season ended, so I came up with a scoring metric to measure his total defensive actions.  His defensive score was the highest, if you look down the list there are defenders there with way superior attributes like Merih Demiral and Bastoni.  That defender outperformed the rest.

So if you go into the game thinking that the sum total of attributes defines the quality of a player, you could be in for a lot of disappointments. Sometimes the way the attributes are spread is way more important. 
 

[KlaaZ]

4 hours ago, Rashidi said:

The danger with treating attributes like this is that sometimes you could think that a small difference in attributes can make a huge difference, actually this couldn't be further from the truth


This defender is currently my best defender, in fact he finished the season in Serie A as the best defender this season.

To top it off he has ALWAYS produced a good rating


In his 347 appearances for the club he has never given me a season where he has finished lower than 7.11, and to make things more interesting he has been playing with me since he was 17 when we were in the Serie A, even then he was no wonderkid. He was only a 3 star player.

There are many factors that go into understanding how attributes affect play. Attributes work in combination, never in isolation. Some attributes may even take more importance during certain phases of play or during development. 

And we also need to bear in mind that a player also has a position rating, a versatility rating, plus other hidden attributes which can also impact on his overall performance.

When people reduce the game to only the visible attributes that make up his profile, they make the critical mistake of not understanding that everything about the player could affect his performances. Sometimes you need to play to the strengths of a player. Lets take this further

I wanted to evaluate the performances of my defender vs the rest of the league when the season ended, so I came up with a scoring metric to measure his total defensive actions.  His defensive score was the highest, if you look down the list there are defenders there with way superior attributes like Merih Demiral and Bastoni.  That defender outperformed the rest.

So if you go into the game thinking that the sum total of attributes defines the quality of a player, you could be in for a lot of disappointments. Sometimes the way the attributes are spread is way more important. 
 

I love how he went up two divisions with you and just kept shining. I had a similar experience with an Italian midfielder, Marco Carraro, in FM21 who I signed at Orléans in the Ligue 2, and who then kept performing for me almost until the end of his career.

[DJ Sir Matthew]

4 hours ago, Rashidi said:

The danger with treating attributes like this is that sometimes you could think that a small difference in attributes can make a huge difference, actually this couldn't be further from the truth


This defender is currently my best defender, in fact he finished the season in Serie A as the best defender this season.

To top it off he has ALWAYS produced a good rating


In his 347 appearances for the club he has never given me a season where he has finished lower than 7.11, and to make things more interesting he has been playing with me since he was 17 when we were in the Serie A, even then he was no wonderkid. He was only a 3 star player.

There are many factors that go into understanding how attributes affect play. Attributes work in combination, never in isolation. Some attributes may even take more importance during certain phases of play or during development. 

And we also need to bear in mind that a player also has a position rating, a versatility rating, plus other hidden attributes which can also impact on his overall performance.

When people reduce the game to only the visible attributes that make up his profile, they make the critical mistake of not understanding that everything about the player could affect his performances. Sometimes you need to play to the strengths of a player. Lets take this further

I wanted to evaluate the performances of my defender vs the rest of the league when the season ended, so I came up with a scoring metric to measure his total defensive actions.  His defensive score was the highest, if you look down the list there are defenders there with way superior attributes like Merih Demiral and Bastoni.  That defender outperformed the rest.

So if you go into the game thinking that the sum total of attributes defines the quality of a player, you could be in for a lot of disappointments. Sometimes the way the attributes are spread is way more important. 
 

I guess herein lies the big dilemma for SI & FM: how to keep it challenging enough for people like you who have developed such a deep insight into the inner workings of the game, what works & what doesn't, how things/attributes are intertwined, what is proverbial fluff and what is key AND at the same time keep it accesible and simple enough for your average Joe/Joanne who watches MoTD once a week and visits his/her League Two team on Sundays and might be tactically inept  but still wants to take their team to Champions' League glory...

[KingCanary]

15 hours ago, DP said:

Flair is a bit of an edge case though right? Finishing, passing, tackling, positioning, determination - most of them, if not all - you want as high as possible. 

The only ones I can think you might not want too high.

