Elsu

Potential Ability

339 posts in this topic

This is false. It happens with newgens as well. They have a PA just like the rest of the players in the game. I once sold a 22 year old, in-form, French national team striker b/c it was obvious he reached his peak. How did I know this? His ratings dropped across the board (he wasn't injured) which told me he hit is PA limit. No matter how well he played (he was top scorer in European championship and won the CL) I knew he wouldn't improve. This is pretty silly and wouldn't happen in the real world.

It has very little to do with real players and newgens.

Its not false.

You can't say its wrong as there is nothing to compare it to. The newgen created doesn't exist in the real world so you have nothing to match his career path or performance against like you have with a real player.

Do we get newgens that start with a low CA and go on to be top quality players - Yes

Do we get newgens at big clubs that turn out rubbish - Yes

Do we get newgens at big clubs who go on to have good careers at a lower level - Yes

Whether you like it or not there are loads of examples of players who look good at age 18yo-21yo that just never develop in the real world.

Go back and look at the U21 squads from 7/8 years ago and see how many are playing at top flight clubs, you'll be surprised at how many aren't - Just like your 22yo French ST.

I also don't know what you mean by "ratings" but a player's in match rating doesn't lower just because he has reached his PA. It also begs the question if he was playing well and scoring goals why would you sell him??

EDIT

Reading some of your other posts I'm not even certain you understand the CA/PA system and how it translates into attributes and their use in the ME.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So that his attributes reflect that he exceeded expectations. The same way Torres' ratings dropped b/c he didn't meet expectations. Unless you think ratings should stay the same? No offense but that question is little silly.

During the course of the season, the worlds top scorer should definitely improve. It happens in real life and every time a new version of FM is released, so why is it so crazy that it can't happen in the game world? Once again, if it's gradual there shouldn't be a problem. He wouldn't just turn into a world class striker overnight, nor would the attribute increase be unrealistic.

You have that part slightly the wrong way round. Attributes determine player performance in the ME. If a player seems to perform above what you'd expect from his visible attributes then there are usually other reasons - hidden attributes, morale, etc. If a lowish CA player is the worlds top scorer he's just having a wonder season where all other factors 'click' for him. Doesn't mean he's outperforming his attributes - this isn't possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please stop with the straw man arguments. NO, WE ARE NOT SAYING EVERY PLAYER SHOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO BE MESSI. The main point is the relationship between CA and PA shouldn't be so rigid. You guys keep dumbing down this debate with the same baseless accusation.

This striker's ratings were good but not great. His production exceeded his ratings for a while but his ratings either dropped or hovered around the same level b/c of his PA. The same way his rating would drop if he has a bad season, they should increase if he plays well.

Your mixing up form and ability, its possible in game for the worlds best player to have a bad season if various things happen, just like its possible for an average player to have a brilliant season, it doesnt mean these players have become better or worse players, it just means they either didnt perform or constantly performed to their attributes, no player can out play his in game attributes but a player in good form will make full use of said abilities a player not in form will not.

Where the issue really comes up with all this is when we have hindsight on real players in the game and we can look back at how players have progressed and compare them to how they were in the game, this wont change because there will always be a human in control of the database. With regen players this really isnt an issue, because you should never know the ca/pa numbers of these players, and there is nothing to compare them too. Football is full of stories of players being world beaters at 22 and stagnating, players not coming of age until they are slightly older, wonderkids, massive flops, you name it, all of which are possible with regens in FM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its not false.

You can't say its wrong as there is nothing to compare it to. The newgen created doesn't exist in the real world so you have nothing to match his career path or performance against like you have with a real player.

It has nothing to do with real world players. This has been stated countless times in the thread. It's about how rigid PA is. I shouldn't have to keep repeating myself.

Do we get newgens that start with a low CA and go on to be top quality players - Yes

Do we get newgens at big clubs that turn out rubbish - Yes

Do we get newgens at big clubs who go on to have good careers at a lower level - Yes

Whether you like it or not there are loads of examples of players who look good at age 18yo-21yo that just never develop in the real world.

The main issue is with PA. Nobody in this thread has disputed any of the above. Of course players that start at low CA can go on to be world class players. Why? Because their PA is high. This is obvious and doesn't need to be restated. The question is what happens when a player consistently plays better than his attributes even though he's reached his PA.

Go back and look at the U21 squads from 7/8 years ago and see how many are playing at top flight clubs, you'll be surprised at how many aren't - Just like your 22yo French ST.

Not even close to the same situations. How many 22 year old top flight, national team strikers in great form (35+ goals a season) have ever been sold? It's worse with AMCs and FBs.

I also don't know what you mean by "ratings" but a player's in match rating doesn't lower just because he has reached his PA. It also begs the question if he was playing well and scoring goals why would you sell him??

I use ratings and attributes interchangeably. I sold him b/c his rating weren't that stellar, he had 2 years left on his contract, and most importantly, he obviously hit his PA wall and there was no chance of him getting better.

EDIT

Reading some of your other posts I'm not even certain you understand the CA/PA system and how it translates into attributes and their use in the ME.

