Jump to content

rogerdoger

Members+
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    15

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Forums

Articles

FAQs

Online Manual

Support: Blocks

Support: Games

Bug Tracker

SIGames Manual (beta)

Profiles

Posts posted by rogerdoger

    CA, Stars or Attributes

    in Good Player & Team Guide

    Posted

    Piggybacking off of what @fc.cadonisays, you should definitely look at attributes first and foremost if it is a player you want to use and achieve success with. CA is only a generalized tool for judging "at a glance" how good a specific player's set of attributes work for the positions he is accomplished/natural in playing. That's not saying that the CA is in any way shape or form a proper indicator of a players skill and competence in the specific system YOUR team plays, though, but it gives some hints about how many relevant attribute points the player has across all possible roles and duties in his positions.

    Hidden attributes/personality can be just as impactful as attributes (or lack of them), especially when it comes to player development. There's no point in players that are far away from their potential (even if that potential is high) if their Professionalism, Ambition or even Determination (not hidden) is very poor. Such a player will probably never reach anywhere near their potential.

    I'm currently spending way too much time trying to perfect the player filters to use for my setup, but for simplicity you could (and should if you actually want to play the game) follow the priority stated in the post above.

    However, PA is a very good indicator to begin with if you actually want to use the in game editor, so I would suggest looking at PA first, and then decide whether or not to actually sign them after having looked at the attributes and hidden attributes.

    E.g. if the best youngsters available  start at PA 150 and descending, there could very well be a kid at PA 135 with a much better attribute spread for your role in that position and with a model professional personality instead of slack or casual. I would definitely sign him first.

    Finally, stars are an okay indicator, but at role level. I would look at them last, but you could find a real gem of a player with low positional CA but a good role ability.

     

    0

    Is dynamic youth ratings for nations working how it should be?

    in Football Manager General Discussion

    Posted

    1 hour ago, vikeologist said:

    It's also important to bear in mind how important 'realism' is for some players. The major football nations today are the same as they were 50 years ago. No African, N American or Asian nation has emerged. No nation has started producing a much higher number of top footballers than 50 years ago. Maybe Africa as a whole.

    I disagree with this, I'd say that football quality has never been this consistently high throughout the world, and there are plenty of examples where "smaller" nations that have decided to invest and commit have grown in stature quite quickly. Internationally, there are significantly less "easy" games for major nations now. Serbia comes out ahead of Portugal in the WC qualifiers, Sweden/Denmark consistently reach championship playoffs, Italy are edged out by Switzerland and are close to not qualifying to yet AGAIN, Wales appears to have become an international powerhouse, the Netherlands barely scrape by in front of Turkey and Norway, North Macedonia make a good showing against the likes of Germany... This is only numbers from the current WC qualifiers, and there are similar stories the last couple of years.
    These examples are all EU, but that only shows that the largest factor in domestic improvement is what FM defines as GAME IMPORTANCE; what is the stature of football inside a given country. If it is the dominant sport, which it is in most of these, the skill-gap is more prone to closing than increasing, given investment and time.

    We can also take a look at Asia and world cup statistics:
    Before 1990, a total of EIGHT (8) Asian nations had qualified for WC. Since 1990, that number has grown to 38.
    Before 1994, ONE (1) Asian nation had made playoffs, while NINE (9) more have achieved that since.
    South Korea and Japan consistently qualify and perform better than many established European footballing nations.

    Africa:
    Before 1990, EIGHT (8) African nations qualified for WC, since then we've had another 36.
    No African nation made playoffs before 1986, since then we've had 13.
    Cameroon has made WC 7 out of 10 times since 1982, never before that.
    Nigeria has made WC 6 out of 7 times since 1994, never before that.

    How many times has England won the World Cup since 1990?
    How much relatively "better" have they gotten in this time-frame?

    To me it looks like the big nations are mostly delivering at the same level, with some occasional spells of dominance, while other nations are consistently catching up. This comes down to the accessibility of- and investment into the game of football in "the rest of the world", which does much more to even out the playing field than spreading it out. One can argue that a big reason for increased performance of these national teams are the fact that big leagues throw a wide net and fetch talent globally, but to me this just means that potential exists everywhere and the nations that create infrastructure to exploit this will eventually catch up.

