Positional Familiarity is Wack

[wattzy]

Whilst I use the positional ratings as a guide when scouting/buying players, I pretty much ignore it when picking my team. Just watch the game, and play around with different roles/positions until the player finds one that suits him.

In my game with West Ham I spent a whole season trying to build a team around Lanzini in the advanced playmaker AM role as it's his favourite, but nothing worked. He would play poorly in every game and ended up being dropped.

Now, I've got him playing in CM(A) and he scores and assists for fun despite the role being almost red. Play the players in a position and role that you think suits them, not what the game tells you too is the lesson I've learnt. My other two midfielders are also playing roles they don't 'like' according to reports, and still excel, as does Chicharito as  CF despite this being his least favourite.

Edited January 26, 2018 by wattzy

[Weston]

1 hour ago, wattzy said:

Whilst I use the positional ratings as a guide when scouting/buying players, I pretty much ignore it when picking my team. Just watch the game, and play around with different roles/positions until the player finds one that suits him.

In my game with West Ham I spent a whole season trying to build a team around Lanzini in the advanced playmaker AM role as it's his favourite, but nothing worked. He would play poorly in every game and ended up being dropped.

Now, I've got him playing in CM(A) and he scores and assists for fun despite the role being almost red. Play the players in a position and role that you think suits them, not what the game tells you too is the lesson I've learnt. My other two midfielders are also playing roles they don't 'like' according to reports, and still excel, as does Chicharito as  CF despite this being his least favourite.

If this is the case then FM needs to change so that it's tools for understanding (reports, etc) stop directly opposing this reality as it only serves to confuse, unless it can be tweaked in a way where it's more clear that you can go against a certain staff member's opinion versus feeling like you're just playing the entire game incorrectly.

Edited January 26, 2018 by Weston

[Weston]

On 25/01/2018 at 20:33, Weston said:

Perhaps if you could answer this scenario it would help clear things up for me:

Say Player 1 has an average attribute rating of 17, and a coach rating of 4* in his preferred position. In a position he has a darker shade of green in but an equal attribute spread for the same coach rates him as only a 2*.

Player 2, meanwhile, has an average attribute rating of only 14, and a coach rating of 3*. His preferred position is the same position Player 1 is rated 2* in.

Now, is the coach correct in saying that Player 2 will perform 1* better than Player 2* because of positional familiarity despite having lower attributes, or is the coach incorrect and Player 1 only takes a hit to decisions and really would still be better overall?

I guess what frustrates me is how star ratings suddenly seem completely false when applied to secondary positions, if what you're saying is true. They can't both be accurate, because they appear to directly oppose each other, unless the game intentionally has coaches misunderstand the game mechanics to force us to think independently or something, which would be a bit awkward.

@Seb Wassell What is your professional opinion about the above? I want to be better prepared to deal with these scenarios in FM19.

[herne79]

2 minutes ago, Weston said:

@Seb Wassell What is your professional opinion about the above? I want to be better prepared to deal with these scenarios in FM19.

I know I'm not Seb, but personally I'd say stop looking at average attributes because they're completely meaningless and attributes have got absolutely nothing to do with positional familiarity anyway.

Positional familiarity is driven by a completely separate, hidden and under the hood attribute called - you guessed it - positional familiarity.  That's what governs how comfortable a player feels to play in a particular position.  So your striker may be a "Natural" in the STC position, but only "Accomplished" at AMC and "Awkward" in central midfield for example.

The visible attributes you see on a player's profile help drive how well suited a player may be to carry out a certain role.  The game gives you a separate indication of this - the "role suitability" pie chart.  These are more complex calculations in game because different attributes for different roles carry greater or lesser significance - the calculations given them a higher or lower weighting.  So set a defender to "Ball Playing Defender" and the relative importance of his Passing ability will increase compared to setting him as a plain old Central Defender - thus the colour of his role suitability pie chart will look different when comparing the 2 roles.