Aggression

Flair

...and a few of the goalkeeping ones like Tendency to Punch, Eccentricity and Rushing Out.

Edited August 19, 2022 by KingCanary

[sdx15]

6 hours ago, DJ Sir Matthew said:

I guess herein lies the big dilemma for SI & FM: how to keep it challenging enough for people like you who have developed such a deep insight into the inner workings of the game, what works & what doesn't, how things/attributes are intertwined, what is proverbial fluff and what is key AND at the same time keep it accesible and simple enough for your average Joe/Joanne who watches MoTD once a week and visits his/her League Two team on Sundays and might be tactically inept  but still wants to take their team to Champions' League glory...

A good start would be to make it impossible for average players to perform like world-class players. I know good tactics and hidden attributes can make players perform really well, but the CB Rashidi has shown shouldn't really be the best defender in Italy under no circumstances.

[DJ Sir Matthew]

10 minutes ago, sdx15 said:

A good start would be to make it impossible for average players to perform like world-class players. I know good tactics and hidden attributes can make players perform really well, but the CB Rashidi has shown shouldn't really be the best defender in Italy under no circumstances.

I disagree, I think it speaks for @Rashidi he's able to get the best out of this player for consecutive years and I think there are enough real life examples of average players overperforming under certain coaches/situations. I would fail (unless I got lucky).

To be honest, I've been out of FM for a while now, and just restarted FM21 (don't have FM22). Wanted to do something different and chose Newell's Old Boys (because I'm a huge fan of Marcelo Bielsa). But then I see the squad overview screen and I immediately feel overwhelmed, not knowing how/where to start. It's just a bit much. And while I used to then sift through all players, deciding which to keep, starting XI etc (based on visible attributes mind), I can't bring myself to it anymore because everytime after a few months it all falls apart and I don't know why. Maybe I'm not cut out for this football tactics thing or maybe I'm trying too hard. I would love to have Rashidi's insights internalized and really enjoy this game (with its flaws) but now it's like looking at a mountain, knowing you got to reach that top but I have no climbing gear. Out of depth...

[sdx15]

4 minutes ago, DJ Sir Matthew said:

I disagree, I think it speaks for @Rashidi he's able to get the best out of this player for consecutive years and I think there are enough real life examples of average players overperforming under certain coaches/situations. I would fail (unless I got lucky).

Average players can overperform, but in real-life they either improve and become world-class players or return to their average performances. In FM, some players just keep on playing exceptionally well for years as if most of their attributes are above 15. I'm sorry, but I don't see anything plausible in a player with a Marks opponent tightly player trait whose marking is 12, anticipation and decision 13, agility 10 and acceleration 11 playing like prime Chiellini. Congrats to Rashidi for getting the most out of his player, but that's just not realistic.

But, to be fair, the reason for this player playing so well is most likely the fact that headers won stats heavily influences player rating so a CB with jumping reach at 19 can easily get a good match rating. I've seen it in my save as well.

4 minutes ago, DJ Sir Matthew said:

To be honest, I've been out of FM for a while now, and just restarted FM21 (don't have FM22). Wanted to do something different and chose Newell's Old Boys (because I'm a huge fan of Marcelo Bielsa). But then I see the squad overview screen and I immediately feel overwhelmed, not knowing how/where to start. It's just a bit much. And while I used to then sift through all players, deciding which to keep, starting XI etc (based on visible attributes mind), I can't bring myself to it anymore because everytime after a few months it all falls apart and I don't know why. Maybe I'm not cut out for this football tactics thing or maybe I'm trying too hard. I would love to have Rashidi's insights internalized and really enjoy this game (with its flaws) but now it's like looking at a mountain, knowing you got to reach that top but I have no climbing gear. Out of depth...

I feel you. My first FM was FM20 and at the beginning the game was so overwhelming that I had to take a long break. If you need a fresh start, reading about tactics and watching others play helps a lot to get a general sense of what works and what doesn't work in FM so you can always try that.

[Marko1989]

On 19/08/2022 at 08:46, Rashidi said:

The danger with treating attributes like this is that sometimes you could think that a small difference in attributes can make a huge difference, actually this couldn't be further from the truth


This defender is currently my best defender, in fact he finished the season in Serie A as the best defender this season.

