Not sure if a bug, but youth intake CA&PA is broken. Screenshot enclosed.

[RoversRob]

 

Edit* larger sample of 100 youth intakes with results shown further down in thread.

 

------------------------------------

Posted this on reddit, someone suggest I post on these forums to get more visibility, so I am just going to straight up copy the text from my reddit post if that's ok 

_______________________________________________________________________

TLDR at bottom.I made a post about this earlier, but I don't want proof getting lost in the comments, so here is the previous thread if you are interested: https://www.reddit.com/r/footballmanagergames/comments/d1hi8q/si_why_do_you_make_great_intakes_that_never/

In a nutshell, it appeared to me that players I was getting in my youth intake with AMAZING stats never developed. After checking CA's and PA's via FMSE, it turns out that the AMAZING looking players with great starting stats that come into your youth intake are usually around 120/130 CA. They unfortunately, however, only have PA's around 10 points higher.

The only players that develop to 160+ PA all start with around 80CA and are nowhere near your first team starting stats on intake day.

Basically, 15 year olds that look like they could be the next Wayne Rooney the day they come into your intake? You may as well just sell them as soon as you can, they are not getting any better.

I just spent a measly half an hour loading up Englands youth intake day over and over. I searched for regens that had a CA of 120+. From loading about 7/8 games I found 5 of these wonderkids with no issues. As you will see in the screenshot below, they are amazing looking kids. I mean, they look like they are going to be absolute monsters in the future. As I've mentioned earlier though, not ONE of them will develop into anything better. Every single one has a PA rating barely above their 15/16 year old CA, as you will see in the screenshot.

For reference, from the 2nd player down I also decided to include 160+ PA players on the same youth intake day. As you can see, they all have dog ***** CA of around 80, but will still surpass these 130 CA wonderkids within a year or two and go on to become mega players.

Absolutely ridiculous. I understand that sometimes, a very talented youngster may not develop. But to make it so that there is a 100% probability that these wonderkids will not develop at all past their current 15/16 year old selves is annoying and unrealistic.

TLDR; SI have messed up youth intake. If you have an amazing looking youth intake wonderkid with first team starter stats, bin him - he isn't getting any better. Screenshot below.

https://pasteboard.co/IwAL0nS.png

Edited September 11, 2019 by RoversRob

[CFuller]

Just because a player is very good for 16 doesn't mean they will go on to be very good for 21, or very good for 26. You'll find plenty of examples of real-life players who peaked very early - and not always because of injuries and/or poor career choices.

Also, you are reading far too much into CA/PA. Personally, I find attribute spreads (Determination, Work Rate, etc are attributes, not stats) and personalities are far more important. A 140 CA player with well-rounded attributes and a good personality will likely be more useful to you than a 160 CA player who has glaring weaknesses and a bad attitude.

There's nothing inherently wrong with using an editor or third-party software to look at player CA/PA. However, I think you will enjoy and appreciate FM a lot more if you just played the game as it was intended to be played.

But if you really do believe that this aspect of FM is "broken" , you will have to provide A LOT more evidence to back that up.

Edited September 9, 2019 by CFuller

[RBKalle]

22 minuti fa, RoversRob ha scritto:

In a nutshell, it appeared to me that players I was getting in my youth intake with AMAZING stats never developed. After checking CA's and PA's via FMSE, it turns out that the AMAZING looking players with great starting stats that come into your youth intake are usually around 120/130 CA. They unfortunately, however, only have PA's around 10 points higher.

Basically, 15 year olds that look like they could be the next Wayne Rooney the day they come into your intake? You may as well just sell them as soon as you can, they are not getting any better.

That's however kinda accurate...

How many "great prospect" are hyped around the time they're starting to get a few apps for the first team, or even before that while they're still playing for the Youth team?

The list of those Early Peakers is long... Francis Jeffers is likely the most infamous, but also Federico Macheda could be a good example. Not to mention the plethora of 18yo "future worldclass players" who never even got an actual breakthrough and have since disappeared altogether or are having a modest career in tier 2, 3 or even lower.

If anything, I'd say FM produces TOO MANY good newgens who can almost walk into the Starting XI of a mid-table EPL team. Regardless of their potential, that's just not-so-accurate. Much less if we're talking about players with no room for improvement.

 

22 minuti fa, RoversRob ha scritto:

The only players that develop to 160+ PA all start with around 80CA and are nowhere near your first team starting stats on intake day.

Again, not an outlandish scenario.

An unassuming teenager can grow into a top player if given enough time and nurturing. Pedro Rodriguez and Didier Drogba didn't set the world on fire as youth players, but they turned out quite good I'd say.

And converselt, how many potential talents have we missed out on because they didn't get a chance to develop and eventually stagnated?

22 minuti fa, RoversRob ha scritto:

I just spent a measly half an hour loading up Englands youth intake day over and over. I searched for regens that had a CA of 120+. From loading about 7/8 games I found 5 of these wonderkids with no issues. As you will see in the screenshot below, they are amazing looking kids. I mean, they look like they are going to be absolute monsters in the future. As I've mentioned earlier though, not ONE of them will develop into anything better. Every single one has a PA rating barely above their 15/16 year old CA, as you will see in the screenshot.

For reference, from the 2nd player down I also decided to include 160+ PA players on the same youth intake day. As you can see, they all have dog ***** CA of around 80, but will still surpass these 130 CA wonderkids within a year or two and go on to become mega players.

 

But there's no guarantee those CA80/PA160 will surpass them... If the attributes distribution or the mental traits are unbalanced or poor, their PA won't be reached, and by a big margin.

FM's development model is too linear and predictable (THAT'S the actual issue with newgens...), so a "flawed" player is almost unfixable, no matter how many PA points left he has. And of course if he starts at 65CA, it's almost guaranteed he won't amount to much, surely not to his original PA.

On the other hand, the ready-made 18yo won't improve massively, but will still fulfill his PA much faster, making him the obvious one of the two choices.

[RoversRob]

*EDIT* @CFuller

lol, you are entitled to your opinion and I respect your viewpoint, but it really does annoy me when people bring in the "real-life" aspect to argue their point. I am going to respectfully attempt to counter you with real life examples of my own.

