Football Manager 2021 - New Headline Features

[FlorianAlbert9]

6 minuti fa, HUNT3R ha scritto:

No he wouldn't necessarily because staff do not know the actual PA number. 

They don't know the exact PA, but a range yes. Otherwise JPP attributes would be useless. (And you even test that changing PA with editor in-game)

[HUNT3R]

Just now, DP said:

But how likely is this to happen? If there’s a young player with a high PA too often you know this as a number of big clubs start becoming interested. For that PA to not be known so long into a players career on FM doesn’t seem to happen - it’s realised earlier. 
 

I can’t recall having seen anything close to a Vardy situation on FM. 

There's a leftback in my game who has 171 PA. He drifted between the Championship and Premier League for most of his career. His highest CA was 127. He could have been a Vardy, had someone given him the chance.

Staff/clubs/etc cannot see the actual number. They have no real idea if a player will be good or not. I have had a lot of players who were highly sought after (having 5 star PA as well) at 16/17 and they had PAs no higher than 140. The AI goes by the same metrics as we do IRL. How good he is right now for his age.

Look at these two similar players. 92 and 95 CA. Both 16 years old. Look at the PCA and PPA - identical. Their actual PA is 144 and 117. 

[DP]

8 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

There's a leftback in my game who has 171 PA. He drifted between the Championship and Premier League for most of his career. His highest CA was 127. He could have been a Vardy, had someone given him the chance.

Staff/clubs/etc cannot see the actual number. They have no real idea if a player will be good or not. I have had a lot of players who were highly sought after (having 5 star PA as well) at 16/17 and they had PAs no higher than 140. The AI goes by the same metrics as we do IRL. How good he is right now for his age.

Look at these two similar players. 92 and 95 CA. Both 16 years old. Look at the PCA and PPA - identical. Their actual PA is 144 and 117. 

Okay but can that left back now reach his potential or is it gone for him?

[destmez]

10 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

There's a leftback in my game who has 171 PA. He drifted between the Championship and Premier League for most of his career. His highest CA was 127. He could have been a Vardy, had someone given him the chance.

Staff/clubs/etc cannot see the actual number. They have no real idea if a player will be good or not. I have had a lot of players who were highly sought after (having 5 star PA as well) at 16/17 and they had PAs no higher than 140. The AI goes by the same metrics as we do IRL. How good he is right now for his age.

Look at these two similar players. 92 and 95 CA. Both 16 years old. Look at the PCA and PPA - identical. Their actual PA is 144 and 117.  

the final note or 🌟 of the recruiter should take into account the current performance of the player like IRL, sometimes a young player is very strong in young one can predict that he has a big potential but sometimes the youngster has good characteristics but he lacks the intelligence of the game or a lack of physical development does not allow to play at 100% of his level pu then his development is not finished so it is difficult to see the potential by which they have not finished its development it does not perform among young people whose recruiters ignore it 

 

if one day you want to create a concept send a message

Edited October 20, 2020 by destmez

[gunner86]

8 minutes ago, destmez said:

Abidal cuadrao , pavard , and many others

Abidal moved to Barcelona at 26 having played in Ligue 1 before, Packard is still only 24, they’re not exactly late bloomers

2 minutes ago, DP said:

Okay but can that left back now reach his potential or is it gone for him?

Theoretically, yes he could still reach that PA as technicals continue to develop until around 30-32, and mentals increase all the way up to retirement I believe.

Don’t get me wrong, the system is flawed, for several reasons. In my opinion removing PA is not the solution.

[HUNT3R]

1 minute ago, DP said:

Okay but can that left back now reach his potential or is it gone for him?

No it's over for him now. He's 33 now. He spent a season at Arsenal (8 seasons ago) and one at Lazio (7 seasons ago), so there was a chance for him. Problem is that the season before, he only played 6 matches in total.

 

4 minutes ago, destmez said:

the final score of the recruiter should take into account the current performance of the player like IRL, sometimes a young player is very strong in young one can predict that he has a big potential but sometimes the youngster has good characteristics but he lacks the intelligence of the game or a lack of physical development does not allow to play at 100% of his level pu then his development is not finished so it is difficult to see the potential by which they have not finished its development it does not perform among young people whose recruiters ignore it 

Form does influence the star ratings.

[herne79]

Fun fact - the hidden CA and PA values are not measures of how good a player is or could become and using them as such is fundamentally flawed.  Likewise the in game star ratings are only indicators of current / future ability and should never be viewed in isolation.

[Deisler26]

With regards to the new recruitment, will you be able to 'turn it off' as such? Or will you have to sack your Chief Scout, Recruitment Analysts etc?

