*Official* Football Manager 2023 Feedback Thread

[gggfunk]

34 minutes ago, Neil Brock said:

Sounds like the size of the ground and all the fans is putting more demands on your system than it can handle in the graphical setup you've got. 

Thanks for the reply, but I don't think so as I've played with big teams on different saves and there wasn't any issues there, plus I've got a brand new laptop which should more than enough for FM (Acer nitro 5). Also I play in 2d.

Edited June 16, 2023 by gggfunk

[DarJ]

On 12/06/2023 at 18:58, jlammi said:

Hi i dont remember how to i change my graphics folder to my G: drive which is usb drive, launch options in steam but im stucked. i have only 60 gb left in my ssd drive so i would use my G drive. thanks

you need to put this in launch option --user_data_location="path"

replace the word "path" with the location where you want to store your graphics. 

 

[Sunstrikuuu]

19 hours ago, Oliver Roland said:

It is easier for AI to sign players, it happens for years. You offer important player, 150k/w but he wants 200...week later he signed for worse side for 100 as squad player...

I'm not disagreeing, but I do think there's a misunderstood relationship between squad status and wages.  People seem to think that squad status is an inducement in itself.  And it is!  But players also want wages that reflect their squad status, and it's a negative factor when they don't get them.  That negative can and does outweigh the positive you get from giving them a higher squad status in the first place, sometimes making it harder to sign a player by offering higher-than-expected playing time with lower wages than expected for that playing time than if you offered expected playing time with expected wages, even if those wages are lower in absolute terms.  If you can sign someone as a squad player, it is IMO always better to do that than offer them first-team or higher status, even if that's how you intend to use them.  Higher squad status is linked to higher wage demand; you cannot decrease wages by offering more playing time.  Does it make sense?  No.  Should it work that way?  Also probably no.  But it does.

[KlaaZ]

Is the board requirement to develop players using the clubs youth system and the team promise to play more youth next season broken? I'm failing the former despite having one academy player in my starting lineup and at least five of them getting regular game time as rotation or off the bench. I've also had players telling me I've broken my promise to play youth despite doing the same thing as described above. In the promise tab, they were feeling like I was fulfilling the promise but then all of a sudden, it failed.

[BristolCity1992]

2 hours ago, KlaaZ said:

Is the board requirement to develop players using the clubs youth system and the team promise to play more youth next season broken? I'm failing the former despite having one academy player in my starting lineup and at least five of them getting regular game time as rotation or off the bench. I've also had players telling me I've broken my promise to play youth despite doing the same thing as described above. In the promise tab, they were feeling like I was fulfilling the promise but then all of a sudden, it failed.

I've wondered about this on FM22. I'm at Utrecht. I have 2 regular youth players and then a number coming up getting game time. I can't just chuck them in and qualify for the CL as the expectation, but it seems they don't really consider players in the fringes to be meeting the criteria. 

I get it's hard for the game to replicate the nuances, but it can be a bit frustrating. The promises section is ***** anyway and I always try to remove them.  

[jlammi]

On 16/06/2023 at 15:18, DarJ said:

you need to put this in launch option --user_data_location="path"

replace the word "path" with the location where you want to store your graphics. 

 

--user_data_location="D:\data" i have this but it dosent work and location in preferences dosent work eather...

[KlaaZ]

On 16/06/2023 at 22:42, BristolCity1992 said:

I've wondered about this on FM22. I'm at Utrecht. I have 2 regular youth players and then a number coming up getting game time. I can't just chuck them in and qualify for the CL as the expectation, but it seems they don't really consider players in the fringes to be meeting the criteria. 

I get it's hard for the game to replicate the nuances, but it can be a bit frustrating. The promises section is ***** anyway and I always try to remove them.  

Yeah, it's promises in general. Just had a kid return from a broken arm, who I promised I'd play him regularly once he was fit again. I did, and in the promises tab he was happy with his playing tab a week before the promise ran out. Failed it a week later despite him getting 45 minutes off the bench in the only game we played during that time.