I understand clearly. I think you just don't understand the argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main issue is with PA. Nobody in this thread has disputed any of the above. Of course players that start at low CA can go on to be world class players. Why? Because their PA is high. This is obvious and doesn't need to be restated. The question is what happens when a player consistently plays better than his attributes even though he's reached his PA.

The player is not consistently exceeding his ability, he is consistently playing to his full potential which is entirely different to how you are perceiving the situation.

Not even close to the same situations. How many 22 year old top flight, national team strikers in great form (35+ goals a season) have ever been sold? It's worse with AMCs and FBs.

You decided to sell him despite being in form, you're problem not FM.

I use ratings and attributes interchangeably. I sold him b/c his rating weren't that stellar, he had 2 years left on his contract, and most importantly, he obviously hit his PA wall and there was no chance of him getting better.

See previous point about you selling him, as for the PA wall you speak of & assuming that the player had already hit is peak why is this a problem? As has been repeatedly said not every player continues to progress in terms of their technical ability & how much more do you expect from a striker who is scoring 35+ goals per season?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You have that part slightly the wrong way round. Attributes determine player performance in the ME. If a player seems to perform above what you'd expect from his visible attributes then there are usually other reasons - hidden attributes, morale, etc. If a lowish CA player is the worlds top scorer he's just having a wonder season where all other factors 'click' for him. Doesn't mean he's outperforming his attributes - this isn't possible.

When I say ratings, I mean attributes. I don't mean match ratings.

Attributes should be adjusted for wonder seasons the same way attributes are adjusted for bad or injury plagued ones. It happens in the real world and in every new release.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When I say ratings, I mean attributes. I don't mean match ratings.

Attributes should be adjusted for wonder seasons the same way attributes are adjusted for bad or injury plagued ones. It happens in the real world and in every new release.

Attributes aren't adjusted due to bad seasons attributes are adjusted then the bad season is the result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone who says they should scrap the PA system and then presents their alternative solution have one thing in common. That is their alternative solutions are exactly how the game behaves currently if you don't ever cheat and look at PA. Think about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The player is not consistently exceeding his ability, he is consistently playing to his full potential which is entirely different to how you are perceiving the situation.

I've played enough games of FM to know that a players performance can exceed what you would expect based on his attributes. This also happens in the real world.

You decided to sell him despite being in form, you're problem not FM.

Thank you captain obvious for that analysis but that isn't the point. The issue is b/c of how rigid the CA/PA system is at 22 years old I new exactly how good he would turn out.

See previous point about you selling him, as for the PA wall you speak of & assuming that the player had already hit is peak why is this a problem? As has been repeatedly said not every player continues to progress in terms of their technical ability & how much more do you expect from a striker who is scoring 35+ goals per season?

Not much more, but I don't expect him to know with certainty that he won't get any better. This isn't realistic at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Everyone who says they should scrap the PA system and then presents their alternative solution have one thing in common. That is their alternative solutions are exactly how the game behaves currently if you don't ever cheat and look at PA. Think about it.

1) I never said scrap the PA system

2) You don't have to look at the numerical CA or PA to know when a player has reached his PA limit. Scout/coach reports and unexplained drops in attributes are all you need.

Pretty ignorant to assume anyone who would like to see the system changed is cheating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've played enough games of FM to know that a players performance can exceed what you would expect based on his attributes. This also happens in the real world.
It does not, it is impossible for a person to consistently perform beyond their ability, you are perceiving it as such because the norm is for people to consistently perform below what would be expected given their talent.

As for the attributes & again this has already been pointed out to you but it's worth repeating, the game assigns hidden attributes to players so what you see on screen might only be 80% of the picture.

Not much more, but I don't expect him to know with certainty that he won't get any better. This isn't realistic at all.

This is where you are going wrong, for some reason you are expecting a player who is already scoring at a rate reserved for the very best to improve season after season, such behaviour would go against what is normal in reality.

I think we've strayed far enough off-topic for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It has nothing to do with real world players. This has been stated countless times in the thread. It's about how rigid PA is. I shouldn't have to keep repeating myself.

There is a significant difference between real & newgen players when it comes to CA/PA.

Newgens are created by the game which is God.

Real players have their CA & PA estimated by a human being and this is adjusted from version to version to mirror their real life performances.

The main issue is with PA. Nobody in this thread has disputed any of the above. Of course players that start at low CA can go on to be world class players. Why? Because their PA is high. This is obvious and doesn't need to be restated. The question is what happens when a player consistently plays better than his attributes even though he's reached his PA.

This has already been covered numerous times.

Then he is making the most of what is given to him on a regular basis - ie he is being consistent and has the relevant attributes for the position he plays.

Not even close to the same situations. How many 22 year old top flight, national team strikers in great form (35+ goals a season) have ever been sold? It's worse with AMCs and FBs.

Barside has already covered this - You made the choice to sell him.

I use ratings and attributes interchangeably.

Well don't, it very confusing for everyone else. If you mean ratings say ratings, if you mean attributes say attributes - Its not rocket science!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In My opinion, the only weakness with the PA system is that most players in the CCC or league one etc have à Set Value that is too low. If implemented correctly, one could set à higher value but instead let his personality, ambition and à few more mental stats along with morale and the relationship with the coaches have à bigger impact whether he actually CAN reach this PA.