[HUNT3R]

1 hour ago, herne79 said:

Fun fact - the hidden CA and PA values are not measures of how good a player is or could become and using them as such is fundamentally flawed.

This.

Here's my CL winning first 11. They played in the final.

These players won me a CL against teams like Man Utd and Man City who have multiple 170+ and 180+ CA (edit: meant CA) players in their first 11. If you sort by avg rating (so the overall best performers, my best player is on the bench (slightly injured) at 166 CA, Ramazzotti is my 2nd best performer at a 'mere' 149 CA and 3rd is Matousek at 156 CA.

But - these players all fit the team perfectly, I select who will give me the best advantage (in my opinion, of course) in a match when looking at possible match-ups and have been together (most of them) for a while now. I never looked at the numbers under the hood and this is 4/5 seasons ago, so it won't affect me and my save by looking at them now.

My bench is far worse.

This includes a highly rated (PPA-wise) youngster in Remi Dobelle, who I had no idea that he would never amount to anything. He even played in 4 CL matches with 1 start and 3 sub apps. The same happened with Illuminato, Lutz and Merino. Kept playing them and saw very little increase in ability. Eventually, I let them go. Lutz was a 4 star PPA player. Illuminato was 4.5 star PPA. That's why I bought them. 

The game world is quite good if you don't look at the numbers under the hood. Some players will surprise you and it's sometimes a good surprise and sometimes not.

Anyway, it's off topic, but thought I'd share since it was brought up. My advice - don't look at the numbers.

I do wish we'd see a few news items to highlight a Vardy story. It's not the type of thing that's easy to pick up on in a save, unless you're tracking a player and constantly checking the numbers with the editor. IRL, it's through the news that we know of the story. Would be nice to see it in-game.

[rafaelbenitez]

The recruitment meetings look intriguing. I hope they are also ported in some form over to FM Touch.

[Victor]

For me it all goes down to improvements to the ME. IMO FM20 was a perfect game outside of the pitch, but what's the point of playing a football management game if I can't enjoy the representation of football itself?

Don't get me wrong - I like the new features. I perceive them as largely cosmetic but then again I think off-the-pitch stuff is fantastic. It's simply that I want to feel like the tactical tweaks I put foward are reflected on the pitch, I want to feel like what I'm doing is influencing the final result - either positively or negatively, like in some of the previous iterations of the game.

If SI manages to produce a ME able to resemble real football, I'll be buying it without hesitation. If they fail it'll be the first time I won't buy the game. I have bought each and every game since CM01/02 but I'm not paying again to play just a couple of seasons before giving up.

[isignedupfornorealreason]

Yeah, never go by potential stars.

 

I go by the attributes they have, and whether I can give them the games to accelerate their development. If they're turning 18-19 and I'm having to loan them out to the National League, it's almost a waste of my time to bother with them as they will be too far for me to develop to a point I can play them. Just IMO though.

The bigger the club I am, the more risk I can take with youth development. With Manchester United, I regularly use youth in cup and dead rubber games, knowing the quality of the team will pull me through and the board is lenient and won't sack me for errors.

If I'm at say, Swansea, I won't risk it, since promotion is based on fine margins and I can't afford to risk losing out on a payday until I've established the club.

 

Anyway, best feature announced so far will be the recruitment meetings. Hopefully, I can drive recruitment criteria. Like "Find a goalkeeper, I need to replace my current one" etc.

[FlorianAlbert9]

36 minuti fa, HUNT3R ha scritto:

This.

Here's my CL winning first 11. They played in the final.

These players won me a CL against teams like Man Utd and Man City who have multiple 170+ and 180+ PA players in their first 11. If you sort by avg rating (so the overall best performers, my best player is on the bench (slightly injured) at 166 CA, Ramazzotti is my 2nd best performer at a 'mere' 149 CA and 3rd is Matousek at 156 CA.

But - these players all fit the team perfectly, I select who will give me the best advantage (in my opinion, of course) in a match when looking at possible match-ups and have been together (most of them) for a while now. I never looked at the numbers under the hood and this is 4/5 seasons ago, so it won't affect me and my save by looking at them now.

 

But what you see as great management possibility, i see as great ME's flaw. 

(Then, apart from the bench, your team was not weak. And the fact the the both Man had several 170+ PA mean nothing in the match, 'cause, in fact, that was PA that has no impact in the game)

Of course It can happened that a weak team could win the CL (Mourinho at Porto), but only when there are a perfect and rare mix of events (in that case, Real Madrid and Milan suiciding against Monaco and Deportivo,  besides, ok, Mourinho impact). 