[aj67]

Hi, been playing for years now and only just noticed it in this years game, but for me it feels as if all of a sudden clubs are far too leniant with players who have 'legend' status at a club being manager, for example I am in a save in 2045, where Xavi is still Barcelona manager despite not winning a trophy in over 10 years, and winning only 5 copa del reys in 20. It doesn't feel realistic at all that any manager could avoid the sack with returns like that at Barca, never mind multiple contract renewals. It is not an isolated incident either, other managers have maintained jobs for 10~15 years without a trophy or an issue, and has prevented me from getting near some clubs that are now so ruined would be perfect for a 'return to glory' save

[Pearomaniac]

How repetitive and dumb press conferences are? I just had a 19 year old kid make three assists and get POTM in our 3:0 win against Chelseas and guess how many questions were asked about that player?

Not a single one, i was forced to talk some rubbish about home form, stadium and some other **** they ask me in every single conference.

 

Edit: and FM24 is 2-3-4 months away, if SI publishes the game with this same old **** then i think that will be the peak of their insolence towards community feedback.

Edited June 20, 2023 by Pearomaniac

[StevehFC]

Looking at playing a final save for FM23. Is the youth development approved? 

[potbellypigs]

2nd season with Birmingham, flying in the league played 13, won 12, drawn 1. Closed it down and came back a few days later. 3 defeats, 2 draws in the next 5 games. Coincidence, I know...

[Lempicka]

On 20/06/2023 at 09:46, Pearomaniac said:

How repetitive and dumb press conferences are? I just had a 19 year old kid make three assists and get POTM in our 3:0 win against Chelseas and guess how many questions were asked about that player?

Had a similar thing. Playing as Rangers in the CL last 16. Beat Barcelona 3-2 at the Camp Nou, but lost 5-2 in the return leg and had three goals disallowed for very tight offsides.

Not a single question asked about the disallowed goals.

[eXistenZ]

Every 3 pressconferences i get asked "player x has been with you through your journey up the leagues,"

 

 

Also, how is the player of the season, not the signing of the season.... (he came on a free)....

[Nick_CB]

This game is completely annoying and predictable

[g1nh0]

I had been quite critical in previous patches, but since the last patch has released my initial impressions were that although there are still flaws and exploits, the ME generally had been significantly improved and it was now probably the closest engine ever made to reflect football.

Playing months with this patch now so kind of my final thoughts the ME, in an online save with Go Ahead Eagles and experiencing my first season with them, without going into details I actually think the direction the ME is going is absolutely brilliant. You can actually manage a club of this stature and do a good job with them, by using a vast range of tactical variety and approaches throughout the full 90 minutes to try and maximise your chances of achieving a result, just the way a real manager would do irl and where every minute matters.

I went with the mindset to really test this engine using this more realistic approach to managing with an inferior side rather than using what typically is most effective, and It's really great to see the viability of being able to finally use a realistic approach. I have never enjoyed seeing one tactic simply win by way of exploiting the engine, which has always felt like a cheat code to me.

It is now definitely more rewarding and I hope that this can be enhanced even more so in next year's game, where perhaps possession football can be more successfully brought into the equation and with there being less things available to exploit.

So I'm really impressed with the progress made on this aspect of the game, and praise what an eventually great job has been done in making that positive step in this final patch.

[iAlwaysWin]

This FM is a complete let down imo, mainly due to the match engine and lack of new features and fresh look to the game, hopefully FM24 will be a major step foward. I bought FM23 and was happy in beta but since then ive just played FM22, a far better game.

[Mitza]

Another victim of FM23's youth development nerf. 196 PA player stuck on the same 130-ish CA since 18 years old. Terrible AI youth development, the terrible B system and the nerf on attribute development.

[mikcheck]

Regarding thoses cases of poor AI youth development, are you noticing more in this year's version or it's basically the same from older versions?

[Mitza]

1 hour ago, mikcheck said:

Regarding thoses cases of poor AI youth development, are you noticing more in this year's version or it's basically the same from older versions?

Way worse than older versions. There's been posts of people complaining. Here's an example of my experience

I don't think I ever saw Endrick past 145CA in my 6 long term saves

[StevehFC]

10 hours ago, mikcheck said:

Regarding thoses cases of poor AI youth development, are you noticing more in this year's version or it's basically the same from older versions?