    In FM-terms; if Hungary wins the world cup in 2026, and the top Hungarian domestic side invests 1b pounds into training facilities, recruitment and youth coaching (and keep at it for a decade or two), OF COURSE they would produce an entirely different calibre of footballers in 2040. This stuff should happen quicker at lower youth rating than higher.

     

    3

    Is dynamic youth ratings for nations working how it should be?

    in Football Manager General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by rogerdoger

    Whether or not the feature is front and centre or not is not really that relevant, it's a feature and its current implementation seems dodgy at best, especially when looking at what current tests show. Even if it was just some small thing, I can't really imagine that it is working as intended right now, and its effects is almost the opposite of what my expectations were. As of now, the only countries that seem to have an improvement are the already dominant ones, where already fully "developed" footballing nations like England can relatively quickly grow from ~130 to max.

    Now, football is already well established in these nations, what realistically can the English FA do to consistently create new Messis and Ronaldos on a yearly basis that they haven't already been trying to do for the last 10/20/30/... years that would suddenly have such a strong effect? Whereas the job of fostering talent should be much easier for a smaller nation that simply decides to do even just a fraction of what the top nations have been doing for decades; investing in academies, building infrastructure, etc. I understand that population is one factor, and that it should be essentially more difficult for microstates like San Marino or Gibraltar to produce the raw talent, but I see no reason why nations such as Scotland, Ireland, Wales, Austria shouldn't show a much greater growth in a shorter time than the big nations have. Football is already well established here, and given the resources and investments necessary to "match" the big boys they should be closing the gap, not making it larger.

    I guess my point is that if "time-frame" was the problem here, we would see smaller nations approach the larger ones at a slow pace, not the big dogs shooting ahead. What we have now is the completely opposite situation; nations that have lived and breathed football for decades suddenly figure out how to breed super-humans on a consistent basis, while populations of other nations essentially are depicted as having no raw talent at all, regardless of domestic football opportunities or "hype".

    In real life, an english kid with high raw footballing talent would be snapped up at the age of 10 in the blink of an eye by some huge academy system and have every opportunity to develop and succeed. England winning the world championship would probably have little effect on this. A natural born footballer in Finland would have much more to gain if there was a similar system in place there, and Finland winning the world championship would have a huge impact on the state of the game domestically and for convincing children/adolescents to really commit to football as a career.

    TL;DR:
    The current dynamic youth rating seems to be an inversion of how it really should be. It should be fundamentally easier to make low rating nations catch up than high rating nations to shoot ahead, especially given the kind of consistent over-performance that is possible in a game such as FM.

    2

    Knap - FM24 and FM23 FM22_FM 21 - FM 20 -FM 19 Tactic List

    in Tactics Sharing Centre (Upload/Download)

    Posted

    On 21/11/2021 at 15:41, knap said:

    These are the best tested tactics with Villa, although I expect a ME update soon

     

    22BETABEOWULFKnap424IFP105ECFA

    FM21.7WARRIORKnapSW442MZP107ALLCUPS

     

    22BETAMEARGUSknap3412P100

    VercettiBlues451

    FM22SICILIAN4222KnapVOL3AFP106ALLCUPS.fmf

    Paris IWBs

     

    22BETAPARISKnapPar1sLVER4231SSIFP104

    FM21.4PaeisienneWalkwaysKnapPar1s4231P100

    22BETAPILGRIMAGEKnapIWB4132NP102ECCC

    FM22WARRIORKnap4222P100ECFA

    ME21.7HOLYGHOSTFIREKnap442P251

    22BETAPreachinBluesKnap451P105ECCC

    A couple of questions if you don't mind.

    Which tactic is the Paris IWBs?

    And 22BETAPARISKnapPar1sLVER4231SSIFP104 holding up better than FM22PARISKnapPar1sLVER4231SSIWP110CC for sub-top?

    VercettiBlues451 uses IFs, yet you seem to favour IWs now. Have you tested it with IWs?

    0
×
×
  • Create New...