So, It can happen, yeah, but if this become the standard, then FM is not a simulation.

I play without look at CA/PA, but that isn't the point. 

Because:

1) in data research CA are setting upon guides, but then the ME disregard them if you could win with a 100 ca player  (even Just look at CA set for CL winner in the last 10 years in reality)

2) AI look most at CA (perceiveid) then votes. I had a U21 Goalkepeer (with low wage) that was named the best of the season, despite that when i try to sell (for testing), nobody want him, a part for teams from 2 sub-level league (to whom i sold for free). I had have several other similar case 

3) if you always won with players with 150 at max Is there no sense ti building up team. For you. And for AI.

Edited October 20, 2020 by FlorianAlbert9

[Tiger666]

3 minutes ago, FlorianAlbert9 said:

But what you see as great management possibility, i see as great ME's flaw. 

(Then, apart from the bench, your team was not weak. And the fact the the both Man had several 170+ PA mean nothing in the match, 'cause, in fact, that was PA that has no impact in the game)

Of course It can happened that a weak team could win the CL (Mourinho at Porto), but only when there are a perfect and rare mix of events (in that case, Real Madrid and Milan suiciding against Monaco and Deportivo,  besides, ok, Mourinho impact). 

So, It can happen, yeah, but if this become the standard, then FM is not a simulation.

I play without look at CA/PA, but that isn't the point. 

Because:

1) in data research CA are setting upon guides, but then the ME disregard them (even Just look at CA set for CL winner in the last 10 years)

2) AI look most at CA (perceiveid) then votes. I had a U21 Goalkepeer (with low wage) that was named the best of the season, despite that when i try to sell (for testing), nobody want him, a part for teams from 2 sub-level league (to whom i sold for free). I had have several other similar case 

3) if you always won with players with 150 at max Is there no sense ti building up team. For you. And for AI.

You're missing the point. It's attributes that matter, not PA (or even CA). Squad building and developing players is what I do, it's what I enjoy most from the game. What I mainly focus on is attributes.

Edited October 20, 2020 by Tiger666

[FlorianAlbert9]

13 minuti fa, Tiger666 ha scritto:

You're missing the point. It's attributes that matter, not PA (or even CA). Squad building and developing players is what I do, it's what I enjoy most from the game. What I mainly focus on is attributes.

No.

The point is the attributes made the CA.

Of course between a 150CA player and 160CA player the difference is minimal and then there are several other factors. 

But a team made by all 150 players Is totally another thing. 

Taking into account that your are not playing against a novice, but Mourinho, Guardiola etc ..

What is the sense of data research in setting CA following SI's guide then?

You call FM simulation? 

Then look at the starting 11 of the last 10 CL winner and you see the point.

Edited October 20, 2020 by FlorianAlbert9

[Impacto]

A bit off topic:

CA and PA don't matter if the player has the right attributes for the right role in the team and a good personality to execute it consistantly. A 150 CA player can do a better job than a 180 CA player often times.

I've seen 200 CA players be average and 150 CA players be god like in many, many saves. I've said it before and other people have said it as well - don't look at those numbers! They are made for the game to do it's thing, not for you to use them when playing.  

[SazoJohnno]

22 hours ago, SazoJohnno said:

I am liking what I am seeing but I got to admit that I am still concerned about one thing. 

"in-game covid effect". This was mentioned in section of "realistic market". If this mean that FM is trying to reflect the struggles the clubs are going through currently due to the pandemic financially, then fine, I am fine with that. But if this mean FM has covid pandemic included then I am going to say that I will be hugely put off from it. I hope this can be clarified. 

Look like I have got my answer in this blog mentioned 
 

I am very happy with the decisions people at FM made. This seems to be very best decisions they could ever make with trying to retain the realism but also offering the escapism. Well done once again. 

 

My concern is now gone. 

[herne79]

35 minutes ago, FlorianAlbert9 said:

No.

The point is the attributes made the CA.

Of course between a 150CA player and 160CA player the difference is minimal and then there are several other factors. 

But a team made by all 150 players Is totally another thing. 

Taking into account that your are not playing against a novice, but Mourinho, Guardiola etc ..

What is the sense of data research in setting CA following SI's guide then?

You call FM simulation? 

Then look at the starting 11 of the last 10 CL winner and you see the point.

No .