That's the reason why I haven't played this game in a while. Major part of the game not even working properly. 

[fc.cadoni]

18 hours ago, mikcheck said:

Regarding thoses cases of poor AI youth development, are you noticing more in this year's version or it's basically the same from older versions?

Players now reach (if) PA at the age of 26.

[herne79]

19 hours ago, mikcheck said:

Regarding thoses cases of poor AI youth development, are you noticing more in this year's version or it's basically the same from older versions?

 

18 hours ago, Mitza said:

Way worse than older versions. There's been posts of people complaining. Here's an example of my experience

I don't think I ever saw Endrick past 145CA in my 6 long term saves

If we ignore for a moment that CA is not (and never has been) a measure of how "good" a player might be, I think different people see different results in different saves which in all honesty is how it should be.

In my current save for example if I look at CA (just to follow the above comment) pretty much all potentially "elite" young players are indeed at or near their PA.  This is true for both real life young players and newgens.  There is of course the odd outlier (as there should be) with an underutilised Endrick being of particular note.  That's pretty much it though.

However if we ignore CA (as we should) then players do seem to be developing pretty well, at least in my experience.  Even the 21 year old Endrick would be a starter for most top division sides if we look at his attributes and not get hung up on his CA, with room for further development:

Spoiler

I'm sure there's room for improvement but in my experience it's not all doom and gloom .

[XaW]

18 hours ago, Mitza said:

Way worse than older versions. There's been posts of people complaining. Here's an example of my experience

I don't think I ever saw Endrick past 145CA in my 6 long term saves

I think the crux of the issue is that people are looking at CA and PA in the first place. CA & PA are game mechanics, not, as @herne79 points out, a measuring stick as to how good a player is. With the right attribute distribution a 140 CA player can outclass a 180 CA player easily. And if you didn't look "under the hood" (which seeing CA/PA essentially is), then you wouldn't know it. I sometimes look at CA or PA after I'm done with a save to look at how it compares to my own view, and sometimes I'm surprised of both how high and how low CA is for some players. In one of my saves in FM22 (or was it FM21?) I used a 150 CA player over a 170 CA player and I would never have guessed the 170 one was the "better" one.

[diLLa88]

38 minutes ago, XaW said:

I think the crux of the issue is that people are looking at CA and PA in the first place. CA & PA are game mechanics, not, as @herne79 points out, a measuring stick as to how good a player is. With the right attribute distribution a 140 CA player can outclass a 180 CA player easily. And if you didn't look "under the hood" (which seeing CA/PA essentially is), then you wouldn't know it. I sometimes look at CA or PA after I'm done with a save to look at how it compares to my own view, and sometimes I'm surprised of both how high and how low CA is for some players. In one of my saves in FM22 (or was it FM21?) I used a 150 CA player over a 170 CA player and I would never have guessed the 170 one was the "better" one.

This is of course true if you isolate it to one player vs. another in a direct comparison. If you however apply it to a database of 150k players, ultimately it does have an impact as (to take your example) you will no longer compare 150 vs. 170 CA, but 130 vs. 150.

[XaW]

1 hour ago, diLLa88 said:

This is of course true if you isolate it to one player vs. another in a direct comparison. If you however apply it to a database of 150k players, ultimately it does have an impact as (to take your example) you will no longer compare 150 vs. 170 CA, but 130 vs. 150.

Indeed, but a 130 CA player with excellent attribute distribution is still better than a CA 150 with poor. But of course a well distributed 150 will be better than a well distributed 130, but that would also be reflected in the attributes themselves. So CA is still a game mechanic, not something used to identify quality in isolation. Attributes are much better for knowing if a player will perform than CA.

[Mitza]

1 hour ago, XaW said:

Indeed, but a 130 CA player with excellent attribute distribution is still better than a CA 150 with poor. But of course a well distributed 150 will be better than a well distributed 130, but that would also be reflected in the attributes themselves. So CA is still a game mechanic, not something used to identify quality in isolation. Attributes are much better for knowing if a player will perform than CA.

But that is the wrong way to look at things. If a 160CA regen has terrible attribute distribution so that a 130CA regen can be a better player, that means the game has an issue with distributing stats. 