To top it off he has ALWAYS produced a good rating


In his 347 appearances for the club he has never given me a season where he has finished lower than 7.11, and to make things more interesting he has been playing with me since he was 17 when we were in the Serie A, even then he was no wonderkid. He was only a 3 star player.

There are many factors that go into understanding how attributes affect play. Attributes work in combination, never in isolation. Some attributes may even take more importance during certain phases of play or during development. 

And we also need to bear in mind that a player also has a position rating, a versatility rating, plus other hidden attributes which can also impact on his overall performance.

When people reduce the game to only the visible attributes that make up his profile, they make the critical mistake of not understanding that everything about the player could affect his performances. Sometimes you need to play to the strengths of a player. Lets take this further

I wanted to evaluate the performances of my defender vs the rest of the league when the season ended, so I came up with a scoring metric to measure his total defensive actions.  His defensive score was the highest, if you look down the list there are defenders there with way superior attributes like Merih Demiral and Bastoni.  That defender outperformed the rest.

So if you go into the game thinking that the sum total of attributes defines the quality of a player, you could be in for a lot of disappointments. Sometimes the way the attributes are spread is way more important. 
 

This makes no sense to me at all. I know that hidden attributes are also important and all that. but, if the defender is defensively bad, like your CB, with 12 tackling and 12 marking, then he is.. bad defender.. He is overall bad player, with only jumping as his strength. Makes no sense that bad defender produces such good defensive performances and even wins best defender award.

This is why we need dynamic potential. If he is constantly improving, getting better and better, he can't be stuck with 12 tackling and marking. If he won Serie A defender of the year in reality SI would increase those two attributes for him to at least 15, but this way he is probably stuck to 12 for the rest of the career. He could win best defender of the World Cup and Champions League for example and still be on 12 because of the fixed potential, which makes no sense.

[Rashidi]

4 hours ago, Marko1989 said:

his makes no sense to me at all. I know that hidden attributes are also important and all that. but, if the defender is defensively bad, like your CB, with 12 tackling and 12 marking, then he is.. bad defender.. He

Frankly speaking, this is the fundamental issue I see amongst a few people playing the game. 
 

If we are to equate good performances with good attributes then this game would be predictable and big underdog results will be hard to come by.

I think anyone who has been following me over the years knows that when I have a weaker squad I do a lot of in game management.  For nearly every game of the season I studied teams before playing against them. During matches I would identify their main threats to try and neutralise them, and I did this as a livestream. Finally and this is the important bit.

If I am a weaker side and I allow myself to spend more time defending then naturally I will expect players like Tobias to fail. In fact in the Europa Cup I got knocked out because we were played off the park by bigger and better sides, but in a marathon league season, we took the game to the bigger sides by playing more direct and attacking them in the channels.

By doing so I spent less time defending and more time attacking, and when I had to defend against better sides in my league I removed the offside trap.  In the previous season we conceded nearly 1.33 goals per game a season because I partnered Tobias with someone who didn’t have good interceptions. The following season I paired him with a player who pulled off almost 5 interceptions a game. That’s Immense.

On top of that, I wanted to make sure most of the grunt defending was done in midfield so sometimes we would drop the line of engagement without changing the DL, dropped the mentality to counter. The compression in midfield would give sides an issue working the ball. And because Tobias has fantastic concentration and decent anticipation, this couple with his fantastic jumping reach meant he would win the initial header from a press, all I needed was a player with good interceptions and passing completion in midfield to make sure we made something of the 2nd ball.

Yes his attributes may appear to you as poor, but he has a fantastic personality and coupled with those key attributes he is playing well. If I played a game where I allowed teams to come at me, we would be toast. We aren’t gegenpressing, but we are very compact in our approach. Whether we can repeat the feat is another matter.  Attributes are important yes but only in combination. 

[santy001]

Weird because I look at that defender from Rashidi's game and would have no qualms about having him in my own squad when competing at a Champions League level. I cannot conceive ever reaching a point where I felt 12's in tackling and marking were bad. 