Wayne Rooney. Under the current system, you will never find a Wayne Rooney in FM19. If I had to guess, I'd have his "CA" at around 150 age 16. In FM19, any youth intake with 120+ CA will not improve. Guaranteed (from my research so far).

Physical attributes. In real life, 15 and 16 year olds at least develop physically a LOT as they change from boys to men. Speed, strength etc. In FM19, that doesn't matter. If the CA of the youth intake is 120+, he is not improving, at all.

Find me 1 single player that has a 120+ CA on youth intake day with more than a 15+ increase in PA. So far, I have not been able to.

Just so that you know, I play FM as a youth developer. I have no issues developing youth. I have some 19 year olds already in my squad that are 150+ CA, that started as 80/90 CA on youth intake day. My point is, it is strange (and unrealistic if you like real life comparisons) to guarantee that every single 120+ CA youth intake will have absolutely ZERO scope for further development.

Edited September 9, 2019 by RoversRob

[RoversRob]

@RBKalle

Im not here to make real life comparisons mate, as mentioned in my previous post.

I'm not arguing your point that bad CA players can evolve into great CA players (as per your example of say, Drogba). You are entirely correct.

But find me one single CA youth intake of 120+ with a high PA. So far, I have not been able to.

If this is comparible to real life, then players such as Rooney making a debut at 16 years of age would still have been the exact same player aged 26 as he was aged 16. Turns out he was a lot better at 26.

I really hate getting into these real life comparisons.

The games youth intake is broken, and again, I challenge anyone to find me an unedited CA 120+ youth intake with a high PA. I am trying to do this myself still, but cannot.

Edited September 9, 2019 by RoversRob

[RBKalle]

I've been playing as a NT manager on the side in almost every save since FM14, and I can guarantee you there are TOO MANY CA120/PA>160 youngsters in the youth intake. By the 3rd or 4th season most NTs, including top-level ones will feature at least one newgen, thus aged 19 at most, in the Startig XI or as part of the team.

You may not get them in your club's intake, not even in your league, but the rate at which high-end newgens are produces is way too high.

The actual problem is how terrible AI's development skills are... You can nurture one of those half-flawed CA80 talents and get something out of him. AI won't because the low CA, the questionable attributes distribution and the low reputation will label the player as "not worth it".
Which, again, is realistic enough.

Anyway, we've been debating newgens a lot lately, with plenty of data: for reference:

 

Edited September 9, 2019 by RBKalle

[RoversRob]

@RBKalle

I am not disagreeing with you that there are 19 year old regens ready for NT football. I have some myself.

I do, however, disagree with you that in FM19 it is possible to get a 120/130 CA on youth intake day (at least in England, as I have only tested there) that will have more than a +10-15 PA scope for improvement.

I have done my (admittedly) limited research, but I have uploaded my proofs. So far, my proof demonstrates that if a youth intake is above 120+ CA on youth intake day, he will not improve.

Again, I challenge anyone, yourself included, to find me an unedited youth intake with high 120/130+ CA, with a high PA. 

[RBKalle]

14 minuti fa, RoversRob ha scritto:

Again, I challenge anyone, yourself included, to find me an unedited youth intake with high 120/130+ CA, with a high PA. 

But why do you think you should get one, or many, such players?

You may not like to hear the "in real life" argument, but actually how many high-end players aged 16-17 break through every year in any given Top League?

you seem to expect to see 4 or 5 Rooneys to appear year in and year out, while the good-to--pants ratio is much much lower.

 

I'd be more than happy to get a 120-130 player in my intake... Any club would.

instead the vast majority of the academy alumni end up in league one and below... Even producing a future Championship player is regarded as a good result.

both in FM and in real life

[herne79]

If you believe there is an issue the best thing you can do is start a new thread in the Training and Medical Centre bugs forum, upload your game saves and let the developers at SI take a look.

For me it's more interesting that you appear to be getting a fair amount of newgens with extremely high CA (120+), regardless of what their PA is.  15/16 year old kids appearing on intake day with that high a CA should be an absolute exception (personally I can't remember the last time I even saw one), so the frequency with which you seem to be getting them is potentially something to be looked at.

One thing I will mention however is that you are using an unofficial in game app.  I'm not by any means saying it's the cause, but these things have been known on occasion to create unexpected issues so please mention what you are using should you start a new thread in the Bugs forum.  Are you also using an edited database?  Again, sometimes such files may throw up unexpected issues so likewise please mention any such files.  Mentioning both helps to give full information for the people who will conduct investigations.

[enigmatic]

Tend to agree there definitely should be people who are at 120CA at 18/19 who have very little scope for improvement beyond that. In line with all the real life players who are just about ready for Premier League appearances at that age who end up dropping divisions for regular football.

Don't think many of those guys should have 120CA at 15/16 though...

Suspect the theory about high CA young players having lower potential than low CA ones is an inaccurate conclusion drawn from a very small samples (2 players!) though.

 

Edited September 9, 2019 by enigmatic

[RoversRob]

@herne79 Not using any type of edited database, nor any in-game editor (not even available on Windows version). I've no idea how often 120+ CA youth intakes should appear, but can confirm that the 5 found across Premier League top flight clubs in those screenshots were over around 8 loaded games so yep, quite a high rate. None will develop further though and are destined for low level Premier League if lucky, although likely the Championship.

@RBKalle I have not once said "I think I should get one, or many, such players". Please, do not put words into my mouth and then over-exaggerate them to substantiate your own point. I have not said I want 4 or 5 Rooneys year in year out - in fact, I have not even come close to that. I am saying that judging by my testing, it would be impossible to ever get one, no matter how many years you play.

If you are telling me that it is completely realistic to have every 120+ CA youth intake have no scope for development, then I don't know how I'm meant to debate with you. Please understand my point - I am not saying I want 5 Rooneys. I have more than enough youth talent. Youth talent is easy to find. I am merely pointing out a flaw I have found, and that flaw is that high CA youth intakes never develop much further beyond their CA. If it was CA 130, PA even 25 points higher at 155, I'd drop the point. But the proof is there - you will only ever get a PA anywhere from 5-10 points higher than that CA (100% of the time until proven otherwise). 