.....or....

Perhaps more stats should NOT take up CA points as such but instead be able to raise through experience, such as positioning, anticipation, decision. I think à player with à CA and PA Of 120 should be able to raise his anticipation stat simply because he gets more experienced. Naturally, not all players should be able to get really high stats here( like decision, positioning) as some people Will never have this " vision".

( the mentioned stats att only examples and perhaps the positioning is à poor example as its something that actually is one tjat tje players train everyday in the trainingground)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Everyone who says they should scrap the PA system and then presents their alternative solution have one thing in common. That is their alternative solutions are exactly how the game behaves currently if you don't ever cheat and look at PA. Think about it.

Are you not getting PA stars on your scout reports then? I don't think the PA system should be scrapped, just that PA star ratings should be hidden from us as it pretty much is IRL, hence why researchers are re-adjusting figures twice annually.

The people asking for a complete overhaul want the players to continue improving CA once the set PA has been reached, which most others disagree with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dragging this thread back on-topic it would be interesting to know what percentage of players (either default &/or newgen) actually achieve their full potential.

My perception of this topic is that people are assuming players will more often than not reach their full PA value at some point whereas I think it is actually quite rare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dragging this thread back on-topic it would be interesting to know what percentage of players (either default &/or newgen) actually achieve their full potential.

My perception of this topic is that people are assuming players will more often than not reach their full PA value at some point whereas I think it is actually quite rare.

My guess would be very, very few. If speaking about those players at MY club, most Of them probably come really close but thats simply because I only sign and develop ambitious players with the correct personality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dragging this thread back on-topic it would be interesting to know what percentage of players (either default or newgen) actually achieve their full potential.

My perception of this topic is that people are assuming players will more often than not reach their full PA value at some point.

Just from playing the game and looking at my own team I would say the bulk of players with a decent personality/hidden attributes reach their PA. This is judging from coach reports rather than 3rd party applications though.

In terms of overall number of players probably much lower but one of the problems is that most experienced human users target those players with good personalities leading to a high conversion rate so to speak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1) I never said scrap the PA system

I never said you did, because I never read your posts, nor do I have any clue who you are.

2) You don't have to look at the numerical CA or PA to know when a player has reached his PA limit. Scout/coach reports and unexplained drops in attributes are all you need.

So your saying that it should be harder to see when a player has reached his limit? What's funny is that a player hasn't reached their limit until their CA actually starts to decline without increasing back to the PA limit. For example: I train the balls out of my players physical attributes until they hit 21. Sometimes players reach their PA before then and it starts taking from their other skills. Crazy thing, that player hasn't reached his limit, yet he has reached his PA limit. As said player ages, he loses some of his physical beastery, but makes up for it with his technical skills. Another crazy thing, this player is actually a better player at 25 even though he hit his PA limit at 21. So using this PA system, you can mimic real life. That's why the best players in the game don't always have 190+ PA. I mean, what's the point of a high PA when 90% of it is tied up in useless attributes?

Pretty ignorant to assume anyone who would like to see the system changed is cheating.

Pretty arrogant to assume anyone who makes a generalized statement is ignorant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just from playing the game and looking at my own team I would say the bulk of players with a decent personality/hidden attributes reach their PA. This is judging from coach reports rather than 3rd party applications though.

In terms of overall number of players probably much lower but one of the problems is that most experienced human users target those players with good personalities leading to a high conversion rate so to speak.

As I do not have Genie or FMRTE I cannot research this for myself. I'd be surprised if SI haven't run soak tests to check on player development & be equally surprised if there wasn't a decrease in full PA realisation scaled against increasing PA values.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you not getting PA stars on your scout reports then? I don't think the PA system should be scrapped, just that PA star ratings should be hidden from us as it pretty much is IRL, hence why researchers are re-adjusting figures twice annually.

The people asking for a complete overhaul want the players to continue improving CA once the set PA has been reached, which most others disagree with.

Those scout reports can be wrong, as well as it is not based 100% off of PA. Yes PA goes into it, but so does their hidden attributes. So if you never look at PA, you can have a 5 star player who has only 160 PA as long as his attributes are distributed properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't a good example. I think everyone accepts that players don't pan out in FM. A better example would be Kobe Bryant. Under the FM system he could never be the player he is b/c he was drafted in the middle of the first round. How many youngsters with less than 3 star potential have you ever seen become world class? I haven't seen any, and this is the problem.

I had a youngster rated 2.5 stars by all my scouts and coaching staff, but I liked the look of him. I didn't think he would develop much, so sent him out on loan his 2nd season (1st season was spent entirely on the bench of the first team). He scored more goals than I expected in Ligue 1. I brought him into the first team the next season. He scored WAY more goals than I expected. He is now rated 3 stars by all my staff, and is genuinely world class. But my scouts told me for YEARS he was a 2.5 star player, at best. Maybe I had a very good striker all that time, that caused him to be rated 2.5 stars, but still, he is going to end up with the all-time record for league goals, and if a 2.5 star (as a youth) player can do that then I think the system works quite well.

