Key attributes, my theory

[ronnymvc]

This thread is just my theory and is related to key attributes and single role players.

Starting with new training system you are allowed to choose, more or less ,what attributes to train and improve for your players.
Now the question is :
are the key attributes relevant in game engine calculation or just the quality counts?
I am sure that our opinions are divided, and each of us has own felling.

Anyhow, having above starting point I summarized bellow how many key attributes has each single position,
dl/dr - 8
dc - 8
mc - 10
dml/dmr - 8
dmc - 10
amr - 8
mr /ml - 7
amc - 8
st - 9

As you can see, the position with less key attributes is ML/MR(7), that means ML/MR position has the biggest chances to have a big discrepancy between key attributes and non-key attributes, on other side is mc/dmc which has the most key attributes (10).
From my history matches I noticed that playing vs teams with big discrepancy key attributes players were the hardest matches, so I am almost convinced that key attributes are reflected into match engine.
Players with multi role(3) have more key attributes and for long term are not the best option to get big discrepancy in attributes, but they give you the possibility to make changes during game without make substitutions.
My next step is to rebuild my team in such way and buy players with only one role and keep them for 7-8 seasons and try to monitor the performance vs teams with the same quality and why not high quality.
If someone had this in his mind or did it already please share with me the results.

[LeManiaque]

That's my basic set up
I prefer single position, I don't move most of them or change from my 4411 for many seasons.
I have a dc/dmc who is a sub and can allow 4141 a couple times a season if I need. I have a multi position sub for each flank, too.
Otherwise, my starting 11 have always been single position, more or less. (A few seasons had D/DM players starting for my ML/MR positions, they were good).

I've documented plenty how my old players, low quality team has defeated teams higher level, 20+% quality... Doesn't really matter. Results feel reliable enough to me that I have no doubt the right players make the team, not the average age, or quality. Manager tactics or individual players, one those I think is key. More than formation (not tactics) and training, I think. More than condition and motivation and win bonus.

Everything matters, just a little bit.

[LarryC]

Many many thanks for coming back on this topic. Very interesting observations and interpretation.

From my history matches I noticed that playing vs teams with big discrepancy key attributes players were the hardest matches, so I am almost convinced that key attributes are reflected into match engine.

My team has had some tough opponents at equivalent or lower % quality, but I did not observe what you describe. I’ll look harder.

I have a slightly different (or complementary, if you will) theory at the moment. Sorry for the big info dump.

In my current opinion
- only %DEF and %ATT and %PHY matter.
- players might also have the so-called talent hidden attribute. Meaning that 2 players with exact same attribute values will never perform the same. It looks then to me impossible to assess how individual attributes matter.

To me the individual attributes are only relevant when it comes to training, in the way and the way to make these %DEF, ATT and PHY grow by focusing on the key attributes. The fewer key attributes in a skill group (ATT, DEF, PHY), the harder it’ll be to keep this group at a high level, increasing the player’s specialisation

I also find striking that in the squad screen the stats&skills list view mentions these 3 values. Maybe if Nordeus placed them here, it must be for a reason.


Then I made some other observations related to this on the attributes gains during the match
- gains are always on ATT or DEF and more often on the key attributes - but for instance an AML can also get 1% gain in tackling.
- players never gain PHY attributes. However the player that got MoM sometimes do (e.g. 4% bonus on fitness for the MoM).


This theory has influenced my way of selecting players and my training strategy.

1) I select lower overall quality players:
For instance, I select defenders based on the highest %DEF value.
My best lineup at the moment comprises a 22yo DML/DL/DC (note the 3 positions) with 145% DEF. He's only 96% Quality, and gets good ratings against 105% teams. He does not score or assist much anymore.
His skills are now quite unbalanced indeed (he's an ex-fast trainer), so in that regards it matches what you guys have observed.

Due to his positions he has only passing and crossing in ATT. He’s for the moment
• DEF: 145%
• ATT: 42%
• PHY: 100%

Only 2 key attributes in ATT made it very hard to keep a high %ATT, therefore his overall quality remained under 100%. But he’s got the DEF and PHY of a 110% player.


2) I adapted my my training strategy:

- I made a experiment using only physical drills in training (warmup, stretch, gym, long run) in the daily routine (makes it easier to setup training sessions )
Is it a coincidence? I noticed that players having gotten the highest %PHY were getting among the worst performers. Therefore I stopped.
My advice is not to let PHY go too close/too high relative to ATT&DEF.

- my favorite drill is “use your head” because it trains all three ATT, DEF, PHY . I use it mostly for ST, AMx, MC, DMC. To DL/DR I give copious amounts of “defending crosses” to keep the ATT skill group not too low.

- as you noted, MC have 10 key attributes, (4 DEF, 3, ATT, 3 PHY), I had noticed that because of this MCs don’t gain as much in ATT, so I take this into account in my training sessions, I train them more in ATT drills. Mostly “pass go and shoot”

[LacBuoc]

This is what I want to say to you

[HairDryer]

from my experience and observation i notice striker and attacking player to give the best out of them is by training more on their speed. Although there is an internal factor that separate between the good and the great. With speed chances are better etc. from LacBuoc above.

[LarryC]

If individual skills really matter in the game engine (which I'm not convinced of) I guess you can't go wrong with speed and passing.

"Pass go and shoot" drill all the way!

[KenoticFC]

Sometimes but not all the time you have to go even with a little bit of practical thinking. Example, I had a midfielder who's biggest attribute was shooting. I used him as FK taker and despite not having FK special ability he scored around 85% of FK during his peak (If he had SA I'd think it was because of it but no). Same with corner when I don't have a corner specialist I use the player with the biggest crossing attributes with optimal results. I agree with HairDryer with the attacking players observation.

[LarryC]

Well, I also had a AML/ST who was scoring on most FKs without having the SA. And even though I kept his shooting attribute reasonably high (say, above 120%), his performance in FKs plummeted after a while.

I speculated that it was because his Strength attribute had gotten too low (Strength is trained by the drill "set pieces delivery", interestingly). But even though I trained strength again (specifically with this drill), he never got back scoring on FKs.
Who knows if it is not in fact another expression of the rumored "hidden attribute"?

[112000]

This is what I want to say to you

Wow, amazing stat.
What is your team average quality? and what is the position Kaka play most?
Thanks

[LacBuoc]

There are my season for kaka to score the lead . There are seasons I divide the whole team . But he is still very good .

1 . Key player option .

2 . But the tactic to promote his abilities is more important