And we are not looking at how good a player is here, we are looking at their CA and PA, aka them reaching their potential. It doesn't matter if a 140 CA  player is pretty good, if they have a 180 PA that means that they can be way better and the game blocks them from doing so. What's the point in having high PAs if the players never reach it? A few years in the future you'll have fewer world class stars. With current FM, you'll never have Gavis, Pedris or Bellinghams

There's been constant complains about this on the forum, with experiments and examples. In my current save, I have 44 players(!!) of 170+ PA that are already 20 and not past 130 CA. Here is another example

 

[XaW]

6 minutes ago, Mitza said:

But that is the wrong way to look at things. If a 160CA regen has terrible attribute distribution so that a 130CA regen can be a better player, that means the game has an issue with distributing stats. 

No it's not. Because CA is NOT a metric you should know about. It's a not a game mechanic for the user to know, it's a mechanic for the behind the scenes. If you look behind the curtains, don't be surprised to see that actors wear makeup!

8 minutes ago, Mitza said:

And we are not looking at how good a player is here, we are looking at their CA and PA, aka them reaching their potential. It doesn't matter if a 140 CA  player is pretty good, if they have a 180 PA that means that they can be way better and the game blocks them from doing so. What's the point in having high PAs if the players never reach it? A few years in the future you'll have fewer world class stars. With current FM, you'll never have Gavis, Pedris or Bellinghams

Because not all players will reach their potential, neither in the game or real life. Freddy Adu was supposed to be the next superstar, but it never happened. How many "the next Messi"'s have you heard about who never got anywhere? Bojan Krkic anyone? If you didn't know the CA or PA behind the scenes you would never know how has what, and the only reason you know of it is because you use an editor.

[herne79]

5 minutes ago, Mitza said:

And we are not looking at how good a player is here, we are looking at their CA and PA, aka them reaching their potential.

CA is not a measure of a player reaching their potential.  Just as PA is not a measure of how “good” a player might become.  Despite the names it’s not their actual potential nor their actual ability.  Their actual ability is how well they perform for you on the pitch, not a single digit calculation of their attributes.  Their actual potential is how well we (or the AI) may be able to develop them in the time we have available to do so.

This is because CA (and PA) do not take account of: some visible attributes; all hidden attributes; player form; morale; fatigue; complacency; tactical familiarity and so on.  CA and PA, from a gameplay perspective, are irrelevant.  They are hidden for a reason.

As said above, there is room for improvement in player development but giving CA as an example of how players are apparently not fulfilling their potential is a red herring.

16 minutes ago, Mitza said:

But that is the wrong way to look at things. If a 160CA regen has terrible attribute distribution so that a 130CA regen can be a better player, that means the game has an issue with distributing stats.

I’m afraid the wrong way of looking at things is by looking at CA in the first place.

If a player has terrible attribute distribution then you just don’t buy him (or you sell him) and bring in someone else better suited.  The game doesn’t produce robots - it tries to create individuals via (amongst other things) attribute distribution.

Btw that Brazilian player profile you posted above?  That’s Jamie Vardy right there, which the community have been asking for for ages - somebody with high potential but under developed and passed over by the big teams.  But now it’s apparently an example of poor player development.  SI just can’t win .

[diLLa88]

42 minutes ago, XaW said:

No it's not. Because CA is NOT a metric you should know about. It's a not a game mechanic for the user to know, it's a mechanic for the behind the scenes. If you look behind the curtains, don't be surprised to see that actors wear makeup!

Because not all players will reach their potential, neither in the game or real life. Freddy Adu was supposed to be the next superstar, but it never happened. How many "the next Messi"'s have you heard about who never got anywhere? Bojan Krkic anyone? If you didn't know the CA or PA behind the scenes you would never know how has what, and the only reason you know of it is because you use an editor.

You are completely missing the point of the issue dude. There is no one claiming a lower CA player can't be better than higher CA player, the point is about the development of the next generation of footballers in the game which is not happening sufficiently.

