Impact of retraining on PA

[xavinwonderland]

I have been searching the forums for a clear answer on this but couldn't not find anything clear. 

When a player gains attribute points the CA cost will depend on its position so increasing  tackling for instance will be very expensive for a defender but pretty much free for a striker. 

What happens if I have a striker that I retrain as a defender? Is the cost increase based on being a striker? A defender? An average of the 2?

Is it possible to min/max by keeping it natural as a striker and only accomplished as a defender so that the tackling cost is using the striker weight rather than the defender weights? 

 

[zyfon5]

4 hours ago, xavinwonderland said:

I have been searching the forums for a clear answer on this but couldn't not find anything clear. 

When a player gains attribute points the CA cost will depend on its position so increasing  tackling for instance will be very expensive for a defender but pretty much free for a striker. 

What happens if I have a striker that I retrain as a defender? Is the cost increase based on being a striker? A defender? An average of the 2?

Is it possible to min/max by keeping it natural as a striker and only accomplished as a defender so that the tackling cost is using the striker weight rather than the defender weights? 

 

Btw it is the opposite tackling costs less for a defender than a striker. That is why there are a lot of defenders with good tackling but rarely a striker with good tackling. I believe the CA cost is an average of the two. And min maxing it could be very difficult unless you know the exact CA value cost for each point of increase because the relationship is not uniform. For example, getting acceleration from 13>>>14 can cost different CA value if compared to getting acceleration from 14>>>15. There was an old thread in this forum that tried to find out the relationship but the algorithm behind is too complex and the project was abandoned. Another reason why min maxing could be difficult is there is no guarantee you can increase the attributes in a pattern that you want.

[xavinwonderland]

il y a 11 minutes, zyfon5 a dit :

Btw it is the opposite tackling costs less for a defender than a striker. That is why there are a lot of defenders with good tackling but rarely a striker with good tackling. I believe the CA cost is an average of the two. And min maxing it could be very difficult unless you know the exact CA value cost for each point of increase because the relationship is not uniform. For example, getting acceleration from 13>>>14 can cost different CA value if compared to getting acceleration from 14>>>15. There was an old thread in this forum that tried to find out the relationship but the algorithm behind is too complex and the project was abandoned. Another reason why min maxing could be difficult is there is no guarantee you can increase the attributes in a pattern that you want.

Thanks a lot. Would you have the link to that old thread by any chance? 

I was under the impression that you could find CA calculators online which means that some people had cracked the algorithm. I think there was something on FMscout

[xavinwonderland]

il y a 52 minutes, zyfon5 a dit :

Btw it is the opposite tackling costs less for a defender than a striker. That is why there are a lot of defenders with good tackling but rarely a striker with good tackling. I believe the CA cost is an average of the two. And min maxing it could be very difficult unless you know the exact CA value cost for each point of increase because the relationship is not uniform. For example, getting acceleration from 13>>>14 can cost different CA value if compared to getting acceleration from 14>>>15. There was an old thread in this forum that tried to find out the relationship but the algorithm behind is too complex and the project was abandoned. Another reason why min maxing could be difficult is there is no guarantee you can increase the attributes in a pattern that you want.

So I checked and there is indeed a calculator so the exact formula is known. 

You are mostly correct that the CA cost is not linear it is more expensive the higher the attributes and that only kicks in after a certain threshold. So linear up to a point and exponential afterwards. 

However tackling is much more expensive for defenders than strikers. It will cost about 2 CA points for a striker to go from 6 to 20 tackling but would cost 13 PA points for a defender to achieve the same move. 

So the only question is really what is the trigger for the game to consider a player à defender vs a striker? 

[enigmatic]

5 hours ago, xavinwonderland said:

I have been searching the forums for a clear answer on this but couldn't not find anything clear. 

When a player gains attribute points the CA cost will depend on its position so increasing  tackling for instance will be very expensive for a defender but pretty much free for a striker. 

What happens if I have a striker that I retrain as a defender? Is the cost increase based on being a striker? A defender? An average of the 2?

Is it possible to min/max by keeping it natural as a striker and only accomplished as a defender so that the tackling cost is using the striker weight rather than the defender weights? 

 

From what I can see the cost is the highest of the two, with an additional cost for being skilled in multiple positions.

Min/maxing is a waste of time since if the player's ability in a position puts zero weight on their CA (competent and below) and they're not training in that position either they'll play with a significant penalty to their decision making.

I'd rather have my defence anchored by a defender with two points less tackling than a great tackler that doesn't know how to play centre back

Edited August 28, 2021 by enigmatic

[xavinwonderland]

Is that progressive? 

This is the highest of the 2 after a certain threshold but let's say if you are natural striker / awkward defender you only count as a striker but once you reach accomplished you get the max penalty right away in terms of weighting or is the penalty progressive until you reach natural that would be the max penalty? 

[zyfon5]

38 minutes ago, xavinwonderland said:

So I checked and there is indeed a calculator so the exact formula is known. 