My view is that a 3 star player with the 'right' attributes can be better than a 3.5 star player who is inconsistent, doesn't like big games, injury prone, bad attitude, or has the 'wrong' attributes. Similarly for a 2.5 star player being able to be better than a 3 star player.

I used to think a PA of 150-160 wasn't great. Actually, provided the points go to the right attributes it is VERY good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My guess would be very, very few. If speaking about those players at MY club, most Of them probably come really close but thats simply because I only sign and develop ambitious players with the correct personality.

I've actually been doing my own research. To do this, I buy every player with 180 PA and up and make sure my training/coaches are always at 20/20. I would say about 10%-20% still don't reach their PA under ideal circumstances. What I've seen is that is usually lack of professionalism that kills a player.

I also never coach games, and I usually simulate an entire year at a time. Then just move all the newgens to my team in June, set up their training schedule, and then simulate again.

Doing this I have never won the Champions League, but I have won my league for a few years straight. Which makes it seem like to win the champions league, you need the best players, not the players with the highest PA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It does not, it is impossible for a person to consistently perform beyond their ability, you are perceiving it as such because the norm is for people to consistently perform below what would be expected given their talent.

As for the attributes & again this has already been pointed out to you but it's worth repeating, the game assigns hidden attributes to players so what you see on screen might only be 80% of the picture.

I perceive it as such b/c I look at his performance in comparison with other strikers in the game world. Sure formations, tactics, morale, and team strength affect his performances affect his performance, but in the real world and in each release of FM attributes are determined by performance. There is no denying this.

I know what hidden attributes are and to suggest he is playing that well only b/c of hidden attributes is at best a guess. I'm enjoying people telling me things I already know.

This is where you are going wrong, for some reason you are expecting a player who is already scoring at a rate reserved for the very best to improve season after season, such behaviour would go against what is normal in reality.

I think we've strayed far enough off-topic for now.

Once again, straw man. The fact of the matter is I know he won't get any better b/c his PA is fixed. Never said he should have the ability to have unlimited increases in his attributes. No manager in the world can tell you for certainty if a player has peaked, but in FM this is common place

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Those scout reports can be wrong, as well as it is not based 100% off of PA. Yes PA goes into it, but so does their hidden attributes. So if you never look at PA, you can have a 5 star player who has only 160 PA as long as his attributes are distributed properly.

Yes they can be wrong but not wrong enough for me. I tend to sign determined/professional types anyway and also avoid players with a low match rating so in most cases I'd guess my players hidden attributes are pretty good. A scout report also gives a personality type and lists weaknesses.

I have no problem with the system itself but think that PA stars should not be shown to create greater uncertainty. The actual PA values would still be there though just in the background. If you hide PA then you won't know whether or not that 16 year old 1* player can be great or average and only youngsters with an early high CA(wonderkids) will stand out as future stars. The rest(high PA) will then be spotted by user and AI if their CA ever becomes high enough. I very much agree with Cougar's post below.

Personally I think the CA/PA system is a good one but I would like to see improvements in the following areas:

A) Only a very small % of players should reach their PA within a save (say 1%) even given ideal conditions. It should also be more difficult for the player to improve the closer he is to his PA (This is possibly already included, I'm not sure).

B) Staff estimate PA via stars far too easily, there should be an obvious difference between staff with good, average & bad scouting attributes and even the best staff should be wrong far more often. I would even extend this to maybe getting rid of PA stars altogether and just showing CA stars along with maybe a comment, "Reached limit", "Can improve", "Can improve significantly".

C) More "Fog of War", this has been suggested in the past but an extension would see attributes shown first as arrows, then as a range before being narrowed down to an actual number as you scout a player over time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This only happens with real players, its a total non-issue with newgens.

It is an issue with newgens because:

- If I had a regen with the exact same statistics as a real player who performed in-game exactly the same way, he would have the same issue

- It is possible to construct a hypothetical real-world player from a regen

- If the game wants to become the best simulation in the world, the simulation cannot and should not distinguish between real player and regen

and in reality its a very minor issue as even though the game progresses into the future it is still currently 2012 in real life. The players we consider stars now are stars within FM, the players we think will be stars of the future will be stars in the future as we progress through a save and those players that are "Late Bloomers" who will get noticed in the next few years we don't really care about as we don't know anything about them at present.

What about late-bloomers in a saved game?

It's okay plucking values out of the air for Cleverly, he's already at a big club with good facilities etc. It's a hell of a lot harder doing it for some random young player in league 2 as there are so many variables that could potentially affect him. You are making a huge guess at his EPA because you are also guessing at his likely career trajectory (i.e. whether a bigger club buys him, plays him etc). In fact it's a much bigger guess that just guessing at a players actual PA which the researchers do now - actual PA factors as much out as possible by assuming that a player gets perfect training etc to give an absolute maximum and then determines whether a player actually reaches that based on his other factors.

I'd argue it's no harder right now where League Two researchers always have to factor in the possibility that they can do a Kightly or Smalling and shoot up the ranks very quickly.

In this system, a League Two researcher doesn't care about this possibility. The possibility of him shooting up the ranks is an outlier and rare case that few people would really spot. The researcher only needs to consider realistic scenarios, and "take an average".