The fact that not everyone "makes it" is not an excuse for barely any one making it when managed under current AI conditions. With the current way the game is working, a new Messi or even Mbappé is not possible unless managed by the player with knowledge of how the game treats player development. In the game even the level of a player like Bukayo Saka, which is of course a great talent but not on the level of a Messi, is completely unreachable for a regen under AI training (180+ CA at age 21 btw). And don't you dare to come with the suggestion that hypothetically a 160 CA player regen (which is still barely possible with a regen under AI management btw) is better than Saka.

[XaW]

14 minutes ago, diLLa88 said:

You are completely missing the point of the issue dude. There is no one claiming a lower CA player can't be better than higher CA player, the point is about the development of the next generation of footballers in the game which is not happening sufficiently.

The fact that not everyone "makes it" is not an excuse for barely any one making it when managed under current AI conditions. With the current way the game is working, a new Messi or even Mbappé is not possible unless managed by the player with knowledge of how the game treats player development. In the game even the level of a player like Bukayo Saka, which is of course a great talent but not on the level of a Messi, is completely unreachable for a regen under AI training (180+ CA at age 21 btw). And don't you dare to come with the suggestion that hypothetically a 160 CA player regen (which is still barely possible with a regen under AI management btw) is better than Saka.

No, you are missing the point. CA is not meant to be seen as you play, and if you didn't you wouldn't have this issue.

I'm not saying the current way is without flaw, but you cannot use CA as a measurement to how good a player is.

[andu1]

The player interaction is insufferable.

Club x makes offer, players instantly becomes unsettled.

And said club only buys players just to hoard them.

This is killing my enjoyment of the game.

[Wavelberry]

1 hour ago, XaW said:

No, you are missing the point. CA is not meant to be seen as you play, and if you didn't you wouldn't have this issue.

I'm not saying the current way is without flaw, but you cannot use CA as a measurement to how good a player is.

Goes back to the point I was making here and makes the point again.

[andu1]

Now i try to buy a replacement defender because AI steals my talent and he rejects my contract because i offered a 3 year deal instead of 2... And everything else was what he asked for.

I am so close to uninstalling this mess

[Viking]

 

Norwich wasn't in the PL when I got the job, so I have no idea what this lady is on about. It's things like this that makes me feel more and more disconnected to FM.

[f.zaarour]

Is there anyone who bought Mbappe in FM23 from Psg? Is that even possible? With his crazy contract untill 2025 in the game?

Also what isnt rly realistic is the financials of Real Madrid in Fm22, is that still the same in FM23? Wanna know, maybe to get the game anyway.

Or would u say, wait it out untill FM24? 

[diLLa88]

6 hours ago, XaW said:

No, you are missing the point. CA is not meant to be seen as you play, and if you didn't you wouldn't have this issue.

I'm not saying the current way is without flaw, but you cannot use CA as a measurement to how good a player is.

Well this is just simply not true. It's also irrelevant that CA is not supposed to be seen, as it is a crucial variable in the game as both attributes/development, player value and reputation is tied to it. AI clearly prioritizes its choices based on CA in both squad selection, national team selection, etc. It all ultimately goes back to CA and PA.

Please stop telling everyone that there is no issue when so many people actually do find an issue in this.

Also, since CA is such an unimportant stat to you, please find me one world class player with a CA lower than 150. I will then show you all the world class players who do actually have a high CA.

Edited June 26, 2023 by diLLa88

[XaW]

4 minutes ago, diLLa88 said:

Well this is just simply not true. It's also irrelevant that CA is not supposed to be seen, as it is a crucial variable in the game as both attributes/development, player value and reputation is tied to it. AI clearly prioritizes its choices based on CA in both squad selection, national team selection, etc. It all ultimately goes back to CA and PA.

Please stop telling everyone that there is no issue when so many people actually do find an issue in this.

Also, since CA is such an unimportant stat to you, please find me one world class player with a CA lower than 150. I will then show you all the world class players who do actually have a high CA.

If you genuinely think there is an issue, why are you not reporting it in the bug tracker?

Everything in that post is a lot of buzz word with just about nothing more, and quite frankly this is not the thread for this as this is far off feedback, so let's cut this now.

[diLLa88]

10 minutes ago, XaW said:

If you genuinely think there is an issue, why are you not reporting it in the bug tracker?

Everything in that post is a lot of buzz word with just about nothing more, and quite frankly this is not the thread for this as this is far off feedback, so let's cut this now.