It is consistently the same pattern, of a PA 5-10 points higher than their CA. Surely you can admit that blanketing all high CA youth intakes this way is highly unrealistic? I mean, if one had +5 PA and another +25 PA, then ok - but all have +5-10 PA.

Again, I did not come here to argue with peoples viewpoints of "realism". I came here to point out that CA/PA appears to follow a strict set of guidelines in the circumstances I am talking about, and is therefore entirely scripted and not randomised. This is fundamentally flawed and does not lend to a "realistic" experience if this is the view point you wish to take up.

 

*Edit* So I just started loading more games to try and push this point, and the pattern remains consistent. Over 3 saves, several more 120/130 CA intakes with the same virtually non-existent increase in PA. I'm not going to bother with more screenshots, feel like the first should be enough.

I've apparently reached my daily post limit, so I am just going to leave this now as most here seem happy with this scripted system and feel the need to debate - and each to their own. I myself though find it a let down that I now know that any youth intake 4/5* PA "almost first teamer based on CA" I might get coming into my intake will not be worth the effort, and I should focus on the ****** CA's with 4/5* potential instead.

Did not make this thread to debate with people and their views of realism. I've read enough of peoples same old "real life" comparisons on other FM discussions, and have done for years. I made this thread to simply point out the extraordinary (and so far unbreakable) consistency of zero progression on high CA intakes. A spread of +5/10 100% of the time is not right in my opinion.

Anyway, if S.I see this and would care to comment on why it's like this, great. I'm just raising the issue.

*2nd edit* @jozza800 below me, just posted as I finished my first edit

Cheers for the rational reply. Maybe I have just had consistently bad results on my marginal tests, so I do hope someone can disprove this and post an unedited high CA youth intake day player with also high PA - not just the +5/10 I am finding.

The checking the CA and PA was due to my previous experience of "The next Frank Lampard" not developing even a tiny bit. Did it out of curiosity to see if my new regen was equally as dud, and doing it here in the name of FM science!   

Edit 3 @herne79 with regards to your reply below me. I told you I wasn't using an edited database, and you replied saying "I said in-game app". You did, yep, but you also asked me about edited database. Check your OP. I confirmed that I wasn't using one, nor an in-game editor. With regards to in-game app, I didn't think I had to re-affirm that I used FMSE to check PA, as that was clear to see in my original post as you have just pointed out. It may not be apparent as you would have to check my reddit post, but I used FMSE to check the current regen I had out of ciriosity due to the fact a regen I had gotten seasons before (with great stats) had shown no development. FMSE did not play any part in the previous dud regen. I continued to use FMSE for the purposes of the experiment, otherwise, what would be the point in doing it?

*Edit 4* @CFuller In reply below, you said "This is a discussion on whether there are too many newgens with high starting CA but low PA. Let's stick to the topic, shall we?" - That kind of isnt what its about - its not the "quantity" of these players that bothers me - It is about why these particular players seem to be guaranteed to have zero scope for development.

*Edit 5* @CFuller You said "A potential 10-point increase in CA does not equal zero scope for development." - if getting hung up on technicalities to make a pointless point makes you feel better mate, go for it. I'll re-phrase for you and say "a consistently low spread for all of the effected players of a +5/10 increase in CA". 

*Edit 6* Can a mod not give me more daily posts? lol. @santy001 That doesn't disprove what I am saying though. As youve said yourself, the screenshot you have provided shows 17 year olds that have had development time, and wouldve started with CA's below 100 for the most part. I am only referring to players that come into youth intake day with 120/130 CA. Not players that have 100 CA and a years worth of development under their belts.

 

Edited September 9, 2019 by RoversRob
Maximum number of daily posts.

[jozza800]

I was about to reply with what the others have said. This system works as long as you dont look at the 'hidden' CA/PA values.

But if as you have mentioned that that players with early high CA dont ever develop much more than wht they start then thta is a definite issue. Though it's not something i've noticed in my games.

I have had 15 year olds who already have fully rounded attributes and walk into first teams only for them not to develop any further (as you have described). But equally I've had players that have the same strating points and go on to be GOATs.

As, I've said it works as long as you dont know the CA/PA.

[PenguinKenny]

Surely it's a combination of a high CA being unlikely and a high PA being unlikely, so a situation in which both are high is even more unlikely. In the relatively small number of intakes you have looked at I don't think it's unreasonable to not see the situation of a high CA, high PA player.

 

[herne79]

44 minutes ago, RoversRob said:

Not using any type of edited database, nor any in-game editor

I said in game app - you must be using something otherwise you wouldn't know the hidden CA/PA values.  FMSE is mentioned in your OP, so something is being used.

Regardless, like I said please upload your save game file and open a new thread in the bugs forum I linked above, also saying what additional apps you are using so the devs can understand and investigate.

[Mr U Rosler]

Done 50+ seasons as Academy Challenges, see plenty of high PA players but i don't think i've seen any arrive with 120+ CA, 115 is the highest i've had.

I can get most players pretty close to PA as long as they are in the first team at 17 years old at the latest, maybe 1 in 8 plateaus and never gets to there potential. 

[FlorianAlbert9]

PA is totally irrealistic and SI should re-think the system

We don't have PA in life.

We have all Is needed to devoleped player in game without PA.

Start CA+mental+some phisical unlike to improve much (like pace)+enviroment+inj. pro.

 

You could use those for all example in real life.

 

[CFuller]

5 minutes ago, FlorianAlbert9 said:

PA is totally irrealistic and SI should re-think the system

We don't have PA in life.

We have all Is needed to devoleped player in game without PA.

Start CA+mental+some phisical unlike to improve much (like pace)+enviroment+inj. pro.

 

You could use those for all example in real life.

CA/PA has been discussed many times in the past - and I know we couldn't have more different opinions on the matter - but this is not a discussion on CA/PA. This is a discussion on whether there are too many newgens with high starting CA but low PA. Let's stick to the topic, shall we?

Edited September 9, 2019 by CFuller

[HUNT3R]

9 minutes ago, FlorianAlbert9 said:

PA is totally irrealistic and SI should re-think the system

We don't have PA in life.

We have all Is needed to devoleped player in game without PA.

Start CA+mental+some phisical unlike to improve much (like pace)+enviroment+inj. pro.

 

You could use those for all example in real life.