Not every researcher can take a guess on what "perfect training" might be. A researcher in amateur leagues - does he consider the possibility that this player moves to Barcelona and gets La Masia training and first-team football, getting 10.00 ratings all over the park? No! He just worries about realistic scenarios.

So let's say you have a 20 year old playing fairly regularly in league 2, and doing fairly well - what EPA should he have? He has a chance of making the prem, but he probably won't. So do you give him the EPA of a league 2 journeyman and allow the other factors to massively affect his actual PA (so he could potentially become a prem star), which is nonsense, since anybody could potentially become a prem star if you allow this. Or you give him a prem level PA and make sure he doesn't reach it often, which is exactly what we do now so nothings changed.

You give him an EPA of a potential League Two star or perhaps higher depending on where you think his potential is (League One/Championship perhaps).

You don't give him PA. In my system, PA is changed.

Anyone can become a Premier League star, yes - it is just that for 99.9% of the population, you are probably more likely to win the lottery. The reality is that my system will be of course balanced to ensure that the average case is sensible and that outliers are rare. But importantly - outliers can happen.

And I doubt that it's easier for researchers. If you give Cleverly an EPA of 155, but give him a very high determination, he's almost always going to exceed that EPA, so you have the stupid situation of a researcher saying "I think Cleverly will be EPA 155, but I'm going to have to give him EPA 140 since he's always going to exceed what I give him" or vice versa, you have a researcher giving a player an EPA which he knows will be almost always ignored.

Determination doesn't really affect it that much - that's how a player responds to things like going down a goal. Do you mean professionalism?

And I don't agree with your reasoning above. EPA 155 implies that given his professionalism of 15 (say), he will peak at CA 155 on average. If for some reason we could "freeze" his attributes now except his professionalism (drop to 10), then we could simulate the game several hundred times and measure his average peak CA. We will likely find that his average peak CA will likely be lower (150, say), due to the lower professionalism. The 155 is a "baseline" or guideline. If Cleverley deviates from this baseline slightly, then his average peak CA would deviate correspondingly.

This will allow us to do things like:

- Tutor Cleverley with someone with outstanding mental attributes => average peak CA might rise to 160, say, beating the Manchester United researcher's opinion

- Tutor Cleverley with Antonio Cassano => average peak CA might plummet to 120

- Give Cleverley an excessively hard training schedule => More injuries => average peak CA might fall to 145

You do raise a good point in that the EPA assigned is inevitably tied to the underlying attributes, of course, but I don't see why this can't be mitigated with guidelines, balancing and soak tests.

All I'm saying is, you either have a development model that is based on an average + factors that wil let the player exceed the average, or you a model that is based on a maximum with factors that determine whether you reach that maximum or not. Either way the outcome is exactly the same. In either model the player will ultimately reach a point where he can develop no further (either because he has reached his max PA, or because he has reached the limit at which the other factors will allow him to exceed his average PA). Of both systems, the Max PA one is much easier to use for researchers and for database balancing and it makes much more sense to stick to it.

Not true. Say a player has PA 120 and EPA 100 (in two different worlds, of course). For the first world, P(peak CA > 120) = 0, while for the second world, P(peak CA > 120) > 0. They are not the same.

In both models, a player will inevitably peak, in the same argument that every finite list of numbers has a maximum value (can be repeated). But importantly, the peak CA distribution is not the same. The first world has a hard limit, while the second does not.

I'm not convinced the peak CA model is easier for researchers since thinking about outlandish scenarios is more difficult than mundane, sensible scenarios. A researcher in the PA world has to think of difficult, rare scenarios (and weight these accordingly) while a researcher in the EPA world doesn't care. If everyone is assigned a boring, mundane EPA, then it is possible for any one of these to blossom given the correct support. The EPA is not taken as gospel.

@ x42

Also how do you propose your system would deal with the millions of players who have a reputation of being a good/star player in the mid-lower leagues but struggle when promoted/transferred into higher leagues?

As far as I can see with your system the player would stand out in say League 1, get an improved PA as a result which would lead to a better performance in the Championship whereas in real life the player struggles in the Championship but plays well again when dropping back to League 1.

One idea that springs to mind is that one of the factors that determines the "PA rise" is the quality of the league (or opposition). A quick-and-dirty (not recommended without testing!) approach might be to multiply the rise by the reputation of the league divided by 10000 (in the database, reputation goes from 1-10000 I believe).

An alternative is not to consider small timescales like 1 year. Maybe a rolling average is better.

I also want to point out in general that far too much emphasis is placed on CA/PA rather than looking at attributes.

This last season I've had three DLs:

A) 31yo rated at 3*

B) 21yo rated at 2.5* with 3.5* potential

C) 34yo rated at 1.5*

Despite the difference in stars the best performer of the three has been the 34yo this season and if you looked at the relevant attributes for the position there actually isn't that much difference between any of the three.

This is true, but the reason I look at CA is because it's an easy way to compare apples and oranges (i.e. left-backs with right-wingers). We could go into individual attributes but there are too many of these to look at. In addition, we don't have "potential attributes" (i.e. "Cleverley's passing will never exceed 15") and the capping at 20/100 is a model and scaling issue. Oddly enough, do any PA defenders think it is a good idea to have "potential passing"? After all, everyone's passing has a limit...