This is not a bug, it's a design issue. This is a feedback thread and there has been plenty of feedback on this subject all over the forum. You are debating it doesn't exist to us and now you tell me to cut it off? Nah man, you should be the one cutting it off with the constant downplaying  of mentioned issues, as I see you do that stuff all the time here.

Edited June 26, 2023 by diLLa88

[warlock]

withdrawn

Edited June 27, 2023 by warlock

[Mitza]

18 hours ago, XaW said:

No, you are missing the point. CA is not meant to be seen as you play, and if you didn't you wouldn't have this issue.

I'm not saying the current way is without flaw, but you cannot use CA as a measurement to how good a player is.

But the CA literally is a way of measurement of how good a player is. High CA = high attributes and higher PA means potential for even better attributes. Why are you spreading misinformation?

A top player literally has high CA. Look at all of the top squads at the start of the game, all world class players have high CA's regardless of it being a hidden stat. A top youngster like Pedri has a 150CA and a 190PA, that means they are really good and they will become even better. It's the most basic mechanic of FM. Show me a single world class player that has low CA at the start of the game. If a player performs well in real life, in the next FM they will have higher attributes and with that, higher CA. You don't have a 120CA in two UCL finalists squads. The fact that low CA players can perform better than a world class player is a completely different matter. 

 

19 hours ago, XaW said:

No it's not. Because CA is NOT a metric you should know about. It's a not a game mechanic for the user to know, it's a mechanic for the behind the scenes. If you look behind the curtains, don't be surprised to see that actors wear makeup!

Because not all players will reach their potential, neither in the game or real life. Freddy Adu was supposed to be the next superstar, but it never happened. How many "the next Messi"'s have you heard about who never got anywhere? Bojan Krkic anyone? If you didn't know the CA or PA behind the scenes you would never know how has what, and the only reason you know of it is because you use an editor.

It's a hidden feature but the players have a thing called attributes, which are directly tied to CURRENT ABILITY, a mechanic that the game does tell you about, alongisde their POTENTIAL ABILITY. If I have a great youngster in a Man City squad, with only a star of CA (realtive to squad) and 5 full stars of PA (also relative to a world class squad), you don't need the editor or be a genius to realsie that they have a lot of potential to grow. 

It's obviously true that not all players should reach their potential. But the issue that people are calling out is that there are way too many players that don't do it. If the game starts with a generation of, let's arbitrarily say, 70 world class players, I would expect that there should constantly be 70 world class players in the game in the future, including regens and excluding players who never made it. Not the game producing 70 world class potential players, with only 40 making it and 30 getting stuck in low CAs. As I mentioned before, you will never see a Pedri, Gavi, Bellingham levels of CA regen at 18, or as someone else mentioned, a Messi/Mbappe level regen without the human manager involvement. 

 

If the game didn't mean for players to reach the same CA levels as real life players, then they should remove the feature alltogether. But it doesn't mean that since PA exists, and you veiling it under "it's a feature not a bug " is disrespectful to the people who are giving feedback on the game, and have been experimenting and testing out this issue with clear data to show it.

Edited June 27, 2023 by Mitza

[GuitarMan]

4 minutes ago, Mitza said:

But the CA literally is a way of measurement of how good a player is. High CA = high attributes and higher PA means potential for even better attributes. Why are you spreading misinformation?

A top player literally has high CA. Look at all of the top squads at the start of the game, all world class players have high CA's regardless of it being a hidden stat. A top youngster like Pedri has a 150CA and a 190PA, that means they are really good and they will become even better. It's the most basic mechanic of FM. Show me a single world class player that has low CA at the start of the game. If a player performs well in real life, in the next FM they will have higher attributes and with that, higher CA. You don't have a 120CA in two UCL finalists squads. The fact that low CA players can perform better than a world class player is a completely different matter. 

 

It's a hidden feature but the players have a thing called attributes, which are directly tied to CURRENT ABILITY, a mechanic that the game does tell you about, alongisde their POTENTIAL ABILITY. If I have a great youngster in a Man City squad, with only a star of CA (realtive to squad) and 5 full stars of PA (also relative to a world class squad), you don't need the editor or be a genius to realsie that they have a lot of potential to grow. 