 

Please create a new thread to discuss this as it isn't what the OP is about.  

[CFuller]

1 hour ago, RoversRob said:

That isnt what the discussion is about. It is why it appears to be the case that any newgen with high 120/130 CA on intake day seem to be destined to have zero scope for development based on their PA always seeming to be only 5-10 points higher than their CA.

A potential 10-point increase in CA does not equal zero scope for development.

[santy001]

To an extent I'm in a situation where I know you're wrong @RoversRob from around some 130 seasons of this years FM, but it isn't particularly possible to prove it because first of all I'm not trundling through the saves and in those saves its only possible if its a snapshot at the right time. I've stopped playing FM19 though now as the clock ticks down to the next version so I'm happy to crack open an editor and take a look. I think the last time I did this was to point out that I had a 90-something CA player in my champions league winning squad, which feels like it might also be a point about the arbitrary determination of what is a good CA.

It's an incredibly rare event for a high CA player and also high PA to come through. In life or in FM. But it does happen. It does happen an awful lot more that there are those who have little to give though, and there are some who just will never materialise.

It's February 2043 so a good portion of those 17 year olds would have been 16 when they came in during the last regen cycle some 9 months earlier. There's some development time but every one of those is a player you should be thinking "he looks pretty much ready for top level football" 

Players who are still exclusively 15 at this point in time in the game:

- - -

Anyhow, its probably time to inject a bit more realism to the numbers being used. If you're using the literal figures of intake day then you're doing it very much incorrectly. It very much tends to be the case that the players who are the most notable examples in real life tend to come through at the end of the season after they've had nearly a year or so closer to the senior set-up. This is when they tend to be noticed in the wider world. FM will always have a degree of weakness on the youth intake day because its having to simulate the youth aspects of football which aren't included in the game for a number of reasons.

I'd be inclined to say the real issue here is that those players CA's are far too high rather than their PA's too low. 

[BuryBlade]

I have had a few players this year come through with 112-129CA and almost identical PA. Prime example was a striker who looked amazing came through but a year later hadn’t developed a single attribute. Looked under the hood and his CA and PA were both 114. 

Tested this a few times by just reloading the youth intake and had a number of players with mid 120CA and the PA would be only a couple of points higher. 

Not overly concerned myself as others have pointed out that it reflects real life fairly well. Just wanted to highlight I have noticed this pattern myself.

[enigmatic]

17 minutes ago, CFuller said:

A potential 10-point increase in CA does not equal zero scope for development.

But tbf to the OP, a 15 year old with a CA of 125 and a potential of 130 is pretty close to zero scope for development as a footballer. The game will give him a couple of points of strength and most other attributes won't visibly budge.

Am struggling to think of any real life examples of players who are mature enough for regular top division football at the remarkably young age of 15 who then never had the capability to improve at all (obviously there are plenty who struggle to improve on the level they hit at 18/19, and plenty of 15 years olds who don't have the capability to improve beyond their normal-for-their-age level  of ability because they lack footballing intelligence and only their physical maturity gets them in the youth team, but prodigies who have such high footballing intelligence that they can reach low end Premier League standard without any exposure to senior football who also lack the ability to learn...... nah). People might cite Freddy Adu, but I don't think he was close to CA120 good when he started playing in MLS and his career would probably have looked "normal" if he'd been playing youth football in England instead.

[FMExperiment]

14 hours ago, CFuller said:

A potential 10-point increase in CA does not equal zero scope for development.

Huh it kinda does. His attributes won't increase more than like 1 for each stat at the very most lol.

I don't get why people are saying this is realistic etc.. clearly if players who come into the youth intake with 110+ ca never have a high pa then there is some sort of bug.  Seems obvious to me 

[rjferguson90]

12 minutes ago, FMExperiment said:

Huh it kinda does. His attributes won't increase more than like 1 for each stat at the very most lol.

I don't get why people are saying this is realistic etc.. clearly if players who come into the youth intake with 110+ ca never have a high pa then there is some sort of bug.  Seems obvious to me 

That isn't the case though.

[sporadicsmiles]

19 hours ago, RoversRob said:

lol, you are entitled to your opinion and I respect your viewpoint, but it really does annoy me when people bring in the "real-life" aspect to argue their point. I am going to respectfully attempt to counter you with real life examples of my own.

It annoys you when people use real life examples to back up something that happens in a game that simulates real life? That is an odd position to take on FM.

CA/PA is a flawed system that people get extremely hung up on. And often for no reason. PA is a useful guide, but it is not even something you should base decisions around when building a squad. Attributes trump everything, and I will take a low CA player with a good attribute spread over a high one with a poorer spread of attributes for what I want him to do. One of my favourite players I bought in any FM as Simone Verde in FM18 (I guess it was). He was only 2.5 stars in my side, and his CA was 140ish (and I was a team challenging for the EPL title). Yet he ripped up the league consistently, getting 15+ goals and assists across multiple seasons. Why? Because I used him well, and his attributes perfectly fitted what I wanted from him. I have plenty of examples of that. So firstly really do not get hung up on CA or PA.

Having said that, youth players are complicated. Think of all the things that need to be simulated.

- Once in a generation talents who start with high CA and have a very high PA cap.

- Good players with a good PA cap. Some will start young, some will grow later.

- Players who look like they will set the world alight, but end up being bang average (and there are plenty of examples of this).

- Players who start average and finish average.

- General dross.

The first category is by far the rarest, by definition of "once in a generation". You are not going to get a Messi with every single youth intake. You will be lucky if you ever get one. Yet you seem to expect that you should regularly get players like this? Why? Even the best academies in the world do not constantly churn out world beating players. La Masia has produced zip for the last 10 years. The categories get more common as you go down that list (well two and three are debatable). You may not get a totally world class player, but with a good youth system you can expect to get a fair few in this category. This is what Ajax are doing in real life. They produce good players (with the odd great). You should expect that most players here start with a lowish CA. How many 16 year olds do you know who can immediately start for a top flight club? There are a handful. You have to nurture and develop them into better players.