If a top flight player is bossing games and scoring more then a goal a game but FM doesn't treat him as a equal to Messi and Ronaldo that is a problem with the way FM uses PA\CA in determining value and reputation.

If a player scores more then a goal a game and creates half as many again then he does rival Messi and Ronaldo if you can't reconcile his attributes with his performances that is a problem with the match engine.

Under the present system when Kevin Phillips improbably performed beyond expectations and scored 30 goals in 99/00 the researcher would have amended his attributes and CA to a number that would make that possible. Under your proposed system the AI would increase his attributes and CA to a level where he could score 35 goals the next season.

Your proposing a system where good performance leads to improved ability but in any sporting activity I have been involved in its always been the case that improvements in fitness, skill, mentality or understanding happen before or contemporaneously with improvements in competitive performance.

I would argue that being able to perform in ever-increasing difficulty (i.e. opposition teams taking a well-performing player more seriously) implies that a player is actually learning and hence should develop in terms of technique (perhaps learning a new skill to get past tighter defences, or by practicing in tighter areas) or mentality (i.e. thinking quicker or reading the game better).

First-team football is vital for player development - hence it must be key to player learning.

The scenario you posed above (30 goals, then 35): If a player defies all odds and gets better, then why should he not develop further?

Alternatively, it could be that the rise in individual ability cannot trump the rise in defensiveness of the entire team. I think that's perfectly reasonable, since one man does not make a team. So realistically, if a player scores 30 goals in one season, it is going to be difficult to match that tally next season, and in reality, this happens (second-season syndrome). If they do manage to match (or better) that tally, though - they should be raised even further. We then repeat this process (opposition treats the player as an even larger threat).

Everyone who says they should scrap the PA system and then presents their alternative solution have one thing in common. That is their alternative solutions are exactly how the game behaves currently if you don't ever cheat and look at PA. Think about it.

Nope.

A player has CA 120 and PA 120. He does not develop further despite performing outstandingly well. You know this because he never gets any more green arrows on his profile screen.

A player has CA 120 and EPA 100. He develops further as the opposition perceives him as a greater threat, due to him performing outstandingly well. You know this because he has green arrows on his profile screen.

Two scenarios that are different, and you never look at PA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope.

A player has CA 120 and PA 120. He does not develop further despite performing outstandingly well. You know this because he never gets any more green arrows on his profile screen.

A player has CA 120 and EPA 100. He develops further as the opposition perceives him as a greater threat, due to him performing outstandingly well. You know this because he has green arrows on his profile screen.

Two scenarios that are different, and you never look at PA.

I might be misunderstanding your post, but how does that prove you can see their PA without cheating?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A player has CA 120 and PA 120. He does not develop further despite performing outstandingly well. You know this because he never gets any more green arrows on his profile screen.

Absolutely wrong.

With the right training you can alter the balance of his attributes within the restrictions of his CA/PA to improve the players performances within the ME. You will continue to see red/green arrows as these attributes change.

This is something that I would expect someone like yourself to already know when entering these discussions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I might be misunderstanding your post, but how does that prove you can see their PA without cheating?
You can't, but you could easily deduce it by the fact that a player stops developing despite all the performances (he has reached his PA).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I had a youngster rated 2.5 stars by all my scouts and coaching staff, but I liked the look of him. I didn't think he would develop much, so sent him out on loan his 2nd season (1st season was spent entirely on the bench of the first team). He scored more goals than I expected in Ligue 1. I brought him into the first team the next season. He scored WAY more goals than I expected. He is now rated 3 stars by all my staff, and is genuinely world class. But my scouts told me for YEARS he was a 2.5 star player, at best. Maybe I had a very good striker all that time, that caused him to be rated 2.5 stars, but still, he is going to end up with the all-time record for league goals, and if a 2.5 star (as a youth) player can do that then I think the system works quite well.

My view is that a 3 star player with the 'right' attributes can be better than a 3.5 star player who is inconsistent, doesn't like big games, injury prone, bad attitude, or has the 'wrong' attributes. Similarly for a 2.5 star player being able to be better than a 3 star player.

I used to think a PA of 150-160 wasn't great. Actually, provided the points go to the right attributes it is VERY good.

Good scouts are usually within .5 stars of a player's CA and PA. Also the PA rating by itself isn't that helpful, but if you look at the difference between PA and CA while taking into account their attributes, you can easily gauge which players will be good or not. This is problem I have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Absolutely wrong.

With the right training you can alter the balance of his attributes within the restrictions of his CA/PA to improve the players performances within the ME. You will continue to see red/green arrows as these attributes change.

This is something that I would expect someone like yourself to already know when entering these discussions.

Yes, but you won't be able to shift them much. And the fact that you see red arrows to compensate from the green arrows is in no way comparable to lots of green arrows with no red.

With low CA levels, there is also a limit to the number of red arrows you can have, too, as eventually, every non-key attribute will hit 1. Then where do you go?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes they can be wrong but not wrong enough for me. I tend to sign determined/professional types anyway and also avoid players with a low match rating so in most cases I'd guess my players hidden attributes are pretty good. A scout report also gives a personality type and lists weaknesses.