I don't think it helps because you have a misconception about how such a defender would be rated by the research team were they to achieve similar in FM. When Stoke were in the premier league most of my lower/mid-range CA players were the clubs best players. They were lower ability with better personalities and hidden attributes. They'd generally be capable of performing better week in, week out than the higher CA ability players. Depending on the exact year you go to, Saido Berahino would be one of the highest CA players at the club and be effectively unusable due to his mental attributes unless you were prepared to micromanage him in a way that I expect few if any play the game.

[glengarry224]

Is the game realistic:  i.e. does FM22 = irl football?  Obviously no, nor should it be.  It's a game.  IRL, very smart, skilled and experienced managers work 70-80 hours per week (= 3500-4000 hours per year) and rarely, if ever, have the kind of success which we have on FM in - what? - 1/10 the time invested (on average, how long does it take to get through 52 weeks of FM?).  Of course, we want the game to somewhat simulate IRL, but if the game does not supply some adrenaline and some thrilling success, it won't be around for long. 

[personally, I think it's too easy to achieve wild success and would like a 'difficulty switch' which doesn't require me to turn off the simulation:  for example, you can hide all attributes but irl, no manager would ever have to say:  I have no idea which of these players has more pace or which can jump higher.]

5 hours ago, Rashidi said:

If we are to equate good performances with good attributes then this game would be predictable and big underdog results will be hard to come by.

Agree.  And if accumulating great attributes worked IRL, Man U would be...LOL.  But should it be easier for newbies/casuals to see what kind of player they have?

IRL, can players achieve elite level without certain attributes?  I think so.  Often they need to be in the right position and role:  for example, Pirlo after he became more of a DLP.   

Do CBs need great tackling to be elite.  Well, look at Virgil over the last 365 days:

I'd wager that no top team would have trouble finding a spot for VvD! 

[sdx15]

When I started this discussion about players overachieving in FM, I never meant to say that it shouldn't be possible to have players who overachieve. Good manager can consistently get the most out of their players and that's why they're coaching some of the best teams in the world. So once again, cheers to @Rashidi for getting the most out of his CB, the tactical reasoning behind the CB's good rating was a good read.

The point I wanted to make was that there should still be measure to players overachieving. Only a few elite players are what you would call complete players for their position. All other players have their pros and cons and, while managers can do everything to mask their player's cons, you should, on a bigger sample of games, still be able to see a difference between say Robert Huth and John Terry. You shouldn't be able to just have a player with a few nice pros and a few red flags and make him the best CB in Serie A who's constantly getting ratings over 7.

I remember having a nice all-rounder BBM on FM20 while playing in the Czech league. The guy had 11s, 12s and a few 13s in all the important attributes and he played like Gerrard both in the league and in European competitions. The tactic I played wasn't tailored for him, but he scored a lot of goals and assisted even more and I was clueless to what made him so good. Neither his hidden attributes nor his personality were anything special (balanced personality with good consistency and a slight dislike of big matches), however, he played well week in,  week out in a tactic that concentrated on WBs and two CFs. That's just a bit too gamey for me.

[Butters76]

On 18/08/2022 at 00:53, fc.cadoni said:

Current Ability & Potential Ability (CA, PA): Range 1-200

Attributes: Range 1-20

CA is the sum of all attributes. Not all attributes having the same weighting for each position; some of them having 0 weighting which means is a cost free for CA.

Increasing Acceleration (ST or AMRL position) from 9 to 10 will be easier from increasing 15 to 16.

The exact formula will remain hidden for obvious reasons from SI.

====

@2feet

Slight arrows down or up it's just a re-calculation / re-balancing of CA. Decimal numbers must be "under-the-hood" thing, but visual to you as far I can understand. 12.1, 12.2, 12.3, 12.2, 12.1 must be some factors like rest PA, training facilities, ambition, professionalism, determination etc etc. Things is being connected each other and how exactly is being calculated, as I said, must be remain hidden from public. 

Attributes are displayed 1-20 , but the actual numbers behind the scenes are -127 to +127. Thats why you can see a player has improved in an attribute but still display ie: 13.
Atleast they used -127 to +127 some years ago. I think they still do.
Like condition is displayed 1-100 (but behind the scenes its 1-10000)