Then we have the players you hate, CA and PA close. These players are definitely more common than world class players who make it, and that is true whether you like it or not. That is not even to say that these players are useless or bad. More often than not you can turn any player with 140 PA into a solid home grown backup or rotation option for any club (and 140 PA for a second division club will make him one of your best players). So they will never grow into a Messi. So what? You cannot expect every single youth player who starts out great to develop into a world class player. If you do expect that you have entirely unrealistic expectations.

Finally, most of your youth intake is never going to make it at your club. There are clearly  hugely more crappy players than excellent ones in football. I really cannot see much wrong in the way things are distributed in terms of the types of player you see. I mean, if you want every youth player you get to be epic, just buy the in game editor and give them all 200 PA.

1 hour ago, FMExperiment said:

don't get why people are saying this is realistic etc.. clearly if players who come into the youth intake with 110+ ca never have a high pa then there is some sort of bug

This thing is this is also totally untrue. It is just very rare. I have a game where I just follow football as a spectator and see what happens. Kinda like a God ruling over everything with the in game editor (it is very fun to play around with). One thing I do is find all the players with very high PA in a youth intake and track them. Those with CA above 110 are already on the far end of the bell curve. They are rare, and players with high PA are rare. So with high CA and PA to start are very rare. Just because you do not see it in your intake does not mean it does not happen.

[CFuller]

1 hour ago, FMExperiment said:

Huh it kinda does. His attributes won't increase more than like 1 for each stat at the very most lol.

I don't get why people are saying this is realistic etc.. clearly if players who come into the youth intake with 110+ ca never have a high pa then there is some sort of bug.  Seems obvious to me 

10 CA does not equal +1 in each and every attribute. I don't know exactly how CA works in FM, but I'd imagine that you could simply focus on training players' more important attributes, so that they could go up by a little more.

And again, having high ability at a young age doesn't always mean you have high potential.

Francis Jeffers was a pretty good Premier League striker at 18/19 (not 15/16, but still)... but was he ever likely to become anything more than that, even at Arsenal? Probably not. And was Freddy Adu's 'disappointing' career more a case of him being 'overhyped' at 14 than wasting his potential? Probably.

That's just without delving into the worlds of other sports, games and activities. It seems that you can hardly move for chess prodigies aged 15 or under, but not all of them become world-class adult players, let alone world champions. Likewise in tennis, an outstanding junior player can look ordinary at senior level and never break the top 200 (in singles or doubles), no matter how hard they work.

[FMExperiment]

2 hours ago, CFuller said:

10 CA does not equal +1 in each and every attribute. I don't know exactly how CA works in FM, but I'd imagine that you could simply focus on training players' more important attributes, so that they could go up by a little more.

And again, having high ability at a young age doesn't always mean you have high potential.

Francis Jeffers was a pretty good Premier League striker at 18/19 (not 15/16, but still)... but was he ever likely to become anything more than that, even at Arsenal? Probably not. And was Freddy Adu's 'disappointing' career more a case of him being 'overhyped' at 14 than wasting his potential? Probably.

That's just without delving into the worlds of other sports, games and activities. It seems that you can hardly move for chess prodigies aged 15 or under, but not all of them become world-class adult players, let alone world champions. Likewise in tennis, an outstanding junior player can look ordinary at senior level and never break the top 200 (in singles or doubles), no matter how hard they work.

I mess around with the editor alot and was just being arbitrary in my example. But 10ca for a striker can be as little as 10 pace points. So 10ca really isn't alot... attributes have different weighting depending on position. For example a striker might only use 0.25 ca for 1 point in marking, but a defender might use 1ca for 1 point of marking (again just rough examples). I would still argue that whilst some footballers peak really early its a little weird to have a 110ca 15 year old who for the rest of his life only learns to run a little faster 

To all those who responded if ops data is false then of course I have no issue with certain players peaking early.. I was just going off the basis that seemingly all players with high ca had low pa. That was all 

Edited September 10, 2019 by FMExperiment

[Karnack]

So I did a test myself, just to see if this was true with my own eyes. I've been reloading the English youth take for the better part of 2 hours, I would say I have more than 50 youth intakes to draw from. I have a single newgen above 120 CA and a single player above 119CA. Both with a fair amount of growth potential. Not world beaters but surely sufficient to put doubt on OPs claim of 100% probability to not develop beyond their current self.

Another issue I see based on this is the amount of 120+ CAs OP seems to get from so few intakes. I had to work "hard" for just these two.

Edited September 10, 2019 by Karnack
Found another one (60+ tries)

[theonets]

2 minutes ago, Karnack said:

So I did a test myself, just to see if this was true with my own eyes. I've been reloading the English youth take for the better part of 2 hours, I would say I have more than 50 youth intakes to draw from. I have a single newgen above 120 CA and a single player above 119CA. Both with a fair amount of growth potential. Not world beaters but surely sufficient to put doubt on OPs claim of 100% probability to not develop beyond their current self.

Another issue I see based on this is the amount of 120+ CAs OP seems to get from so few intakes. I had to work "hard" for just these two.

Interesting experiment, but I went on Reddit, and OP had state of the art youth facilities and exceptional youth coaching, so those are possibly factors to consider. Perhaps for these specific vectors, the production is wonkily tilted towards high CA/comparitively Low PA?

 

Admittedly, his sample size is very low to draw a conclusion, but I would suggest those two parameters should be what the focus should be on while testing?

 

Once youth coaching goes above a certain level, I have noticed a similar trend to the OP, albeit with no data to back me up right now

Edited September 10, 2019 by theonets

[Karnack]

3 minutes ago, theonets said:

Interesting experiment, but I went on Reddit, and OP had state of the art youth facilities and exceptional youth coaching, so those are possibly factors to consider. Perhaps for these specific vectors, the production is wonkily tilted towards high CA/comparitively Low PA?

I think OPs examples where players from different clubs, so not sure that matters?

[RBKalle]

22 ore fa, RoversRob ha scritto:

*Edit* So I just started loading more games to try and push this point, and the pattern remains consistent. Over 3 saves, several more 120/130 CA intakes with the same virtually non-existent increase in PA. I'm not going to bother with more screenshots, feel like the first should be enough.

Is it the default database? No edits?

To be honest, I've never had this problem, but then again, I've never gone around snooping other clubs intakes, so I can only comment on what I've seen happening at my clubs. And I've never had many ready-made players, regardless of their Potential.
Well, actually that happened in my Faroes save, but because ANY player with 50CA was first team material for the first couple of years... Still, nowhere near the 120CA/125PA 15yo English players you seem to keep on getting.