One thing I've noticed in my research is that usually players that start out with 3+ stars for potential drop a star or two by the time they reach their potential. Which would make the scouts initial report wrong. And that means that scouts are usually wrong. Basically the scout thought he was going to be a great player and it turns out he is only a good player. And that's a good strategy for finding great players anyway. I would agree that most players with determination and professionalism turn out to be good players, however, how many times in real life is that not the case if you think about it? More often than not I would assume a real life extremely professional and determined player will end up as a good player (barring injuries).

I have no problem with the system itself but think that PA stars should not be shown to create greater uncertainty. The actual PA values would still be there though just in the background. If you hide PA then you won't know whether or not that 16 year old 1* player can be great or average and only youngsters with an early high CA(wonderkids) will stand out as future stars. The rest(high PA) will then be spotted by user and AI if their CA ever becomes high enough. I very much agree with Cougar's post below.

Dude, how are you seeing PA without using a third party app? And if you are using a third party app and wish to not see PA, then stop using the app. I'm confused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can't, but you could easily deduce it by the fact that a player stops developing despite all the performances (he has reached his PA).

And how is that different from real life? At some point EVERY player hits a wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With low CA levels, there is also a limit to the number of red arrows you can have, too, as eventually, every non-key attribute will hit 1. Then where do you go?

At that point, you are probably working at Burger King.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And how is that different from real life? At some point EVERY player hits a wall.
You hit a wall when you simply can't do any better. This usually implies that you have reached a point where the opposition has "found you out" in a competitive sport.

However, if a player is making a mockery of opponents even if they keep trying to make his life harder and harder, then he hasn't hit a wall. He's still developing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At that point, you are probably working at Burger King.
Grow up.

A player with an optimal training schedule and low PA will reach a point where he has the optimal attribute distribution for his CA. Then where does he go? Any further movement in his attributes would actually be detrimental...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You hit a wall when you simply can't do any better. This usually implies that you have reached a point where the opposition has "found you out" in a competitive sport.

However, if a player is making a mockery of opponents even if they keep trying to make his life harder and harder, then he hasn't hit a wall. He's still developing.

That's not true, he could have hit his wall, but his wall was miles above the opponents. Just because a player is performing well doesn't mean he is still developing, it just means hes already developed to a higher level than the opponent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I'd like to say. A player with CA of 160 does not = another player with CA of 160. Period.

You can have a player reach their maximum CA and still become a better player. But other attributes will be sacrificed slightly. How is this unrealistic? Imagine a player in their physical prime, a lot of their training goes to maintaining that level. Now that player's physical levels decrease slightly with age, his technical training will probably become more frequent and more intense. Why? Because he is at a stage in his career where you start to use your head/experience/all your tricks for an advantage, as opposed to looking more for that edge in physicality.

So if you have a player who is a physical beast but low mental skills, and they have reached their CA, guess what, they can get better! Not better in the absolute sense, because not all attributes can continue increasing, but better relative to their current ability. For eg. a players strength decreases from 16 to 15. But Decision making then goes up from 9 to 10. This actually made the player better! The 10% increase in decisions is more significant than the 6% decrease in strength! So if decisions are important to this players role (almost always the case) then he will have now become a better player, whilst maintaining the same CA.

People who don't like the PA cap should just use FMRTE to boost their favorite's PA. I personally find it completely empty, hollow, and unfulfilling to do this, but to each his own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well don't, it very confusing for everyone else. If you mean ratings say ratings, if you mean attributes say attributes - Its not rocket science!

Most American games refer to individual attributes as ratings, which is why I use them interchangeably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's not true, he could have hit his wall, but his wall was miles above the opponents. Just because a player is performing well doesn't mean he is still developing, it just means hes already developed to a higher level than the opponent.
He's playing well on a consistent, long-term basis - i.e. opponents are trying to adapt to him but he keeps delivering the goods.

In other words, he is slowly wading through a list of ever-increasingly-difficult obstacles, very much like a student is working his way through increasingly-difficult pieces of coursework.

In other words - he is developing. He hasn't hit a wall yet. He'd hit a wall if opponents find him out and his performances falter, before stabilising at some mediocre, average level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I never said you did, because I never read your posts, nor do I have any clue who you are.

So your saying that it should be harder to see when a player has reached his limit? What's funny is that a player hasn't reached their limit until their CA actually starts to decline without increasing back to the PA limit. For example: I train the balls out of my players physical attributes until they hit 21. Sometimes players reach their PA before then and it starts taking from their other skills. Crazy thing, that player hasn't reached his limit, yet he has reached his PA limit. As said player ages, he loses some of his physical beastery, but makes up for it with his technical skills. Another crazy thing, this player is actually a better player at 25 even though he hit his PA limit at 21. So using this PA system, you can mimic real life. That's why the best players in the game don't always have 190+ PA. I mean, what's the point of a high PA when 90% of it is tied up in useless attributes?

Pretty arrogant to assume anyone who makes a generalized statement is ignorant.

You made a silly general statement that was meant to troll. Calling people cheaters b/c they don't agree with you is ignorant anyway you slice it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grow up.

Holy crap it was a joke dude. Have a sense of humor!

