The Truth of FM Attributes and Testing | FM24 

Thanks! FM is a lot better nowadays at guiding people through all its pages but it is still a lot to take in. Lots of good RU-vidrs with guides here though.

Nah, set a stat to 1 and see how a player behaves. It's pure shit. Benny Hill show type of comedy. 1 in a stat is terrible.

I think Zealand mentions somewhere that his players with 1 in shooting can still hit the target etc. Interesting point you mention about consistency, do you have a link to anything on that? Put me down as a -20 for composure.

-50 work rate here :)

Glad you liked it!

Thanks for the kind comment

Thanks!

Cheers for the feedback :)

Cheers!

Howdy good sir. I'll take your own number of 2400 matches, although I don't know if it's the correct one either. Depending on the impact of the variable "passing" over the results of the match, 2.4k sampe size could be considered negligible. I am running RIGHT NOW a regression (same process he's running to construct the tendency lines, in essence) where my own sample size is giving me all kinds of headache. And my sample is nearly 25k data points. The effect of the variable I'm interested just isn't big (or clear) enough to provide conclusions. Secondly and by faaaaaaaar the most important thing is the concept of collinearity. To put it way too oversimplified (to the point it's bordering innacuracy) collinearity is when two things explain the same effect but at the same time, one explains the other. For example: We can agree "points per season" can be explained by passing, pace, composure .... all of them with their own particular "weight". But here's the catch (and it's a big one, and I believe, the core of the question): Assume passing 15. We could say that's "good enough", so the player succeeds in most passing attempts. Now imagine this player just played a through ball to a forward putting him one-on-one with the GK. If the Forward had low pace, the pass would not complete. Posession would be lost. If the Forward has enough pace, the pass DOES complete PLUS he scores. Therefore points are gained. Which of these two variables explains the "points gained in this match"? Is it PASS or PACE? Was it PASS or Vision? Was it PACE or Off The Ball ? That's the jist of the concept of Collinearity. Where two variables explain the same phenomenon while also having an effect on each other. There are ways to try to treat and isolate collinearity, which is a whole rabbit whole in itself. Long story short, it's the Holy Grail of Statistics, though. Cheers!

It's a good point you make on the 2400 matches (if it is that, I know its big). Without seeing the distribution of those 2400 matches, it is impossible to know by eye if there is statistical significance. Ideally, if they tested multiple values of passing you could see whether there is an identifiable trend without doing the statistical analysis.

An interesting post, thanks. I feel the challenge with all of this is generating the match data. Do you do it manually or do you have a way of automating it? @@abhuyllongfellow4233