Which, I maintain, is very weird and likely the outcome of some "modding". Usually a standard youth intake has 1 player with passable CA and higher PA, a handful of low-CA, average PA, and a dozen of no-hopers. Every now and then you get the odd Supertalent, but if he's 110CA, odds are his PA will be much much higher.

Anyway, out of curiosity, I've loaded an old test save to crunch some numbers...

Total players aged 14 and 15: 436

Players aged 14-15 with CA >50 AND PA >100: 159

Players aged 14-15 with CA >100 AND PA <130: ONE

Players aged 14-15 with PA-CA Difference <10: 34.  Highest CA among those is 44 (PA 51)
With Difference <20 there are 22 more players, only TWO with PA >100 (85/104 and 82/101. Oddly enough they, and the aforementioned ONE are all from Herta Berlin's Youth Setup...

 

So, in a mostly typical savegame (loaded the Top Five nations), there are only a handful of 15yo players who are vaguely ready for first team football without much room for improvement.

Not saying you're lying, but either you've tampered with the editor or you're getting a series of very very odd and extreme events.

Edited September 10, 2019 by RBKalle

[RoversRob]

So, because of new account I reached post limit yesterday so couldnt reply.

I'd like to clear a few things up.

I posted this here for discussion - I wasn't sure if it was a bug, so after testing (admittedly limited, no-one is paying me to reload thousands of games for a bigger sample size) I made an effort to try and show my findings to you all and put it into an easy to view format. I am just trying to share what I found.

I do not use any edited database or in game editor and have already clearly stated this. I am using the microsoft version of FM via game pass, downloaded straight from the store and un-touched. The only custom thing I am using are club/league badge packs. I understand if people have their view points on how CA/PA works and how they personally compare it to real life, but making pointless accusations and/or calling me a billy liar really doesn't help. I am not here to argue your viewpoint on how players develop, or how CA and PA works. Just to point out my findings.

Finally, to re-instate. I do not want a Ronaldo, Rooney or Messi to magically appear in my youth intake every year. I do not care about that. I simply had 2 cases over a 4 year period where 2 regens that looked like monsters appeared in my youth intake, and after the first didnt develop, I checked the PA of the 2nd when he appeared in my intake to find that he too, would not develop, which lead me to reload youth intake several times to see how many I could spot, to which I spotted lots as you see in my screenshot.

I have no idea why on this intake I am getting these 120/130+ CA youth intakes. I literally just realoded youth intake day to see how many tries it took me. The first, I got nothing. The 2nd try, this guy showed up at birmingham (please ignore the 2 Germans on the screenshot, they are not newgens and are on their third season)

https://pasteboard.co/IwL33gw.png

@RBKalle You can maintain your personal and unfounded opinion that I've modded or edited all you like. I have not. I've also not looked at the numbers you just made in that post mate, but again ill point out, Im only referring to newgens that just came out of youth intake with a 120+ CA. Not all regens across the game with random 100 CA stats after who knows how many months have been in game.

@Karnack Thankyou! Thank you for not completely bashing me and actually taking the time and effort to try this out yourself to see the results. It does appear that you are getting something different to me, with 2 players there over 120+ CA showing +33 and +37 PA increases respectively, so it appears is it not a fixed set of parameters. With regards to your 119 CA player, I can't tell you if I have had any similar - you can see from my search parameters in the screenshot on this post I have only been searching players up to max age of 16, minimum CA of 120.

So, to finalise. One person so far @Karnack has actually tested his own youth intake day, and has found 2 players that go against my results. There are still lots of people on here and on Reddit though describing incidents themselves identical to mine, with high CA players coming in with no scope for development. If anyone else wants to test their youth intake days, please do. With there now being something going against the grain I might actually take the time to load up a few hundred youth intake days to see if I can also get some that go against my original findings, and share the result with people that actually would like to see the results, rather than those who just want to pointlessly talk about Francis Jeffers.

[RoversRob]

Further update. Because of difference found by @Karnack I decided I am going to re-run testing on this youth intake, and also run on next years intake to see what difference there is.

I've already started re-testing, and can confirm I have found some players that go against my original findings - most by not massive margins, but one definitely by a really impressive margin (127 CA, 186 PA).

There are some really interesting finds in here, and I'm sometimes getting as many as 3 120+ CA players in one intake.

I have kids and other commitments, so it might take me a few days to get this years results, but I'll keep going at post them on here as soon as I'm done.

[RBKalle]

1 ora fa, RoversRob ha scritto:

@RBKalle You can maintain your personal and unfounded opinion that I've modded or edited all you like. I have not. I've also not looked at the numbers you just made in that post mate, but again ill point out, Im only referring to newgens that just came out of youth intake with a 120+ CA. Not all regens across the game with random 100 CA stats after who knows how many months have been in game.

Chill out pal...

I was just ASKING, because frankly your findings go against not one but two rather common "norms" in FM youth intake:

1) 15-16yo players ready for Championship/Low EPL football are extremely rare to get in Youth Intakes
2) 15-16yo players with such CA are usually Wonderkids with very high PA

Basically you've been reporting a double subversion of how Youth Intakes generally go, which made me wonder whether you may have "enhanced" your youth setup... And since I've at times dabbled in editing for research/curiosity purposes, I know for a fact not even a 10000 Reputation club with state-of-the-art facilities and top-notch youth recruitment in Big Nation with 200 Youth Rating can guarantee First-Team level players in every intake.

It may take several reloads in such "ideal" (and unrealistic) conditions to get one "Rooney" and a handful of "Welbecks", "Januzajs" and "Machedas". But the bulk of the intake will still consist of players you'll either cut right away or will keep in the U19 side as filler til their contract runs out (or a League Two side signs them).

The odds of a CA120/PA130 player showing up at 15-16 in youth intakes in a Top Nation are minimal for the aforementioned reasons.

BTW, the fact you didn't even bother to read and understand the numbers I took the time to research tells me a lot about what you really expect from this thread... People telling you "you're right! It's broken!".
Which isn't gonna happen. Not because we're all asskissers (dude, I've been among the most vocal critics of a lot of FM's aspects...) but because we know what to expect, what is "normal" and what is, let's say, unusual.