The point is, as I said above, the hidden CA value is not a measure of how good a player is.  Yes the attributes contribute to that CA value but looking at CA to determine how good a player is is utterly flawed because CA doesn't take into account everything.  It doesn't include all visible attributes for a start.  Nor does it include any hidden attributes such as Consistency and Pressure.  And it doesn't even think about factors such as form, condition, the role you are asking a player to perform, the spread of attributes we want our players to have in certain positions or how players fit into the overall framework of our tactical systems (to name but a few).

So it's not an "ME flaw" if a team with lower CA values can beat teams with higher CA values.  You could argue it's an AI flaw because AI managers are nowhere near as capable as human managers in squad building and tactical management, but that's a different subject.

Forget the hidden CA and PA values.  They're not even designed for this purpose of determining how good a player is / might become.

[FlorianAlbert9]

2 minuti fa, Impacto ha scritto:

A bit off topic:

CA and PA don't matter if the player has the right attributes for the right role in the team and a good personality to execute it consistantly. A 150 CA player can do a better job than a 180 CA player often times.

I've seen 200 CA players be average and 150 CA players be god like in many, many saves. I've said it before and other people have said it as well - don't look at those numbers! They are made for the game to do it's thing, not for you to use them when playing.  

But that's the problem!

It is an huge flaw in the game to make It more easy, so you can easily take an obscure team and win the CL in few years.

 

[FlorianAlbert9]

10 minuti fa, herne79 ha scritto:

No .

The point is, as I said above, the hidden CA value is not a measure of how good a player is.  Yes the attributes contribute to that CA value but looking at CA to determine how good a player is is utterly flawed because CA doesn't take into account everything.  It doesn't include all visible attributes for a start.  Nor does it include any hidden attributes such as Consistency and Pressure.  And it doesn't even think about factors such as form, condition, the role you are asking a player to perform, the spread of attributes we want our players to have in certain positions or how players fit into the overall framework of our tactical systems (to name but a few).

So it's not an "ME flaw" if a team with lower CA values can beat teams with higher CA values.  You could argue it's an AI flaw because AI managers are nowhere near as capable as human managers in squad building and tactical management, but that's a different subject.

Forget the hidden CA and PA values.  They're not even designed for this purpose of determining how good a player is / might become.

No. 

You're take in account a player vs a player in a team. That's wrong. 

Form/condition can be a factor for a single player, or a team in determinate situation, but a fare case. 

Pressure/Imp Matches/consistency, are important yes, but when a difference is not huge. 

Messi can perform Always* Better than Rafael Leao even if the last seems not feel pressure

*Of course i mean that 2 of 10 matches he could perform worse

 

Taking fact. 

Look at the CA of the last 10 years CL winners. 

If they are full of 100, 120, 140 players, then you're right. 

If otherwise there are more 160+ then 140-, well, you're wrong. 

I bet that if in FM21 i look at Bayern or Liverpool CA11, this is better by far than Milan or Valladolid.

Easy. Fact. 

Edited October 20, 2020 by FlorianAlbert9

[Mars_Blackmon]

25 minutes ago, FlorianAlbert9 said:

But that's the problem!

It is an huge flaw in the game to make It more easy, so you can easily take an obscure team and win the CL in few years.

 

I think that’s just a matter of the player having the advantage of optimizing attributes and having a tactical advantage. Not to mention some of the attributes not having a huge effect on the game as they should. Like stamina, pace and decisions just to name a few.

[BnadnerB]

I really hope this is the version that convinces people to truly give FM Touch a go. It has taken me back to the glory days, yes I may only be paying for a data update nowadays... but at least there will be no ‘throwing water bottles’ or ‘finger pointing’ CRINGE!

[HUNT3R]

 

[Freakiie]

3 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

 

Eeehhhhhh....

Is that a "vision" any club realistically would ever have? In general I find "SPEND WAY TOO MUCH MONEY" visions incredibly unlikely unless you're actually managing a tycoon backed club, but this one seems even worse than the already dumb "sign high profile players, while we give 2m transfer budget cuz we're broke" vision. Like seriously, which club would ever go "please spend all our money, we beg you!"

[HUNT3R]

Just now, Freakiie said:

Eeehhhhhh....

Is that a "vision" any club realistically would ever have? In general I find "SPEND WAY TOO MUCH MONEY" visions incredibly unlikely unless you're actually managing a tycoon backed club, but this one seems even worse than the already dumb "sign high profile players, while we give 2m transfer budget cuz we're broke" vision. Like seriously, which club would ever go "please spend all our money, we beg you!"

Tbf, I posted about the body language being visible when choosing penalty takers.  

That's a change that I really like. Previously I had to try and remember which players were composed and which players were rattled.