​@@StybbGaming STATISTICS: The current understanding on how to deal with collinearity is to make use of something called an Instrumental Variable. An IV would be would something that closely represents the variable you're interested in, while not BEING that variable. It's a whole field of study by itself. I'm an economist, so I can use an economics example to try to explain the concept. Jacob Mincer wanted to explain the behavior of wages. He found out that wages could be explained (amongst others) by Age and Experience. However, as you age, you tend to gain more experience in your current field, thus bumping your salaries once more. So Age has a "double" effect. it explains wages AND explains "Experience", which in turn, also explains wages. (It also bypasses "how to even measure experience in the first place?") The solution he found was to square the age of the individual as a proxy variable (an Instrumental Variable) to represent Experience in his equation. And it worked perfectly. Nobel prizes are awarded to the "creation" of a working IV, so I wouldn't even begin to attemp to invent one for FM lol HOW I'D RUN AN EXPERIMENT: Were I to try to attempt to figure the importance of a single variable in FM, I would try to run several experiments, though. My example above illustrates the correlation between PASS and PACE, for example. So I'd try to make an experiment for PASS by switching PASS values, while also keeping all relevant variables (on all players) as favorable as possible. Thinking of evaluating PASS for an AMC: Lets say PASS 10-20, while keeping vision, off the ball, pace, strength and all other relevant variables for everyone at 18, for example. In order to make it favorable. In this case, if the pass failed, it's definitly not the AF's fault, it's the AMC. Then compare the results (based on XG, not points or goals) and judge an AMC based of XG averages over a couple seasons (we're not vying for the Nobel Prize, we're talking FM! 2 seasons should be more than enough to grasp the tendecy). Posession lost could be a good indicator as well for midfielders. Passes completed. Offsides. This would allow me to exacerbate the importance of PASS by providing it with the best possible environment for it to succeed. PROBABLY generating a clearer result. Which I could, then, average to try to squeeze some of the RNG out of it. For Defenders, Headers won. Fouls comitted (good defending = less fouls). Tackles won. XG Against. Cards received. For Forwards, non penalty XG, Conversion rate, Fouls received, Corners pro. AUTOMATION: As for automating the process.... not my expertise. BUT, maybe create a database of 17 year-olds with Future Sales deals for 20 years in the future. Embargo the team they're on so they can't hire anyone. Set their stats as you wish, their CA doesn't matter. Freeze them all. Injury Prone = 1. Have backups for each position just in case. Freeze the opponents at 10 while you're at it? From there, shouldn't be too hard to code a Python to scrape the monitor, click the editor button, select "Attribute" and set it to X+1, starting at X=10 until X=20. And then go on vacation for 2 years. Pretty much a Macro with a variable X. Run overnight. IDK, literally my first idea on the subject. Thanks for coming to my TEDTalk, btw

They all contribute to varying degrees. In know Pace is quite important, things like Finishing less so. That gives a rough idea of how important Attributes are with respect to one another.

Thanks. I think he works out the coefficients for each stats importance based off of FM arena if I remember rightly? Even with the example of the target forward above, I think it's a long discussion about what stats are "best" for each position.

Very kind

I see your point, and this is something I'd love to teest - though I might not have the time for every position and role. Just as a note, all the hidden attributes on the players are set to 13 in all tests so we can keep it controlled.

Glad to hear the controls in place @StybbGaming. In the vanilla game the random way players respond to scenarios due to the combination of attributes is what makes the game great. The physical attributes do give an unrealist boost to performance though I think.

Good question, should have mentioned that all hidden attributes are set at 13.

I totally agree, testing the effect of multiple attributes that combine together would be really interesting and insightful

They definitely combine. I think this is mentioned in FM itself. Way back, I signed a CM (for FM10) with 20 Long Shots and 15 Flair (13 Finishing ) as I wanted more goals from midfield in what was at the time a mid-table EPL side. Now, the guy went on to have a long, excellent career, helping to drive my side into Champions League contention on the way to becoming a club Legend; the new stadium we built was even named after him! One thing he never did, however was score a lot of goals - probably averaged around 4 per season. He'd score only a couple from range, on average and some of those would be from direct FKs (he had an Attribute of about 15). Open-play bangers from 20-25 yards? Rare, though he did attempt them plenty enough. He invariably played either as an Attacking or Defensive Playmaker, depending on who else was playing alongside him. I'd always up the slider to encourage him to take either a moderate amount, or lots of long shots. What's the reasoning for this, then? Hard to say, but his Technique wasn't amazing - around 13, so whilst in theory the quality of his long-range shooting might be very high, the chances of him getting it right technically, when in a very strong league, wasn't great. Throw in his Agility and Off the Ball were mediocre (about 12), maybe meaning he didn't get too many perfect opportunities to hit it from range. All speculative, but my take away wasn't that Long Shooting was unimportant, but that it only factored in when a sequence of other events had been ticked off, in order.

Hidden attributes definitely play a role I think

Haha, this is fun to read - because for me this just says "why do you misspronounce ATTRRIButes its ATTRIButes". Literally have no idea of any other pronunciation.

Another poster commented the same. I have no idea how else it's pronounced.

Haha . You say “a tribute “ when it’s more like “at ribute “ . Make sense ? Sorry to join in but comment caught my eye .