Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

Recommended Posts

I have a request regarding the potential ability of players in FM. For those who aren't aware, currently a player's PA can be one value (eg 175), or it can be a range between 30 (eg 150-180). I believe that the PA range of a player should be completely customisable.

This could be most effective when used judging the PA of raw prospects between the ages of 16-18. As such players are largely unknown, it is very hard to judge the potential of them realistically. Every year, many young players especially at top academies burst onto the scene, who were mostly unheard of previously. For this example, let's assume that a young player at a top academy has a  PA of -8, (130-160). This would most likely make them a mid-level premier league player. Surely it would be more realistic to have a larger PA range, such as 130-180. This would mean that the players potential is more variable between different saves, increasing the 'unknown factor'. Along with many other members of the community, I prefer nurturing and developing newgens to real players. This is because it is impossible to develop them to a high level when they have such low/small PA ranges. This idea would mean you can never know for sure how good your youth players at the beginning of the game can become, and are forced to at least give them a shot  and keep an eye on them, rather than discarding them on first viewing.

Now, an example for slightly older players. If Phillipe Coutinho has a CA of 158, and a PA of 175, this is the same in every save. However, no one knows for sure whether he will reach this potential, or even exceed it, therefore I think a range is more realistic in this case. Saying this, surely a PA range of 30 is too much? Perhaps Coutinho could have a smaller range of 165-183, or something similar to that.

This could also be useful for older players too. Robert Lewandowski is 27, can we be sure he has reached his peak yet? I believe his CA and PA in the current database is 178. This means that the game thinks Lewandowski will 100% not improve any further at all. There is surely a chance that he will improve, even if it is very slightly. This would mean his PA could be 178-184 or even 178-182.

These are perhaps not the best examples, however I hope you have a good understanding of this idea. This may not make a huge difference on an individual basis, however if this is implemented correctly I believe it could help the game become far more realistic. Would love to hear your thoughts.

Edited by Tiozaa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had an similar idea once but when you thought about it you are also limiting PA with this suggestion. I tweaked your idea like that. Range only works for under 21 or 23 players. Their final PA depends on their game time, your facilities,tutoring etc.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Egecann said:

I had an similar idea once but when you thought about it you are also limiting PA with this suggestion. I tweaked your idea like that. Range only works for under 21 or 23 players. Their final PA depends on their game time, your facilities,tutoring etc.  

 

Just to clarify PA is fixed at the moment a save is created or a newgen comes into the game.

 

I've said for years though that there should be an option for PA to be totally random for every player rather than fixed (number or range).

 

It would add more variety to saves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree PA should be dynamic, for example if a average play PA 140 is tutored by Cristiano Ronaldo or Messi, his potential should increase because he was learning with the best players. If a player have too many injuries his PA should drop, the impact should be higher between 16 and 23 years old. This behavior of PA seems realistic to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, inacion said:

I agree PA should be dynamic, for example if a average play PA 140 is tutored by Cristiano Ronaldo or Messi, his potential should increase because he was learning with the best players. If a player have too many injuries his PA should drop, the impact should be higher between 16 and 23 years old. This behavior of PA seems realistic to me.

 

No, no, no.

 

PA should never be dynamic, its fixed.  What is dynamic is the CA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Cougar2010 said:

 

No, no, no.

 

PA should never be dynamic, its fixed.  What is dynamic is the CA.

If a player training and learn with better players he can't reach a higher potential than defined initially? I think that should have some impact on PA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, inacion said:

If a player training and learn with better players he can't reach a higher potential than defined initially? I think that should have some impact on PA

Then his initial PA was wrong.

 

By definition a person can never exceed their potential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that by definition potential is fixed. However, if potential is fixed it should by impossibly hard for a player to reach his potential in FM.

Currently, if a player is playing regular football at a semi-decent level, he often reaches his full potential within a few years. Surely this shouldn't be the case, and for a player to reach his full potential he should be in the perfect scenario, with world class players and coaches around him, tutoring him and nurturing him. This would mean that when a young player is tutored by one of the worlds too players etc he will be better. 

I think potential definitely needs a look at, it could completely change the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tiozaa said:

I agree that by definition potential is fixed. However, if potential is fixed it should by impossibly hard for a player to reach his potential in FM.

Currently, if a player is playing regular football at a semi-decent level, he often reaches his full potential within a few years. Surely this shouldn't be the case, and for a player to reach his full potential he should be in the perfect scenario, with world class players and coaches around him, tutoring him and nurturing him. This would mean that when a young player is tutored by one of the worlds too players etc he will be better. 

I think potential definitely needs a look at, it could completely change the game.

 

and that is part of the problem.

 

SI claim that only a small % of players in FM reach their potential while as users we feel its too easy to get a player to his full potential.

 

I think the two aspects that need looking at are:

A) Do too many players on a user managed team reach their full potential &

B) Is it too easy for the user to get a player to his full potential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is more that the game makes it too easy to approach it from a metagaming perspective. 

There are an enormous amount of players that never fulfill their potential because scouts pick up the huge negatives to their personality and factor these in. This means those who gravitate towards star ratings are having it cushioned for them, it also means that those who are aware of what a scout report is saying know categorically a player will or will not amount to something.

This leads to a prevalence of human players especially, as well as AI benefiting, from knowledge about youngsters that should still be 2 or 3 years away from being known in most cases. 

This means whether the player knows the nuances or not, the game is effectively filtering out those high potential - low chance of success youngsters. A Nile Ranger or Ravel Morrison are stopped from ever really coming to your attention in FM. One of the biggest challenges at the moment is not so much setting a potential ability for youngsters or players in general, but rather the mental attributes that shape players. PA being fixed or within a band is quite a reasonable solution (and I don't think anyone is ever going to convince SI that a completely wide open system is the way to go, there's just so many youngsters you know will never make it to the top to ever warrant it being down to RNG). 

I can only really put this out there from a Stoke perspective now, but I've set a number of players down the years, such as Florent Cuvelier, Oliver Shenton, Julien Ngoy, Karim Rossi, Thibauld Verlinden, Dominic Kurasik, Daniel Bachmann and so on with -7/-8+ PA's. None of them have appeared on the shortlists of recommended players, there haven't been threads talking about how they're continually destined for greater things in the good player section and that's down to the way I individually rate youngsters. My approach isn't right for all clubs, but its certainly right for a club who hasn't got a tradition of developing youngsters well, and for players who have large portions of their personality unknown - or rather - untested in football so far.

Each one though there has been games where they've all been solid top-half premier league footballers, and there's been other games where they've fallen by the wayside and been league 1/league 2 players or even lower. I think its already entirely possible within the scope of the game currently to create this reduced degree of certainty, just with simple changes to the scouting reports and perhaps researchers being encouraged to take a slightly different line. Ultimately, too many players have their development on rails - both in terms of success and failure. However, the failures are hidden before human players see them generally speaking long before they even fail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...