[Freakiie]

1 minute ago, HUNT3R said:

Tbf, I posted about the body language being visible when choosing penalty takers.  

That's a change that I really like. Previously I had to try and remember which players were composed and which players were rattled.

Sorry, that club vision part just instantly grabbed my attention after my rather poor experience last year with my board at PSV constantly trying to shove "buy high profile players which we can't afford!!!!!" down my throat.

The penalty shootout interface is definitely a nice change and the ability to set the training of a new signing immediately from the news item is a very welcome little QOL change.

[HUNT3R]

1 minute ago, Freakiie said:

Sorry, that club vision part just instantly grabbed my attention after my rather poor experience last year with my board at PSV constantly trying to shove "buy high profile players which we can't afford!!!!!" down my throat.

The penalty shootout interface is definitely a nice change and the ability to set the training of a new signing immediately from the news item is a very welcome little QOL change.

No worries. These QoL changes are good to see. If the ME can produce, I am going to be a happy man for the next year.

[bielsadidnothingwrong]

11 minutes ago, Freakiie said:

Eeehhhhhh....

Is that a "vision" any club realistically would ever have? In general I find "SPEND WAY TOO MUCH MONEY" visions incredibly unlikely unless you're actually managing a tycoon backed club, but this one seems even worse than the already dumb "sign high profile players, while we give 2m transfer budget cuz we're broke" vision. Like seriously, which club would ever go "please spend all our money, we beg you!"

It makes sense. In the example, Watford just dropped into the championship, why wouldn't they try to spend a replenish their squad to get back into the premiership? 

[obasa_G]

It seems that the role suitability circles are gone in FM21.

[bielsadidnothingwrong]

1 hour ago, BnadnerB said:

I really hope this is the version that convinces people to truly give FM Touch a go. It has taken me back to the glory days, yes I may only be paying for a data update nowadays... but at least there will be no ‘throwing water bottles’ or ‘finger pointing’ CRINGE!

only if they get rid of the microtransaction buttons, nothing makes the game feel cheaper than seeing "purchase magic sponge" or whatever the spaghetti one is.

[santy001]

I've always hated the fact that CA & PA can be seen. Purely because I know how integral they are to the foundation of player attributes, and yet at the same time they're so utterly meaningless without an enormous amount of context. That context tends to be individual to each player and so it becomes very difficult to compare players based on these two metrics alone.

Invoking the fact there are researcher guidelines (which isn't a restrictive system by any measure) is largely disingenuous to the argument being made because it again has little to do with how individual players are rated. I mention this regularly on these forums - I have had players who have frequently come in below and above the guidelines without it having any tangible impact on the game.

Once upon a time, Robert Huth and Ryan Shawcross were both sat around the 155CA mark in the game. Above the guidelines I was given, and as a CA against other centre halves in their field would at a glance look like they're massively overrated. Meanwhile, Glenn Whelan and Jon Walters in the same squad, equally being players of a similar stature and ranking within the squad, were at around the 125-130 mark. 

The guidelines we get would suggest that considering they were all key players in the squad at the time - there shouldn't have been a 25-30CA difference between them. Yet they still went into the game with those attributes anyway. I don't recall if I had to provide some justification for this gap, but either way it went into the game. 

We get research guidelines to help as points of reference and to avoid a situation where an overly-enthusiastic researcher might overrate their team. I will always invoke the Arsenal of around FM2008/2009 as an example of this. It felt like every player in that squad would kick on to become world class, if they weren't already. 

In recent years, given how poor Stoke have been doing, almost everything I do from an FM research perspective is in direct contradiction to the guidelines we're provided. 

[FlorianAlbert9]

For me, at now, the only interesting feature Is the new media description for gk...

Good work on covid. The right balance

 

[HUNT3R]

I read the covid pinned topic. Imo, definitely the right balance. I know from past experience that SI like to keep the unsavoury side of things out of FM. No bribes, gambling etc. Keeping the somber side out is a good move too, imo, but the compromise of the finances being weakened now is fair enough.

[grade]

I have to say i'm at ease with the covid decisions SI has done to the game. Nice Work.

[FlorianAlbert9]

8 minuti fa, santy001 ha scritto:

I've always hated the fact that CA & PA can be seen. Purely because I know how integral they are to the foundation of player attributes, and yet at the same time they're so utterly meaningless without an enormous amount of context. That context tends to be individual to each player and so it becomes very difficult to compare players based on these two metrics alone.