And your scenario is very unusual.

Also, I looked at 15-16 players, so players generated in the current season's intake. And if out of hundrers of freshly generated newgens, only ONE player is fitting your criteria, what does it mean? That it's not as common as you think... And that you're either experiencing a statistical anomaly (to the point of drawing the same lottery numbers 10 times in a row) or you're making a mountain out of a molehill...

Edited September 10, 2019 by RBKalle

[enigmatic]

I think the exceptional CA with ordinary PA might be a statistical anomaly

But I also don't think the FM database should be generating 15 year olds with starting 120CA and 130PA at all. 

[RoversRob]

6 hours ago, RBKalle said:

Chill out pal...

I was just ASKING, because frankly your findings go against not one but two rather common "norms" in FM youth intake:

1) 15-16yo players ready for Championship/Low EPL football are extremely rare to get in Youth Intakes
2) 15-16yo players with such CA are usually Wonderkids with very high PA

Basically you've been reporting a double subversion of how Youth Intakes generally go, which made me wonder whether you may have "enhanced" your youth setup... And since I've at times dabbled in editing for research/curiosity purposes, I know for a fact not even a 10000 Reputation club with state-of-the-art facilities and top-notch youth recruitment in Big Nation with 200 Youth Rating can guarantee First-Team level players in every intake.

It may take several reloads in such "ideal" (and unrealistic) conditions to get one "Rooney" and a handful of "Welbecks", "Januzajs" and "Machedas". But the bulk of the intake will still consist of players you'll either cut right away or will keep in the U19 side as filler til their contract runs out (or a League Two side signs them).

The odds of a CA120/PA130 player showing up at 15-16 in youth intakes in a Top Nation are minimal for the aforementioned reasons.

BTW, the fact you didn't even bother to read and understand the numbers I took the time to research tells me a lot about what you really expect from this thread... People telling you "you're right! It's broken!".
Which isn't gonna happen. Not because we're all asskissers (dude, I've been among the most vocal critics of a lot of FM's aspects...) but because we know what to expect, what is "normal" and what is, let's say, unusual.

And your scenario is very unusual.

Also, I looked at 15-16 players, so players generated in the current season's intake. And if out of hundrers of freshly generated newgens, only ONE player is fitting your criteria, what does it mean? That it's not as common as you think... And that you're either experiencing a statistical anomaly (to the point of drawing the same lottery numbers 10 times in a row) or you're making a mountain out of a molehill...

Sorry - as soon as I typed "I did not look at your numbers" I actually did think "I'll take a look", and noticed you were using search parameters that had absolutely naff all to do with my OP or what this whole thread is about (purely newgens on youth intake day with CA 120+).

I'm not guaranteeing first teamers every intake. I said it was happening on a high rate. Since I've been doing more testing, I have a better idea on the actual percentage which I will show once I have a larger sample.

You say you searched 15-16 year olds and out of hundreds of regens only one met my criteria. You didn't. In fact your post said you were searching 14-15 year olds (no idea now whether you were searching 14-15 or 15-16, but it doesn't matter), and your parameters were not following my guidelines form the OP. In fact, the most relevant search you made was the following:

"Players aged 14-15 with CA >100 AND PA <130: ONE"

That search isn't going to help you with the circumstances I am finding, because you are excluding players above 130 PA (which is the bracket most of these "problematic" intakes I am finding fall into).

All I'm saying mate, is from your very first post you've hardly contributed anything worthwhile to the actual relevant data I'm finding, other than casting your opinion on how realistic my CA/PA scenario is compared to real life players and youth development, quoting names such as Francis Jeffers and Didier Drogba, followed by making presumptions that I am making this post due to being unhappy about not uncovering a Wayne Rooney every season, coupled with a hint of "must be database editing".

You also make contradictory statements like this:

On 09/09/2019 at 12:50, RBKalle said:

I'd say FM produces TOO MANY good newgens who can almost walk into the Starting XI of a mid-table EPL team

 

6 hours ago, RBKalle said:

The odds of a CA120/PA130 player showing up at 15-16 in youth intakes in a Top Nation are minimal

 

To close this off mate, this post is not about your opinion, ego or anything else. It is about me getting 120+ CA players on a regular basis in this particular youth intake, with the vast majority (more testing showing my OP is not 100% the case) showing no potential for improvement. I will be doing more testing and revealing much more data, so if you are interested to see it, stick around. If you can't believe me when I say I am using no editors or skewed database, then this post isn't for you as everything I present will be too easy for you to dismiss if it doesn't follow your own experience.

If you want to contribute (which honestly, I would appreciate), wait til your next youth intake, save, reload, use search parameters CA 120+, max age 16. Newgens only, no 16 year olds that have been developing in France or Germany since they were age 14.

Apologies if I am sounding an arse, but really mate - I just posted this here to show people the data, not get into a discussion on five different fronts to cover 5 different topics.

 

[RBKalle]

1 ora fa, RoversRob ha scritto:

You say you searched 15-16 year olds and out of hundreds of regens only one met my criteria. You didn't. In fact your post said you were searching 14-15 year olds (no idea now whether you were searching 14-15 or 15-16, but it doesn't matter), and your parameters were not following my guidelines form the OP. In fact, the most relevant search you made was the following:

"Players aged 14-15 with CA >100 AND PA <130: ONE"

That search isn't going to help you with the circumstances I am finding, because you are excluding players above 130 PA (which is the bracket most of these "problematic" intakes I am finding fall into).

The starting search I did was to put whatever findings in perspective... Like "there are N players aged 14-15 currently in the test save, and X out of those N fit these or those criteria". E.g. 20 out of 100 is not the same as 20 out of 500... But I shouldn't even being explaining that.

Anyway, about your main criticism... I should have probably set a higher upper limit than PA 130 but, guess what, there is only ONE MORE player that sort of proves your point, with CA113/PA137.

I'll give you that if I search for 16yo players only (so with at least one year of in-game life), there are like a dozen of players with relatively low PA already close to their maximum potential (CA-PA difference <30). But the thing is, without knowing their original CA, that gap may have been more noticeable and fair.