[Weston]

45 minutes ago, herne79 said:

I know I'm not Seb, but personally I'd say stop looking at average attributes because they're completely meaningless and attributes have got absolutely nothing to do with positional familiarity anyway.

Positional familiarity is driven by a completely separate, hidden and under the hood attribute called - you guessed it - positional familiarity.  That's what governs how comfortable a player feels to play in a particular position.  So your striker may be a "Natural" in the STC position, but only "Accomplished" at AMC and "Awkward" in central midfield for example.

The visible attributes you see on a player's profile help drive how well suited a player may be to carry out a certain role.  The game gives you a separate indication of this - the "role suitability" pie chart.  These are more complex calculations in game because different attributes for different roles carry greater or lesser significance - the calculations given them a higher or lower weighting.  So set a defender to "Ball Playing Defender" and the relative importance of his Passing ability will increase compared to setting him as a plain old Central Defender - thus the colour of his role suitability pie chart will look different when comparing the 2 roles.

But this is the thing I don't understand. I say I am confused by colors and coach reports and people tell me to ignore all that and just do what I want based on attributes. And then people tell me that the game has mystical ways of knowing things I can't see when making it's recommendations, leading me to believe I must then adhere to what it tells me for fear of sabotaging myself. I get that no decisions are certain and there are always trade-offs, but surely this could at least be conveyed better in game?

And again, and I have to keep coming back to this, it would be A LOT easier to adhere to positional familiarity if positional familiarity EVER seemed to change based on our training and playing players in new positions, which simply does not happen for me...

Edited September 30, 2018 by Weston

[herne79]

6 minutes ago, Weston said:

but surely this could at least be conveyed better in game?

I agree.

If it helps, just view what the game tells you as a guide.  A starting point.  It's the game's way of having your Assistant Manager or coaches offer you advice.  But the bottom line is - you are the Manager.  It's entirely your choice whether you accept that advice or not.  Better members of staff will tend to give you better advice, but no staff member is infallible.  Just like no Manager is infallible either.

And above all else, know that at no stage are any of your staff aware of what you are trying to do.  So if you are trying to play a system with lots of pressing (for example) your staff won't know that, thus you'll still receive the same formulaic advice and suggestions.  So for instance your staff will still let you know what they think a bog standard DLP may look like but you may prefer someone with much higher Workrate and Aggression but slightly lower passing ability because you think he'll make a better fit to your system.  Your staff will think he won't be as good a DLP as someone else who better fits their profile of a DLP and mark him down accordingly.

So yeh, accept the advice given as your starter for ten, but always try to relate things back to your own vision and style of play.

[kingking]

Does Playing out of position Lower CA?

and does a lower CA result in playing worse in a match?

[kingking]

This whole positional familiarity is destroying FM for me

I'm not advised to play a right back to left back because they drop to half a star rating

I'm not advised to play Neymar as a ST even though he has good attributes..

 

[kingking]

The whole SYSTEM of positional Familiarity is flawed, confusing and not fair.

Terrible UI

• Whole UI of  positional familiarity, Role Ability should be Improved

Punishment of playing out of position is Unclear for users

• The thing is that the Punishment of playing a player out of position is UNKNOWN, CONFUSING, not clear.
• Does it affect CA or Decision ? No one can tell me clearly....

Unrealistic, Untrue, 

• Players are able to play certain positions in real life however in FM it is the opposite 

Assistants Advice is flawed

• Why does a 4 star Left Back... Become Half a Star right back with their "role ability"

PLEASE someone that Factually understands about positional familiarity  explain this or dispute this.

maybe @Seb Wassell can explain or someone that works on this game?

[ceefax the cat]

It makes zero sense in other ways too.

Things that don't really exist in RL:

- Fullbacks who have no idea how to play as a wingback. Wingbacks who have no idea how to play as wingers. Even more ridiculously, players best described as 'wingbacks' in terms of their role but who are considered incompetent if played in the actual wingback position and not DL/R.

- Natural attacking central midfielders who have no idea how to play as attacking midfielders

- Natural AMR's who have no idea how to play at MR. Natural wingers at MR who don't where to begin as wingers at AMR. Literally the same job with less defending.