Invoking the fact there are researcher guidelines (which isn't a restrictive system by any measure) is largely disingenuous to the argument being made because it again has little to do with how individual players are rated. I mention this regularly on these forums - I have had players who have frequently come in below and above the guidelines without it having any tangible impact on the game.

Once upon a time, Robert Huth and Ryan Shawcross were both sat around the 155CA mark in the game. Above the guidelines I was given, and as a CA against other centre halves in their field would at a glance look like they're massively overrated. Meanwhile, Glenn Whelan and Jon Walters in the same squad, equally being players of a similar stature and ranking within the squad, were at around the 125-130 mark. 

The guidelines we get would suggest that considering they were all key players in the squad at the time - there shouldn't have been a 25-30CA difference between them. Yet they still went into the game with those attributes anyway. I don't recall if I had to provide some justification for this gap, but either way it went into the game. 

We get research guidelines to help as points of reference and to avoid a situation where an overly-enthusiastic researcher might overrate their team. I will always invoke the Arsenal of around FM2008/2009 as an example of this. It felt like every player in that squad would kick on to become world class, if they weren't already. 

In recent years, given how poor Stoke have been doing, almost everything I do from an FM research perspective is in direct contradiction to the guidelines we're provided. 

Let's speak clearly. 

If some research for FM21 come with Stoke's CA11 10point for player Better than Liverpool, your position Will be "well ok, form and condition will be more important" ?

 

That's the point. 

(And, I said, i don't Watch CA/PA in game, but you can spot a player with low CA but overperformed 'cause He is not considerer by AI)

Edited October 20, 2020 by FlorianAlbert9

[Freakiie]

3 minutes ago, bielsadidnothingwrong said:

It makes sense. In the example, Watford just dropped into the championship, why wouldn't they try to spend a replenish their squad to get back into the premiership? 

Actually it's 2022 and they're back in the Premiership looking at their competition expectations, but even then... "You must spend money!!" just seems like a really, really silly vision to have. Imagine getting that vision while the board throws a 200mil transfer budget at you, which aren't rare at all in FM. Suddenly they REQUIRE you to spend 200m on players that you don't even need? On top of that it's an ongoing vision, so they expect you to do that every single season apparently? Come on, what club demands that you spend every cent of transfer budget that's made available AND that you spend it as fast as you can. I'm sorry but that's just absolutely insane.

[pizzachips]

My biggest gripe is how long I have to wait before I can get stuck in. Really enjoying the larger and now mini updates SI- keep em coming!

 

[santy001]

CA11 isn't a metric we use to measure squad strength. 

However, if I was saying that broadly speaking a starting XI for Stoke, has more ability, than a starting XI for Liverpool then I would have clearly been drinking too much for my own safety. In fact, I'd hope the head researcher would schedule some kind of welfare check on me.

You're making an absurd, extreme example, that in no way demonstrates your point. I could make a 120-130CA starting XI that would give the current Liverpool squad a serious challenge in the hands of most managers, and if you put someone who's decent on tactics end up with a huge win %. Equally, I could rate a squad that way outscores them on CA and loses most of the time. 

Several years ago there was a player at Stoke called Marc Muniesa. I rated him, I knew his CA and his PA in the game. He could play left back and in the middle, although he was short so it meant he wasn't the best suited to it at times. I played him in my side at centreback, he did well, got a £25m move to Chelsea. His CA was sub 130. His PA probably would've had some growth room in it, but he was already of an age where realistic development expectations were gone.

Moritz Bauer, another player I do the research for. Would've been somewhere around the 120-125 CA mark when Stoke got relegated. His PA is fixed and in spoiler tags below.

Spoiler

His PA is 135

I've regularly played him in the last couple of editions, had him perform well in my team and seen him sold to top European sides for £30m+ the last two times I've sold him in an FM save were to Porto and Tottenham respectively.

---

Sadly, the AI isn't able to get the same level of performance out of these players that I am, they fade away and end up being sold really cheaply or leaving on a free at the end of their contracts. I get a double advantage of course in the fact that I bloody rated them so know their strengths and weaknesses really well in addition to having additional insight into player attributes by virtue of being a researcher. 

I've seen numerous instances of players who have overperformed, moved to a bigger club and then usually fallen by the wayside. More broadly speaking, my sentiment based on my own experience would be to go the opposite way. The AI isn't equipped enough to realise when a player is probably limited and just in a spell of good form rather than a genuine, consistent top level player.

[Gee_Simpson]

4 hours ago, herne79 said:

Fun fact - the hidden CA and PA values are not measures of how good a player is or could become and using them as such is fundamentally flawed.  Likewise the in game star ratings are only indicators of current / future ability and should never be viewed in isolation.