A player with an optimal training schedule and low PA will reach a point where he has the optimal attribute distribution for his CA. Then where does he go? Any further movement in his attributes would actually be detrimental...

That's the point of the entire system. Players have limits. Once players reach their limit (as in real life) it's about maintaining oneself and longevity. Regardless of potential, players that can produce at a consistent level for a long period of time usually are dubbed "legends" by the masses in real life, provided that level is a high level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's the point of the entire system. Players have limits. Once players reach their limit (as in real life) it's about maintaining oneself and longevity. Regardless of potential, players that can produce at a consistent level for a long period of time usually are dubbed "legends" by the masses in real life, provided that level is a high level.
But a player who is performing really well despite the opposition getting harder hasn't hit their limit.

Of course a player eventually finds their level and settles to some more sensible level of performance. But a player who is still performing really well hasn't reached that point yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Use an editor to make the game how you want it. If a player has a good season for you bump his PA. But remember to do the same for your rivals top prospects as well :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You made a silly general statement that was meant to troll. Calling people cheaters b/c they don't agree with you is ignorant anyway you slice it.

Right, and calling random strangers ignorant trolls because they disagree with you is so much better.

EDIT: I should mention, I think the PA system should be scrapped. But every time I come up with a better system or read an idea of how it should work, I take a step back and realize that the game already works that way if you don't look at a players PA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But a player who is performing really well despite the opposition getting harder hasn't hit their limit.

Of course a player eventually finds their level and settles to some more sensible level of performance. But a player who is still performing really well hasn't reached that point yet.

Just because the opposition has "figured you out" doesn't mean the opposition is getting harder. To steal from someone elses reference: look at Kobe Bryant. He is obviously on the decline, yet he still is outperforming his opponents to this day. It just means that he is better, not that he is getting better because he's actually getting worse if anything. But Kobe's "getting worse" still puts him at a level that is higher than 99% of the players who have ever played the game. FYI I hate the Lakers.

When a player performs, it means he is better, not that he is getting better (although that may be the case if he has yet to reach his limit).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Right, and calling random strangers ignorant trolls because they disagree with you is so much better.

Are you serious? How old are you?

1) Accusing anyone who doesn't agree with your position of being a cheater is ignorant

2) Your were obviously trolling

Truth hurts but luckily for us its in the thread. Next time don't make such absurd accusations and you won't get called out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Star ratings Tyler. You do not need anything but scouts and coaches and the ability to look at attributes and report cards. Take youth intake for example, you get 15 players and at a glance your coach tells you they all have a 1* PA. Thats means none will ever make an impact even as a back-up player and even worse than that most will probably never even secure a professional full time contract. That is because we, and the Ai, can accurately write them off at a glance. Why couldn't they all have 1/2* CA and the "ability to improve further due to young age"(that could be the extent of the scouts/coaches imput on PA) and then it will take the length of the youth contract to gauge whether this player is improving enough to become worth a professional.

These players still have the same PA ( 1*) as before and will not get contracts so the only thing that has changed is how easy is has been to come to the conclusion they are not good enough. But you had to keep them and check their development so you don't unwittingly release a future star. With star rating PA being as accurate as I believe it to be currently most users would never release a future star as they would have a star rating similar or higher than a first teamers CA rating at creation.

I don't check actual PA's for players and if I did I probably would not be asking for star ratings to be removed as it would be contradictory.

I hope you now understand me.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Use an editor to make the game how you want it. If a player has a good season for you bump his PA. But remember to do the same for your rivals top prospects as well :D

Why do you assume we are trying to make our players better? The current system actually favors users and makes its way too simple to secure youngsters. When playing in the top flight, by at least year 5 my squad is guaranteed to be the best in the league b/c the AI has no chance against me in the transfer market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Star ratings Tyler. You do not need anything but scouts and coaches and the ability to look at attributes and report cards. Take youth intake for example, you get 15 players and at a glance your coach tells you they all have a 1* PA. Thats means none will ever make an impact even as a back-up player and even worse than that most will probably never even secure a professional full time contract. That is because we, and the Ai, can accurately write them off at a glance. Why couldn't they all have 1/2* CA and the "ability to improve further due to young age"(that could be the extent of the scouts/coaches imput on PA) and then it will take the length of the youth contract to gauge whether this player is improving enough to become worth a professional.

These players still have the same PA ( 1*) as before and will not get contracts so the only thing that has changed is how easy is has been to come to the conclusion they are not good enough. But you had to keep them and check their development so you don't unwittingly release a future star. With star rating PA being as accurate as I believe it to be currently most users would never release a future star as they would have a star rating similar or higher than a first teamers CA rating at creation.

I don't check actual PA's for players and if I did I probably would not be asking for star ratings to be removed as it would be contradictory.

I hope you now understand me.;)

You put into words what I could not. :applause:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do you assume we are trying to make our players better? The current system actually favors users and makes its way too simple to secure youngsters. When playing in the top flight, by at least year 5 my squad is guaranteed to be the best in the league b/c the AI has no chance against me in the transfer market.

That's a very valid yet entirely different subject, how would the AI transfer & player development record be any better under a flexible PA system?

Share this 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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.