You are mostly correct that the CA cost is not linear it is more expensive the higher the attributes and that only kicks in after a certain threshold. So linear up to a point and exponential afterwards. 

However tackling is much more expensive for defenders than strikers. It will cost about 2 CA points for a striker to go from 6 to 20 tackling but would cost 13 PA points for a defender to achieve the same move. 

So the only question is really what is the trigger for the game to consider a player à defender vs a striker? 

Just checked the attribute spread chart on FM scout and didnt know such thing exist. Yes you are correct about the CA costs.

[santy001]

Had a little play with it myself. It was out by a few CA points with the player I checked in it. 

Retraining a player has zero impact upon PA however. 

[xavinwonderland]

Indeed retraining has no immediate impact on PA. 

However some people claim (and that is what need to be properly tested because I have not seen any hard data), that once you retrain a player the weight of the attributes will change so if the player is max out he will have to lose some attributes to fit his CA. 

1/as mentioned I don't know if the above statement is correct as I ha e not seen data

2/should that statement be correct we need to find out when the reweighting occurs and at which speed. 

[obasa_G]

2 hours ago, xavinwonderland said:

So I checked and there is indeed a calculator so the exact formula is known. 

You are mostly correct that the CA cost is not linear it is more expensive the higher the attributes and that only kicks in after a certain threshold. So linear up to a point and exponential afterwards. 

However tackling is much more expensive for defenders than strikers. It will cost about 2 CA points for a striker to go from 6 to 20 tackling but would cost 13 PA points for a defender to achieve the same move. 

So the only question is really what is the trigger for the game to consider a player à defender vs a striker? 

Apart from tackling, other attributes like flair have no cost, when it comes to defenders. In a test save I was running a while back, using the in game editor, I bumped my fullback's flair from 3 to 20 and it had no effect/cost on his CA.

On another note, I noticed that the lower the cost of the attribute, the harder it is to train and improve. That's why it's really hard to increase a striker's tackling or marking through conventional means (Training schedules and Individual focus).

[xavinwonderland]

il y a 43 minutes, obasa_G a dit :

Apart from tackling, other attributes like flair have no cost, when it comes to defenders. In a test save I was running a while back, using the in game editor, I bumped my fullback's flair from 3 to 20 and it had no effect/cost on his CA.

On another note, I noticed that the lower the cost of the attribute, the harder it is to train and improve. That's why it's really hard to increase a striker's tackling or marking through conventional means (Training schedules and Individual focus).

It's also because the matches that you are playing are providing a lot of experience for the player if you will and based on what I noticed they are increasing the player role. So a striker playing as a DLP will increase its DLP attributes even if you don't train them specifically. I could not measure it but I'm pretty sure it works like that. 

[Freakiie]

6 hours ago, xavinwonderland said:

Indeed retraining has no immediate impact on PA. 

However some people claim (and that is what need to be properly tested because I have not seen any hard data), that once you retrain a player the weight of the attributes will change so if the player is max out he will have to lose some attributes to fit his CA. 

1/as mentioned I don't know if the above statement is correct as I ha e not seen data

2/should that statement be correct we need to find out when the reweighting occurs and at which speed. 

Just grab the editor and play around with it a bit. It will tell you what the suggested CA for a player is, so you can easily see how much impact adding a certain position to a player has.

[santy001]

Since it seems as though CA/PA are being used somewhat interchangeably, or at least incorrect, its worth mentioning that categorically retraining a players position has no impact upon PA at all, immediately or in the future.

The weighting system used to have weakpoints you could exploit and at certain breakpoints end up with players having free attribute increases. This isn't the case anymore. 

The redistribution of attributes, should it be necessary after a change in positional training, is fairly negligible. A handful of attributes changing by +/- 1 doesn't make any noticeable difference. 

[enigmatic]

21 hours ago, xavinwonderland said:

Is that progressive? 

This is the highest of the 2 after a certain threshold but let's say if you are natural striker / awkward defender you only count as a striker but once you reach accomplished you get the max penalty right away in terms of weighting or is the penalty progressive until you reach natural that would be the max penalty? 

The breakpoint is competent, and above that I think it's progressive, or somewhat progressive. I think they've also somewhat improved the model so its common to get CA gains around the time you improve the positional ability (IMHO this, or it being attributes less relevant to the new position should nearly always be the case)

Either way it's not much use min-maxing (beyond very basic stuff like "don't train a player up to accomplished in a position you'll rarely ever consider using him") because a player is less good when out of position, and that's worth at least as much as being 0.4 worse off in a handful of attributes.

[xavinwonderland]

I created a new thread with the test so it's probably best to close this one and comments under the test results to have all the relevant info in one place.

[crpcarrot]

bit off topic

in my NRL save i saw a player on scouting who was a DC and ST also a DM he was natural at one and competent (is that the dark green one) in the other two. cant remember  his stats though.