Flaws of Potential Ability

[glamdring]

Originally posted by snowballnufc:

every regen in my opinion should all have the pa of 200 but si shpuld tryu and figure out that only a select few with ever reach this potential as in real life where everyone is the same they just develope diffrently

Putting hard caps on things like potential is never an ideal way of doing things, but have you any idea how difficult it is to program a stable algorithm that takes even a smallish number of very different factors into account to determine the progression of a value like CA?

I've no idea how many variables there are that go into the formula for determining progression of PA, but I'd imagine it is a large number and when I have programmed algorithms in the past that are allowed a free reign (which is effectively what capping everyone at 200 is) it is very very difficult to control the effects of all those parameters to keep it balanced and not have everyone reaching 200 or no-one getting anywhere near it.

Slamming a hard cap onto the progression of CA is a cheap, but maybe not so cheerful, and very effective way of keeping control of the distribution of player CAs throughout the game rather than getting the balance of parameters ever so slightly wrong and finding that every player is reaching a CA of 200!

[djsills]

I'm not a big fan of the CA/PA system. Although I do think that every player has limits on how good they cane be.

Is it no true that a player can learn something new every single training session or match they play in?

Here's my solution which i feel mirrors real life much more accurately.

Every player has a PA on their technical attributes and their physical atributes. These should be two different values because they're two very different skill sets.

Personally, I've always done athletics and cross country because I'm gifted physically so my PA for physical attributes would be high. On the other hand when it comes to shooting, crossing and long passing I've always been terrible. Even with sustained training on one area my talent for these things improves very slowly. So my PA for technical skills would be very low.

Mental attributes should have no PA because a player can always learn new things even when he's old. I also think mental stats should change much more rapidly than technical or physical. A player with low teamwork may finally understand that football is a team game after constantly being told by his manager and change instantly his philosophy. Composure is definitely linked to how comfortable a player is at a club and form. Darren bent at spurs this year has lacked a bit of composure this year because he has had to prove himself in the short stints he's got on the pitch. Last season at Charlton he looked the most composed striker in the premiership.

I would propose a hidden learning stat which would indicate how quickly a player learns mental skills. or even a combination of several attributes to determine how quickly or likely a player's mental stats wil develop.

There is obviously problems with my solution. It's much more work for researchers to give each player two sets of CA/PA for technical and physical attributes. It requires the introduction of new attributes. It requires a more advanced development system that could integrate a sudden change in mental attributes.

But in my opinion it represents real life more accurately and should therefore be considered by the more learned to consider integrating it into the game.

[pelicanstuff]

Originally posted by djsills:

I would propose a hidden learning stat which would indicate how quickly a player learns mental skills. or even a combination of several attributes to determine how quickly or likely a player's mental stats wil develop.

This seems like a better idea than most un this thread generally, it could be called "IQ" and be on a scale of 70-150.

No, but some good ideas there. Some definite cap has to be kept.

[TonyD]

What if you had a 19 year old player at a League One club with a CA-95 PA-140 who had played week in week out for the first team and had an average rating of 7.75. Now obviously he's playing above L1 level and a few Prem clubs have watched him and been impressed but with a PA of only 140 he's not Prem class but still gets a move to lets say Middlesboro who have better coaches and a top quality training facility should the game maybe then give that player a PA boost of say maybe 10-15, but with no guarantee he's going to reach it, because hes moved to a higher level or should it just leave it at 140 and let Boro find out for themselves that hes not good enough and sell him a season later to a mid table Championship side.

[DaveRH]

Originally posted by TonyD:

or should it just leave it at 140 and let Boro find out for themselves that hes not good enough and sell him a season later to a mid table Championship side.

This option. The move to a club with better coaches and facilities would be reflected in getting more CA points to improve his skills than if he was still at his own club.

[pelicanstuff]

Originally posted by TonyD:

What if you had a 19 year old player at a League One club with a CA-95 PA-140 who had played week in week out for the first team and had an average rating of 7.75. Now obviously he's playing above L1 level and a few Prem clubs have watched him and been impressed but with a PA of only 140 he's not Prem class but still gets a move to lets say Middlesboro who have better coaches and a top quality training facility should the game maybe then give that player a PA boost of say maybe 10-15, but with no guarantee he's going to reach it, because hes moved to a higher level or should it just leave it at 140 and let Boro find out for themselves that hes not good enough and sell him a season later to a mid table Championship side.