It's obviously true that not all players should reach their potential. But the issue that people are calling out is that there are way too many players that don't do it. If the game starts with a generation of, let's arbitrarily say, 70 world class players, I would expect that there should constantly be 70 world class players in the game in the future, including regens and excluding players who never made it. Not the game producing 70 world class potential players, with only 40 making it and 30 getting stuck in low CAs. As I mentioned before, you will never see a Pedri, Gavi, Bellingham levels of CA regen at 18, or as someone else mentioned, a Messi/Mbappe level regen without the human manager involvement. 

 

If the game didn't mean for players to reach the same CA levels as real life players, then they should remove the feature alltogether. But it doesn't mean that since PA exists, and you veiling it under "it's a feature not a bug " is disrespectful to the people who are giving feedback on the game, and have been experimenting and testing out this issue with clear data to show it.

CA may tell you how much ability someone has - yes, but does it tell you if they have it in the right areas? No.

That is the point I believe @XaW to be making. (happy to be corrected). A player could have plenty of CA but only be good at the athletic side of the game - once they get the ball at their feet they could be useless... but in terms of athleticism, they could have it in bucketloads... a player could have great footballing intelligence but virtually no athletic ability. Depending on what role the players play - both of these could be good - but a winger with no athletic ability is not going to be good at all, like a forward who can't read the game will always be in the wrong place at the wrong time, doesn't matter how good they are at finishing if they are not there to get the ball. 

So yes - CA may be a pointer - but it is far from everything. 

[Mitza]

21 minutes ago, GuitarMan said:

CA may tell you how much ability someone has - yes, but does it tell you if they have it in the right areas? No.

That is the point I believe @XaW to be making. (happy to be corrected). A player could have plenty of CA but only be good at the athletic side of the game - once they get the ball at their feet they could be useless... but in terms of athleticism, they could have it in bucketloads... a player could have great footballing intelligence but virtually no athletic ability. Depending on what role the players play - both of these could be good - but a winger with no athletic ability is not going to be good at all, like a forward who can't read the game will always be in the wrong place at the wrong time, doesn't matter how good they are at finishing if they are not there to get the ball. 

So yes - CA may be a pointer - but it is far from everything. 

Do you have an example of a real life player with 160+ CA but terrible stat distribution?

 

Edit: And that is not even the point of this whole conversation. It really doesn't matter if a 130 CA player has a better distribution than a 160 CA player, the point is that if both of them, alongside 20 of their peers, have a PA of 190 and none of them ever reach close to it, it's a big issue with attribute progression, training, and general youth development. And this hasn't been an issue in previous FMs, hence why so many complaints about it.

Edited June 27, 2023 by Mitza

[herne79]

19 minutes ago, Mitza said:

But the CA literally is a way of measurement of how good a player is.

It’s not.  CA is a hidden game mechanic used in the coding.  It’s only us players who have discovered it buried in the Editor and decided to use it for that purpose.  But CA is only a calculation based on certain attributes - not all visible attributes are included and none of the hidden ones.  So yes, of course players with high attributes that are included in the CA calculation will have a high CA but that does not mean they are “good” because too many other things are not included in the CA calculation.  It just means they have some high attributes.

23 minutes ago, Mitza said:

If I have a great youngster in a Man City squad, with only a star of CA (realtive to squad) and 5 full stars of PA (also relative to a world class squad), you don't need the editor or be a genius to realsie that they have a lot of potential to grow.

Again this is incorrect.  The star ratings may show you they have lots of room to grow but the star ratings are based on much more than just the hidden CA/PA values.  We’ve seen plenty of times before that players with a high star rating for potential can frequently turn out to actually have a fairly low hidden PA value, and vice versa.  The star ratings are essentially your coaches looking at a snap shot of the youngster’s current attributes and saying “wow this kid looks great for his age (or not), he must have bags of potential (or not)” and give him a star rating accordingly.  Once he starts to develop the coaches reassess him.