Interesting. I stupidly kept reloading on FM20 to get a high PA Greenwood because I feel he's going to be towards the top of his PA range irl, and I actually ended up not getting past the 2nd season. I tend to get hung up on PA values and actively search for them. After reading your post I certainly won't be reloading for that purpose on 21.

Edited October 20, 2020 by Gee_Simpson

[FlorianAlbert9]

46 minuti fa, santy001 ha scritto:

CA11 isn't a metric we use to measure squad strength. 

However, if I was saying that broadly speaking a starting XI for Stoke, has more ability, than a starting XI for Liverpool then I would have clearly been drinking too much for my own safety. In fact, I'd hope the head researcher would schedule some kind of welfare check on me.

You're making an absurd, extreme example, that in no way demonstrates your point. I could make a 120-130CA starting XI that would give the current Liverpool squad a serious challenge in the hands of most managers, and if you put someone who's decent on tactics end up with a huge win %. Equally, I could rate a squad that way outscores them on CA and loses most of the time. 

Several years ago there was a player at Stoke called Marc Muniesa. I rated him, I knew his CA and his PA in the game. He could play left back and in the middle, although he was short so it meant he wasn't the best suited to it at times. I played him in my side at centreback, he did well, got a £25m move to Chelsea. His CA was sub 130. His PA probably would've had some growth room in it, but he was already of an age where realistic development expectations were gone.

Moritz Bauer, another player I do the research for. Would've been somewhere around the 120-125 CA mark when Stoke got relegated. His PA is fixed and in spoiler tags below.

  Contenuti nascosti

His PA is 135

I've regularly played him in the last couple of editions, had him perform well in my team and seen him sold to top European sides for £30m+ the last two times I've sold him in an FM save were to Porto and Tottenham respectively.

---

Sadly, the AI isn't able to get the same level of performance out of these players that I am, they fade away and end up being sold really cheaply or leaving on a free at the end of their contracts. I get a double advantage of course in the fact that I bloody rated them so know their strengths and weaknesses really well in addition to having additional insight into player attributes by virtue of being a researcher. 

I've seen numerous instances of players who have overperformed, moved to a bigger club and then usually fallen by the wayside. More broadly speaking, my sentiment based on my own experience would be to go the opposite way. The AI isn't equipped enough to realise when a player is probably limited and just in a spell of good form rather than a genuine, consistent top level player.

And that's the point. 

If both research pre-game and AI in game cannot use the same parameters that work in the ME, there is a problem.

Or It Is reasearch/ai or the ME. 

But if, like you said, you could create a starting 11 with 130 CA and give to current Liverpool (that, i Remember, Is managed by a top like Klopp and not a novice) a serious challange (not for a single game eh, the point is about win League or Champions League) then the problem Is the ME. 

And It Is an huge problem. 

Try that. 

Take a real team that have in game a starting 11 with max 130 ca. 

Would you bet on It for winning League or CL in Real Life?

I doubt

i know that FM Is a game and should have some magic. 

But magic should be something harder to reach.

Edited October 20, 2020 by FlorianAlbert9

[kandersson]

'Playmaking goalkeeper' description would be even better as a new role...

[Pav_Makarov]

2 hours ago, Freakiie said:

"sign high profile players, while we give 2m transfer budget cuz we're broke" vision

Hehehe, I've just had that "hey man we got a promotion, so now we need to sign high profile players, you know not to look cheap out there with big fellas. So here, take these 5 millions and go get'em boy" 

[herne79]

1 hour ago, Gee_Simpson said:

Interesting. I stupidly kept reloading on FM20 to get a high PA Greenwood because I feel he's going to be towards the top of his PA range irl, and I actually ended up not getting past the 2nd season. I tend to get hung up on PA values and actively search for them. After reading your post I certainly won't be reloading for that purpose on 21.

Yeh this is the thing.  It's so easy to get hung up on chasing CA and PA that we can forget what's important.  I would much rather have a player with the correct spread of attributes for the role I give him along with decent hidden attributes, than someone with a high CA/PA who keeps getting injured, wilts under pressure, is consistently inconsistent (lol), prone to getting sent off, doesn't like big matches, lacks determination and is a square peg in a round hole.  If my system uses a Target Man I'm not going to employ Messi for example.  Likewise if I want a consistent performer who's going to work hard for the team I won't sign Super Mario.

Anyway, we're way off topic (fancy that, a thread on these forums which veers off topic ) so lets see how FM21 pans out.