Why should he get a PA boost if he naturally wouldn't get any better? PA isn't what someone will reach by kicking around and doing nothing, it's what they will achieve with top training. If this was the case, the game would have no 'next big things' who go nowhere, one of the more realistic elements at the moment in my opinion.

A PA of 140 might make someone pretty good if all the stats are optimal for his position, anyway. The AI managers should take stats and performances into greater account when scouting/buying players.

[Stomalomalus]

Well I just checked Fazios PA on two different saves as I said I would. On a first season save with liverpool, his CA is 139 and his PA is 168. On a third season save with Utd, his CA is 153, and his PA is 182. Now, Im pretty damn sure I havnt edited this, so it must have changed in game. Can SI confirm this either way, perhaps?

[DaveRH]

Originally posted by Stomalomalus:

Well I just checked Fazios PA on two different saves as I said I would. On a first season save with liverpool, his CA is 139 and his PA is 168. On a third season save with Utd, his CA is 153, and his PA is 182. Now, Im pretty damn sure I havnt edited this, so it must have changed in game. Can SI confirm this either way, perhaps?

PA is -9, so if they are two differently generated games then he has simply been assigned a different PA.

[AB-forever]

Originally posted by DaveRH:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stomalomalus:

Well I just checked Fazios PA on two different saves as I said I would. On a first season save with liverpool, his CA is 139 and his PA is 168. On a third season save with Utd, his CA is 153, and his PA is 182. Now, Im pretty damn sure I havnt edited this, so it must have changed in game. Can SI confirm this either way, perhaps?

PA is -9, so if they are two differently generated games then he has simply been assigned a different PA. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Doesn't -9 give a random PA in the range 155-180?

[Stomalomalus]

Ah, if hes -9 that would explain it. But im sure it was different earlier. Must have got confused with another game

[aggressive minor]

I read the initial post, couldn't be bothered to read the rest, but I fully agree.

I definately think the PA should change under certain circumstances.

Like Frank Lampard, whats his PA, I pressume its like 170-185? He wasn't considered an outstanding youngster, Im pretty sure he had PA of like 150s when he first came into this game.

Theres tons of examples, if you play older games of FM/CM, you find so many of the players from now had the wrong PA!

So of course they should be able to change.

[pelicanstuff]

Originally posted by aggressive minor:

I read the initial post, couldn't be bothered to read the rest, but I fully agree.

I definately think the PA should change under certain circumstances.

Like Frank Lampard, whats his PA, I pressume its like 170-185? He wasn't considered an outstanding youngster, Im pretty sure he had PA of like 150s when he first came into this game.

Theres tons of examples, if you play older games of FM/CM, you find so many of the players from now had the wrong PA!

So of course they should be able to change.

Actually, I think he had a very high PA, If I remember correctly. But FM isn't a real life prediction engine, it is a simulation. It would be ridiculous for someone's POTENTIAL to increase.

[Bongo-Bongo]

Personally, I don't see the problem with having PA. In fact, I'd say it makes perfect sense, particullary when you consider that the age of youth players in the game start at 15-16. If players came into the game at 8-12, there could be an arguement for having players as they still have an awful lot of development to do. It's near impossible to tell who look like having careers in football at this level.

When a player reaches 15-16 however, they have passed the most critical part of their development. Now coaches and scout, particullarly the best ones, have an easier job telling which players may or may not as you can see which players have the key elements required to make a footballer.

Personally, I believe the development system is what needs improving. At the moment, I personally believe it's far too rigid. Players all seem to develop at the same rate. You don't get any players who see rapid increases in attributes. You rarely see any late bloomers, and you rarely see any player improve in one area more then others. All attributes pretty much improve at the same rate, regardless of training and position.

[Bongo-Bongo]

Originally posted by aggressive minor:

I read the initial post, couldn't be bothered to read the rest, but I fully agree.

I definately think the PA should change under certain circumstances.

Like Frank Lampard, whats his PA, I pressume its like 170-185? He wasn't considered an outstanding youngster, Im pretty sure he had PA of like 150s when he first came into this game.

Theres tons of examples, if you play older games of FM/CM, you find so many of the players from now had the wrong PA!

So of course they should be able to change.

The only circumstance in which a players PA should change is if he picks up a serious injury.

Frank Lampard for example has had the same PA IRL throughout his career. All thats changed is that things have changed in his career to enable him to improve nearer to his PA. His potential has never changed as it simply an indicator of how good a player COULD become.

The reason why players PA's have changed throughout each itteration of the game is simply because the clubs researcher either feel they have seen something to suggest a player could become better/worse then they first though, or where the researcher at the players new club believes the old researcher got it wrong.