- Defensively talented MC's who have no idea how to operate at DM. Classy DMs who have zero awareness how to play in the midfield line. Halfbacks who can't play at the back.

- Inside forwards who are clueless up front. Strikers who have zero clue what to do as inside forwards.

- Creative deep-lying forwards who become totally incompetent when asked to be shadow strikers or play in the hole.

Etc. etc. etc... Not just a bit awkward in most cases, but actually incompetent. Clueless. You move your MC to DM and he has the same level of familiarity as if you'd put a striker there, unless he goes on an 8-month training course and plays there every week.

RL football is also full of examples of players being asked to play in a new position and just taking to it - even blossoming - because their attributes made them suited to it and they had no idea themselves. It doesn't necessarily take more than a few training sessions for a player to more or less understand his new job, and certainly isn't some mystical journey that takes months / years. Here is what I want you to do because you seem to have all the skills for it ---> training, a few games ----> Roger. There might be small aspects of the job, tricks of the trade, that sink in over time (say, the journey from accomplished to natural) but the journey from a bit clueless to pretty damn good needn't take longer than a few weeks if the attributes are there.

The positional familiarity graphics in FM should look a lot less like a dot on a pitch and a lot more like a heat map, which should be able to change quite rapidly if a remotely intelligent, able player is asked to perform and train at new tasks. Philippe Lahm being asked to tuck in and play as an inverted fullback for example. This was a player confronted with an entirely new, made-up role, let alone asked to perform in a different position, but because he was intelligent and had the skillset, he carried it out brilliantly, straight away. To suggest that a DLF asked to take up a slightly different position and defend a bit more requires a year of education not to be 'awkward' at it is just bizarre.

Is there a skin that just hides all the circles and star ratings? It's so offputting having the game basically screaming NO at you for moving your Premier League-quality wingback forward 10 metres on the field (to the wingback position ffs) and I'd rather just not see it.

Edited November 6, 2019 by ceefax the cat

[Weston]

2 hours ago, ceefax the cat said:

It makes zero sense in other ways too.

Things that don't really exist in RL:

- Fullbacks who have no idea how to play as a wingback. Wingbacks who have no idea how to play as wingers. Even more ridiculously, players best described as 'wingbacks' in terms of their role but who are considered incompetent if played in the actual wingback position and not DL/R.

- Natural attacking central midfielders who have no idea how to play as attacking midfielders

- Natural AMR's who have no idea how to play at MR. Natural wingers at MR who don't where to begin as wingers at AMR. Literally the same job with less defending.

- Defensively talented MC's who have no idea how to operate at DM. Classy DMs who have zero awareness how to play in the midfield line. Halfbacks who can't play at the back.

- Inside forwards who are clueless up front. Strikers who have zero clue what to do as inside forwards.

- Creative deep-lying forwards who become totally incompetent when asked to be shadow strikers or play in the hole.

Etc. etc. etc... Not just a bit awkward in most cases, but actually incompetent. Clueless. You move your MC to DM and he has the same level of familiarity as if you'd put a striker there, unless he goes on an 8-month training course and plays there every week.

RL football is also full of examples of players being asked to play in a new position and just taking to it - even blossoming - because their attributes made them suited to it and they had no idea themselves. It doesn't necessarily take more than a few training sessions for a player to more or less understand his new job, and certainly isn't some mystical journey that takes months / years. Here is what I want you to do because you seem to have all the skills for it ---> training, a few games ----> Roger. There might be small aspects of the job, tricks of the trade, that sink in over time (say, the journey from accomplished to natural) but the journey from a bit clueless to pretty damn good needn't take longer than a few weeks if the attributes are there.