[FlorianAlbert9]

51 minuti fa, herne79 ha scritto:

Yeh this is the thing.  It's so easy to get hung up on chasing CA and PA that we can forget what's important.  I would much rather have a player with the correct spread of attributes for the role I give him along with decent hidden attributes, than someone with a high CA/PA who keeps getting injured, wilts under pressure, is consistently inconsistent (lol), prone to getting sent off, doesn't like big matches, lacks determination and is a square peg in a round hole.  If my system uses a Target Man I'm not going to employ Messi for example.  Likewise if I want a consistent performer who's going to work hard for the team I won't sign Super Mario.

Anyway, we're way off topic (fancy that, a thread on these forums which veers off topic ) so lets see how FM21 pans out.

I understand this. 

But, it is one thing to prefer Cr7 at Messi, cause the portuguese can be better in your system. 

Another one is to prefer Kalinic (or worst). 

And that difference should be fundamental, cause there is a reason in real life that Messi can demand a wage of 50milion and Kalinic 1. 

You don't find the starting database a top player with a CA <130, cause, rightly, no player with such CA is considerer TOP. 

Cause there are ton and ton of 130CA player, but very less of >160. 

It is the heart of the transfert. 

And if you let human to win with 130CA, you let him to win easily and ruin the conception of TOP player/team.

Of course, you can win with s poor team thanks a lot of lucky events (Porto's Mourinho). But should be a rare thing

I repeat, that is nothing to do with have visible CA/PA in the game (that is a things that i don't do)

Edited October 20, 2020 by FlorianAlbert9

[3maldini3]

I think they kinda shot themselves in the leg.

I enjoyed this game for years before the 3D engine. 

The 3D engine brought complains because you compare to other football games like FIFA and PES and it will never get there.

My problem is the 2D that got worse.

[Gee_Simpson]

10 hours ago, gunner86 said:

I’m hoping that the scouting meeting works well enough that it has a proper, positive impact on AI squad building

You would imagine it would, wouldn't you. 

[bielsadidnothingwrong]

3 hours ago, Freakiie said:

Actually it's 2022 and they're back in the Premiership looking at their competition expectations, but even then...

Even then it makes sense. Look, this isn't a 200m transfer budget. Its Watford in 2022 we're talking about, not City. If they're back in the prem, they probably need to BUY SOME PLAYERS and get them integrated into the squad as fast as possible. english championship/premier league squads aren't hurting for funds, so spending an entire transfer budget of 5 million in a transfer window doesn't sound outlandish at all. 

Now, I would agree with you if we were talking about a club like Besiktas (sorry can't think of a club with high ambitions that would also potential ask you to spend cash) who have a negative balance sheet, crazy high wages for old players, etc. But that is not what any of us have seen thus far.

I hear what you're saying man but it doesn't really seem that unrealistic to me.

[GOODNAME]

1 hour ago, turgi said:

I think they kinda shot themselves in the leg.

I enjoyed this game for years before the 3D engine. 

The 3D engine brought complains because you compare to other football games like FIFA and PES and it will never get there.

My problem is the 2D that got worse.

There is a huge difference between graphics and the match engine.

We dont want huge graphics like FIFA, we want good ME with a lot more animations. 

[FreezingTable]

-The only thing we need is a proper match engine! A match engine that works on the release date, and that keeps getting improved if it has minor bugs here and there.

The ME in fm20 was very bad, and they didn’t fix it. I remember they announced in a February or March that they weren't going to spend any more time on it...

These small changes outside the pitch is not worth the price of a hole game, and it’s happening year after year. If the ME is broken/ has to many bugs, the game isn't playable. 

 

-2D is what makes FM, FM.

[Sherkey]

11 hours ago, Gee_Simpson said:

Interesting. I stupidly kept reloading on FM20 to get a high PA Greenwood because I feel he's going to be towards the top of his PA range irl, and I actually ended up not getting past the 2nd season. I tend to get hung up on PA values and actively search for them. After reading your post I certainly won't be reloading for that purpose on 21.

Just a thing, but herne's example does not really apply to what you just stated. IIRC, most of Greenwood's attributes were fixed, and he had a variable potential range. In this scenario, what you did shouldn't be a problem, as Greenwood would obviously be a better player at a higher PA (assuming all other variables are the same and training and everything goes well). Same player, same attribute range - higher PA is always preferable/better - as he has more range to grow into.

However, focussing only on PA becomes the crux of the issue as a well trained (and a good attribute spread) CA150 range player can easily outperform higher potential players, basis fit (think Pogba at United - high potential, but goofs up a lot IRL). However, that doesn't get reflected in-game, but yeah//