Ein

You can either download an updated database or do it yourself via the pre-game editor (located in Steam under tools). I personally prefer to do it myself and keep updating it.

I don't have FM23/24 but I've seen it happen in previous editions. Normally, I offer a non-negotiable offer that I consider reasonable but below their asking price. This can unsettle the player if refused and he may then end up transfer listed for a reduced asking price.

Unfortunately, contemporary ideology is imbued with the myth of progress. However, newer does not necessarily equate to better. I personally don't find any problems playing older editions. I typically update the database myself, mostly by revising PAs and fixed attributes. I use dynamic PA (-10, -95, -9, etc) for most players under 26 so games are more replayable, unpredictable and fun. When a new edition is out, I try the demo and don't buy it if I don't like it, which is what I did with FM24. People will still buy and praise the game for a number of reasons (swayed by marketing, addiction, social media monetisation interests, etc).

There's no actual or objective transfer value. The asking price can change depending on a number of factors including player happiness. I'm not fazed by astronomical asking prices. Basically it means that the club is presently unwilling to sell. If you manage to unsettle a player, the asking price can drop to a more realistic value. The issue, as mentioned earlier, is that the game lacks the more objective market value. It should be possible to sort players and clubs by market value. Having a market value doesn't mean that clubs would be forced or expected to sell at market value. They could still demand ten times as much or just outright refuse to sell. It would then be up to the player/agent to force a transfer.

IMO it should be possible to view/sort players by market value (like Transfermarkt and past editions of FM). Market value would depend on a number of factors (league/player reputation, performance, age, contract length, etc). Then there should be the asking price (or a not for sale declaration) set by the club which the respective player/agent may or may not agree with. A scout's estimate of the asking price would be given in the scout report. In the recent editions the former component is completely lacking and it's not even possible to view the most valuable players.

I don't know. Maybe depends on a club's willingness to sell but in that case I don't know on which basis one's own player values are calculated. Also, I don't understand why values now come in ranges. It should simply be one market value like in Transfermarkt.

I agree that it is very easy to assess players. I think that is partly because players' attributes and personalities are not as dynamic as they should be. In FM, attributes more or less increase incrementally until a ceiling is reached and then remain pretty much static until the physicals decline with age. The same with personality attributes and other hidden attributes like consistency; they generally improve incrementally with time and experience. However, in real life, you can find plenty of examples of players who stop performing after securing big moves. Other players start performing out of the blue (think Guirassy). The incremental approach doesn't really simulate most real-life development trajectories.

The issue is not with the display of attributes, it's whether attributes matter e.g. whether players with higher scoring attributes do better than those without or whether players with higher attributes for pressing press more/cover more distance than those without. The claim is that they do not or that the difference is minimal/less than it should be or that match performance is predominantly governed by other factors (e.g. the role itself). Masking attributes and following the match metrics would simply conceal this issue.

Bumping this as it has dropped down a few pages without a reply being given.

You have 2 IFs, a SS and an AF essentially doing the same thing/attacking the same space. If you want the AF as the focal point, the roles behind him should probably be more conservative e.g. IF-S AM-S W/IW-S. His attributes seem to be ideal for DLF-A.

Press conferences and a lot of "AI" stuff in general (staff recommendations) are badly programmed and should pretty much be ignored/delegated. I understand that it may be difficult to improve them. The problem with the latest FM iterations is that these areas have been given more prominence instead of less. For instance, you have to enter a dedicated menu for press conferences instead of being able to respond quickly in the inbox. Press conferences are much longer than necessary, leading to junk questions like transfer-listed players in lower divisions. They introduced staff meetings which you cannot opt out from. Bad areas should be recognized as such and be given less prominence until solutions are found.

I reported this issue here: Unfortunately there has been no response yet. At this point, I'm not sure to what extent the information displayed in the training UI is correct. I've been using routines like Transition - Press a lot based on what the UI displays but I'm seeing experienced players opt for general routines like Attacking and Defending.

I don't think aggression and bravery can be improved by mentoring. Mentoring can improve determination and the hidden mental attributes (professionalism, ambition, etc).

Yes, I normally see it go back soon after recovery. So from the table it seems that aggression is fixed and other attributes like bravery, teamwork, work rate change very slowly. Can attributes actually decline before the age of 30+ or do they just increment till a peak is reached? E.g. is it possible to have someone like Hector Bellerin who in previous FM iterations had something like 19/20 pace/acceleration decline while still in his 20s?

BTW I disagree that these attributes should be completely fixed. Of course it shouldn't be possible to turn Özil into a BWM but, for example, this kind of evolution should IMO be possible within the game universe.

The issue is with the training UI which, if what you say is the case, is displaying incorrect information. The mentioned training routines/roles/focuses all purportedly target them. Anyway, I raised a bug report about it.

Yes, but this means the UI is showing incorrect information. Are there any other examples of such incorrect info so that I can raise them as a bug?

Can someone from SI confirm this? Has this ever been reported as a bug?

I'm trying to imprint a DNA onto my squad which features aggression and bravery among other attributes. I'm using training sessions like transition - press, defending (both target aggression), training roles like BWM and PF (which target aggression and bravery) and additional focus of aerial (which targets bravery). But I haven't noticed any improvements over multiple years. Can anyone confirm that these attributes can be improved?

The video actually shows that most things (player condition, injuries, distance covered, stamina, work rate, etc) are working as expected. When you say that the experiment is fallacious, does that apply to those things as well? The issue the OP refers to is with mentality and trigger press seemingly having no effect on condition. The video's author does in fact mention that playing defensively does not necessarily translate into covering less distance as you would then still have to run after your opponent.

I haven't had the opportunity to evaluate and test it yet, as it appears that the demo has been pulled out. Trying out the demo is the most reliable way to obtain a definitive answer.

When players are given random attributes, an attribute may end up being very low, thus stunting their long-term development e.g. in the FM24 demo, Pape Matar Sarr has a determination of 4. Suggestion: when a researcher doesn't feel inclined to give a value, determination should be generated from an average of other related mental attributes (e.g. teamwork, work rate, bravery). Alternatively, more random variables may be introduced (similar to how random PA works) e.g. -1: 1-5, -2: 6-10, -3: 11-15, -4: 16-20

I had reported this issue back in FM22 but it seems that some staff are still being generated automatically. They tend to have poor abilities and personalities and have long, expensive contracts to boot. In some leagues (e.g. Italy), the Recruitment Analyst is generated automatically. Almost all set piece coaches are generated automatically. I'm not sure if it's just the Demo. Can anyone check whether this happens in the full game?

1. Why is the Inverted Winger considered more creative than the Inside Forward considering that only the latter has 'takes more risks' hardcoded? Similarly, if the IF-A is more of a wide advanced forward, why is 'takes more risks' hardcoded? 2. The Complete Wing Back has both 'stay wider' and 'roam from position' hardcoded. Does it mean that he will only roam on the flank or may he still roam into other positions? 3. Why doesn't the Segundo Volante, which is often described as a deeper variant of the Box-to-Box Midfielder, have 'roam from position' hardcoded? Thanks in advance.