The positional familiarity graphics in FM should look a lot less like a dot on a pitch and a lot more like a heat map, which should be able to change quite rapidly if a remotely intelligent, able player is asked to perform and train at new tasks. Philippe Lahm being asked to tuck in and play as an inverted fullback for example. This was a player confronted with an entirely new, made-up role, let alone asked to perform in a different position, but because he was intelligent and had the skillset, he carried it out brilliantly, straight away. To suggest that a DLF asked to take up a slightly different position and defend a bit more requires a year of education not to be 'awkward' at it is just bizarre.

Is there a skin that just hides all the circles and star ratings? It's so offputting having the game basically screaming NO at you for moving your Premier League-quality wingback forward 10 metres on the field (to the wingback position ffs) and I'd rather just not see it.

 

I agree with this as well. Even more frustratingly is how you can't compare one player with any other player who plays a position the first player does not have a dot in, so it's very difficult to compare attributes when considering playing someone in a new part of the pitch despite the game structure trying to convince you out of it.

[ceefax the cat]

On 06/11/2019 at 01:51, ceefax the cat said:

It makes zero sense in other ways too.

Things that don't really exist in RL:

- Fullbacks who have no idea how to play as a wingback. Wingbacks who have no idea how to play as wingers. Even more ridiculously, players best described as 'wingbacks' in terms of their role but who are considered incompetent if played in the actual wingback position and not DL/R.

- Natural attacking central midfielders who have no idea how to play as attacking midfielders

- Natural AMR's who have no idea how to play at MR. Natural wingers at MR who don't where to begin as wingers at AMR. Literally the same job with less defending.

- Defensively talented MC's who have no idea how to operate at DM. Classy DMs who have zero awareness how to play in the midfield line. Halfbacks who can't play at the back.

- Inside forwards who are clueless up front. Strikers who have zero clue what to do as inside forwards.

- Creative deep-lying forwards who become totally incompetent when asked to be shadow strikers or play in the hole.

Etc. etc. etc... Not just a bit awkward in most cases, but actually incompetent. Clueless. You move your MC to DM and he has the same level of familiarity as if you'd put a striker there, unless he goes on an 8-month training course and plays there every week.

RL football is also full of examples of players being asked to play in a new position and just taking to it - even blossoming - because their attributes made them suited to it and they had no idea themselves. It doesn't necessarily take more than a few training sessions for a player to more or less understand his new job, and certainly isn't some mystical journey that takes months / years. Here is what I want you to do because you seem to have all the skills for it ---> training, a few games ----> Roger. There might be small aspects of the job, tricks of the trade, that sink in over time (say, the journey from accomplished to natural) but the journey from a bit clueless to pretty damn good needn't take longer than a few weeks if the attributes are there.

The positional familiarity graphics in FM should look a lot less like a dot on a pitch and a lot more like a heat map, which should be able to change quite rapidly if a remotely intelligent, able player is asked to perform and train at new tasks. Philippe Lahm being asked to tuck in and play as an inverted fullback for example. This was a player confronted with an entirely new, made-up role, let alone asked to perform in a different position, but because he was intelligent and had the skillset, he carried it out brilliantly, straight away. To suggest that a DLF asked to take up a slightly different position and defend a bit more requires a year of education not to be 'awkward' at it is just bizarre.

Is there a skin that just hides all the circles and star ratings? It's so offputting having the game basically screaming NO at you for moving your Premier League-quality wingback forward 10 metres on the field (to the wingback position ffs) and I'd rather just not see it.

Just wanted to bump this in advance of FM21 coming out. Please please sort this out, it's wildly unrealistic and makes changing formations or taking over a new club with a certain system in mind a proper pain in the arse.

442, that'll suit this lot. Oh wait no, because the wingers and my best creative midfielder have no concept of what it might be like to do the same job but defend 10 metres further back. Etc... Once you've got a squad to play a certain formation, changing it in any way renders half of your players incompetent.

In reality, positional familiarity should be linked largely to tactical familiarity. If the whole team have trained a certain system to death and know their jobs within it, it's inconceivable that their star AML would still be basically unaware of how to play ML. You've literally been training to do that specific job in that formation every day. It doesn't take that long, it's not that big a deal. Sort it out.

Edited September 22, 2020 by ceefax the cat