Crazy training mixes

Have you figured out what happens if you train any given player with a highly mixed routine, like, say, Set-Piece Delivery? Though it's listed under Attack, it has two skills for forwards, two for defenseman and one for goalkeepers. Say, you train a GK with this set. Is the game engine going to say: "I'm rolling the dice on the skill: Crossing. I'm rolling the dice on the amount: 1%. Who's raining? GK? Sorry, doesn't apply, come again."

Or is it more like: "Rolling the dice on the amount: 1%. Rolling the dice on the skill... Wait, no need, since the only applicable skill is Rushing Out. Here's your 1% for Rushing Out."?

Defending corners as a keeper usually relies on rushing out and being first to the ball so I see why they did it.

Not sure you understood the question. Sure, Rushing Out applies to GK. But when GK trains with a set that includes Rushing Out and four non-applicable skills, is he guaranteed to get Rushing Out (provided the amount is right), or can it be a complete waste?

Yes players can only level on skills that the specific training applies. For instance shooting technique has 3 keeper applicable skills and 4 for the others. Choose wisely or you may waste training.

I am afraid we're talking past each other. I realize my GK can only level on skills that apply to him. But if he joins a set that includes one skill that applies and four that don't, is he guaranteed to level on that one skill (provided the amount of gain is reached, of course), or is it possible that he will never gain?

If a keeper takes part in a a training regimen that only applies to his rushing out, only that stat will grow. He will not gain extra if only that one stat is trained on him and I'm sure there is diminishing returns on doing the same training activity multiple times. He would only never gain if his training level sucks (see 3star fA in retirement year) or if he was overtrained to the point that he was capped in that specific skill.(not sure if even possible)

As to whether all players have the same base growth rates and when skill limiting happens when you overtrain a single stat, I'm sure we will know more after this season. Try to train your players in a way that balances their growth and you will see the most skillups. If you are doing the same 4-5 training exercises every day you are crippling your players. I only run sprints once every two days with my 18-22 year olds as they benefit the most from hard physical training. I run setpiece and shooting training daily with my CK and FK takers and GKs ( and a couple select defenders). Go through your training reports and see when and where you are seeing the most gains and continue to do those things within reason, with balance. I usually mix 2 physical trainings with 2attack 1 defense or vice versa. Balance. you should try to structure your training logically as well. Like Shooting training followed by sprints followed by heading practice then stretching then pressing would make no sense and I would expect terrible gains. This may not be the case as gains are still linked to condition usage but I have noticed some combinations working better than others and no, I won't share which.

Let's get to the basics of the new training system, or rather, to our understanding of it. Perhaps neither you nor I know the answer and we can just offer our best guesses Perhaps it will take Nik and his labs to work out the answer with any degree of certainty.

What do you think it means that Set 1 includes skills A, B, C, D and E?

If player X were to take Set 1, and player X has all 5 skills applicable, do you think it means that he has a 1/5th chance of improving skill A, 1/5 for skill B, 1/5 for skill C, 1/5 for D and 1/5 for E?

Or that he will improve all 5 skills by 1/5th?

Now, let's consider player Z who only has skill E applicable. He does the same set.

Does he have a 1/5th chance of improving skill E and 4/5 of wasting his time (well, condition really), or does he have a 100% chance of improving skill E? Obviously, proportionately to his trainability and to to the stated intensity of Set 1.

Not talking combinations, repetitions, bonuses, trainability, any of that good stuff, just one player, one set, 5 skills, one round. What is the expected gain for an average player, in your experience?

You said to read the reports, but I don't understand them now that SPs have been replaced with %. For example, if a player did a set and no result is shown. Does that mean he has had zero progress? Or does it mean his progress does not reach a full % point and is banked towards the next practice?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ponzu

Or does it mean his progress does not reach a full % point and is banked towards the next practice?

---

This one. All skills have thresholds they must pass in order to increase. It's not a 0 and 1 situation, they likely retained the 0-100 scale of previous training bars. Difference is that all skills have them now, it's why you don't see many increases on very easy/easy training activities. So just imagine 15 training bars instead of one, that's how it is now. Allows for greater customization of players rather than skills levelling according to a preset algorithm. Not sure how this applies to new positions/SA training, however. My guess is that defensive positions level from defensive training and attacking positions level from attack training. Physical stats were still increasing on release even when a player had a position/sa in active learning. No clue about SAs except that they may be related to the individual stats they enhance. happy I've got sa's on most of my core players now so I won't have to test it blindly in the first season of this patch. Which was also planned, btw.

I should know better than to ask two questions in one post.

So who has figured or think they figured out what it means to train a player with a set that only has one skill applicable to the player and four that are not?

Because there are plenty of skills (particularly for GK) that are only available via such sets (some of them listed under Attack), I am proceeding under the assumption that the player in this case gets full advertised benefit of the set, all applied towards one applicable skill. Anything else would be counterintuitive and unfair, but hey, this is Nordeus.

I think it's a good question. It's what I've been wondering about myself.

What I know: if I use GK training on any other player than GK, they won't gain any skills (because they don't have those), but they will lose condition. Effectiveness is zero.

If the same applies for any drill, that would mean players would gain a percentage in every skill, but only level on the ones they have. So from an attacking drill with 4 def/att skills and 1 GK skill, field players would profit at 0.8 effectiveness, GK's at 0.2.

But that's just speculation. I'm not sure if and how it can be tested.


As for extra positions: they can be gained by any drill, not necessarily the ones related to that position.
Attachment 62835

Any drill that relates to Attack/defense dunction, physical drills will not train new positions.

Right. I see. :)

Has anyone figured if it's possible to see partial gain for any one player from any one drill (or more likely from any given practice)?