So a 110/135 16yo could have been a rather acceptable 98/135 15yo when he was created

 

1 ora fa, RoversRob ha scritto:

All I'm saying mate, is from your very first post you've hardly contributed anything worthwhile to the actual relevant data I'm finding, other than casting your opinion on how realistic my CA/PA scenario is compared to real life players and youth development, quoting names such as Francis Jeffers and Didier Drogba, followed by making presumptions that I am making this post due to being unhappy about not uncovering a Wayne Rooney every season, coupled with a hint of "must be database editing".

Well, I'm sorry you find my data not relevant and my contribution not worthwhile... Maybe because it's not backing up your point?

You asked for data and I've given you my findings on a particular save. It's anecdotal, I'll even give you that it wasn't made on Intake Day either (don't have one, and don't have time now to create one for that purpose). But if out of several hundreds of players age 14-15, only TWO vaguely fit your criteria, while 99.5% are either low CA-high PA or simply awful lower-league fodder who'll never improve significantly, what should I tell you?

 

1 ora fa, RoversRob ha scritto:

You also make contradictory statements like this:

They are absolutely NOT contradictory!

* FM produces many players with reasonable starting CA and HIGH PA, meaning a 17-18yo will likely be able to feature a lot in a Top Club's Starting XI. Think of something like CA115/PA165 upon entering the gameworld. Within one or two seasons, the player will be around 125-130CA, therefore more than ready to get serious first team action.

* Conversely, players with average PA (like 120-130 for EPL sides) are generally unlikely to also have high CA. So a 75CA/125PA is still a common model.

 

1 ora fa, RoversRob ha scritto:

To close this off mate, this post is not about your opinion, ego or anything else. It is about me getting 120+ CA players on a regular basis in this particular youth intake, with the vast majority (more testing showing my OP is not 100% the case) showing no potential for improvement. I will be doing more testing and revealing much more data, so if you are interested to see it, stick around. If you can't believe me when I say I am using no editors or skewed database, then this post isn't for you as everything I present will be too easy for you to dismiss if it doesn't follow your own experience.

If you want to contribute (which honestly, I would appreciate), wait til your next youth intake, save, reload, use search parameters CA 120+, max age 16. Newgens only, no 16 year olds that have been developing in France or Germany since they were age 14.

Apologies if I am sounding an arse, but really mate - I just posted this here to show people the data, not get into a discussion on five different fronts to cover 5 different topics.

 

Cold data can't be about opinions or egos (whose ego anyway?!).

You came in presenting what many will (and did) tell you it's rather unusual. We've been debating newgens for years around here and I can honestly say it's the first time I've read about your scenario.

People either moan about newgens been too good on average or about not getting a decent newgen in 50 reloads despite top-level facilities and staff. Your point can be summed up as "newgens are too average", which, again, is a first.

Wanna upload your save so we can test it ourselves instead of trying to recreate it?

[RoversRob]

Ok, so did a test of 100 intakes and now have repetitive stress disorder - I can't do more of these. May do the same test on next intake. Here are some numbers:

 

The youth intakes went a little something like this (1 shows an intake generated a high CA player, 0 shows no high CA player generated on that intake)

0000 11 0 1 00 1 0 11 000 11 0 1111 00 1 000 111 0 1 0 1 0 1 0000 11 00 111 00 1 0 1 0 111 00 1 0000 11 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 111 0 1 000000 1 0000 11 0 11 000 1

It's farily split down the middle, with 45% of intakes loaded providing positive samples and generating players with a CA above 120.

The 45% positive samples provided a total of 55 individual players (taking into account multiple players occasionally being generated on single intakes), of which 13% (7) were generated at my own club.

Players showing little improvement - 82% (45 players)
Players breaking the mould (PA increases of >20) - 18% (10 players)

----------------------------------------------

Out of the players breaking the mould (showing PA increase of >+20), they fell into these PA brackets:

Players that broke the mould had max PA of 
140-149 (3)
150-159 (3)
160-169 (3)
170-179 (0)
180-189 (1)
190-200 (0)

Players that broke the mould had Individual PA Increases of
+20-29 (3)
+30-39 (3)
+40-49 (3)
+50-59 (1)

Average PA increase of approx 34 for the above.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Of the 45 players that showed little to no PA improvement, they all generally had CA 120x PA 130x so I won't list all their max PA's, but I will list their individual PA increases:

Players that showed little to no improvement had Individual PA increases of
+1-5 (9)
+6-10 (27)
+11-15 (6)
+16-19 (3)

Average PA increase of approx 9 for the above.

My favourite from the above selection was Callum Burton, the last guy I got (CA 129, PA 131).

----------------------------------

Attached is a screenshot of all these generated players CA and PA stats. Players highlighted are the ones that showed a +20 PA increase.

Players within black borders were all generated together on the same youth intake day.

Interpret it all how you will, and feel free to download the save here to see that the database/editor is not being used and test the intake yourself. Game is saved right before intake so no messing about.

 

 

 

[enigmatic]

Paging @Seb Wassell since this is ties into the work he's doing on development after they're born into the game

 

Think the issue is probably the distribution of starting CA rather than PA 

IMHO Callum Burtons shouldn't be happening. Freshly generated 16 year olds should almost never have 129CA and the few that do should still have plenty of potential for improvement even if their mentality won't necessarily get them there (thinking about Premier League examples in the past couple of decades - maybe only Rooney and Fabregas just about hit that level at 16 and both had elite level potential. The other teenage prodigies who stagnated as teenagers were either never that good or peaked around 18/19)

Obviously plenty of 15/16 year old newgens with closer to normal levels of CA should have <20 points of improvement - youth team regulars get released to non-league every year because they're really not able to learn enough to stay ahead of their growing and improving teammates. But not the rare player who are such rapid learners that they're high end Championship/Eredivisie standard before they've kicked a ball in senior football

[RoversRob]

@enigmatic agree entirely with everything you said mate, nice way to sum it all up.

[Seb Wassell]

34 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

Paging @Seb Wassell since this is ties into the work he's doing on development after they're born into the game

Acknowledged.

A post in the bug forums would be helpful here, with data/saves please. As ever, exceptions do happen, examples where a trend over a large sample is demonstrated are best.

Cheers.