29 minutes ago, Mitza said:

It's obviously true that not all players should reach their potential. But the issue that people are calling out is that there are way too many players that don't do it. If the game starts with a generation of, let's arbitrarily say, 70 world class players, I would expect that there should constantly be 70 world class players in the game in the future, including regens and excluding players who never made it. Not the game producing 70 world class potential players, with only 40 making it and 30 getting stuck in low CAs. As I mentioned before, you will never see a Pedri, Gavi, Bellingham levels of CA regen at 18, or as someone else mentioned, a Messi/Mbappe level regen without the human manager involvement. 

I actually agree with that.  Using it as a measure to gauge how the database is progressing is pretty much what CA and PA are for, so to continue to use them as a metric for this type of basic analysis should be a decent enough indicator.

[diLLa88]

2 hours ago, herne79 said:

It’s not.  CA is a hidden game mechanic used in the coding.  It’s only us players who have discovered it buried in the Editor and decided to use it for that purpose.  But CA is only a calculation based on certain attributes - not all visible attributes are included and none of the hidden ones.  So yes, of course players with high attributes that are included in the CA calculation will have a high CA but that does not mean they are “good” because too many other things are not included in the CA calculation.  It just means they have some high attributes.

Again this is incorrect.  The star ratings may show you they have lots of room to grow but the star ratings are based on much more than just the hidden CA/PA values.  We’ve seen plenty of times before that players with a high star rating for potential can frequently turn out to actually have a fairly low hidden PA value, and vice versa.  The star ratings are essentially your coaches looking at a snap shot of the youngster’s current attributes and saying “wow this kid looks great for his age (or not), he must have bags of potential (or not)” and give him a star rating accordingly.  Once he starts to develop the coaches reassess him.

I actually agree with that.  Using it as a measure to gauge how the database is progressing is pretty much what CA and PA are for, so to continue to use them as a metric for this type of basic analysis should be a decent enough indicator.

I still don't know why people keep raising the argument that high CA does not necessarily mean a good player, we all agree on that. The point we make is exactly the last one you say in your post, as a metric to analyse whether the database as a whole progresses through the game and the issues that arise from this. The fact that squads keep getting older over the years and national teams not refreshing their selection with new talents is directly related to the poor development of CA under AI management. Us players can min-max our training schedules and provide playtime to these young talents, but AI simply does not do that sufficiently, hence poor development of the newgens. This ruins long term saves for many people, and is completely unrelated to the fact if a 140 CA player can be better than a 150 CA players.

All the "buzzwords" XaW blames me for mentioning in my earlier post ARE in one way or the other related to CA, so yes, it is important.

Edited June 27, 2023 by diLLa88

[XaW]

8 minutes ago, diLLa88 said:

but AI simply does not do that sufficiently, hence poor development of the newgens. This ruins long term saves for many people, and is completely unrelated to the fact if a 140 CA player can be better than a 150 CA players.

If this was your point, it was, at least for me hidden quite well, because on this part I totally agree. AI squad development is the biggest issue the game currently has in my view. As much as you want to shoot shots at me, you really need to make your point clearer....

[herne79]

41 minutes ago, diLLa88 said:

I still don't know why people keep raising the argument that high CA does not necessarily mean a good player, we all agree on that.

 

3 hours ago, Mitza said:

But the CA literally is a way of measurement of how good a player is

Not all of us .

[diLLa88]

36 minutes ago, herne79 said:

 

Not all of us .

I believe he is saying CA is 'A' measurement of how good a player is, which is what it literally is. It is a measurement, but not the only measurement :D.

[diLLa88]

1 hour ago, XaW said:

If this was your point, it was, at least for me hidden quite well, because on this part I totally agree. AI squad development is the biggest issue the game currently has in my view. As much as you want to shoot shots at me, you really need to make your point clearer....

Well fair enough if it wasn't clear enough. I did mention almost the same in one of my previous posts though.

[herne79]

1 hour ago, diLLa88 said:

I believe he is saying CA is 'A' measurement of how good a player is, which is what it literally is. It is a measurement, but not the only measurement :D.

It’s a measurement of a certain number of attributes consolidated for the game’s own nefarious purposes for sure.  As for a measurement of how “good” a player is, we’ll have to agree to disagree on that one 👍.

[Tyburn]

If we’re allowed feedback on the future here … 

https://www.footballmanager.com/news/future-football-manager