Testing: does individual skills matter?

[Toxcatl]

I guess through friendlies will be the best to check this, sticking to one opponent , same counter formation same tactics both ways etc. So you exclude the oppo factor.

This is a great idea, thank you!

[LarryC]

Great idea, thanks for the effort.

First hypothesis:
The higher Fitness skill, the less Condition Loss (CL).

So far I was with Al Svandberg on this

-I see zero correlation between -- individual -- fitness ability and conditioning loss in a game.

One impact of the Fitness Ability can be that a player plays better with a high fitness ability if he has low conditioning, IE that a player for example with 200% in fitness ability will perform better with 50% conditioning than a player with 50% fitness ability and 50% conditioning.

Interesting if you can prove or disprove your first hypothesis.

[ibangali]

don't research too much
then all gonna lost you like AI

-----------------------------------------

One of the main question of this game is the following: do the individual skills of a player matter or do the average values in each category play the role instead?

My understanding both, based on match situation, player's position, formation etc.

I'm posting here my two great players, both I work lot for their sp and their position.

AML+ST+AMC : he mostly play ST position but sometime I use him to play amc position, all depend on the formation, like when I use one st formation I use him st, and when I need amc based formation I use him, he is really good on both position, but he used to be not that good. I give him FK sp too which he did good too when work some of his skills.


when I bought him he was 4* ST FT, as I working on him I bring his positioning+heading (with some others) skill high enough to play good as ST, to make score as FK I work on his shooting+finishing+creativity and he make me happy; same time when I feel I can use him as AMC, I add more point on his passing skills and he work good on that position too. this season (only played less than a week I believe, until new update and mass trolling started) he already got some yellow card, don't know I should work on his aggression or not although I stop playing and waiting to sell him,

ML+DML+MC: I bought him as 4* mc FT, I give him ck sp but he was not scoring good, but when I work on his passing+crossing+creativity then he make me happy (last season 15 assist on league, it might not very high but as a home made ck I'm happy about his assist); when I try to use him as dml on 3-6-1 butterfly formation, he was not doing good but as soon I add more def skills point, he start to work good as dml too.








ps.: I could explain those players story on

https://forum.topeleven.com/tutorial...as-thread.html

but I explain here because it might help on your research. Good luck

[Toxcatl]

don't research too much
then all gonna lost you like AI

We must know, we will know. Or die trying =]

About tests. It goes very slowly, because I can't play more than one friendy each day against the same opponent, and I need to have the same starting conditions for every game. I wanted to do several tests with different orders and bonuses, but with current speed of testing the idea with bonuses best to be left forgotten.
I'm doing it with Zonal and Low pressing. I don't see any correlations between Fitness, AvgPM, Quality and CL. Maybe with High Pressing and Man-2-man there will be difference, but I tend to think that either nothing reduce CL (and high Fitness just negate invisible condition penalty or something like this) or individual skills don't matter. Yay.

[LeManiaque]

One interesting thought - can anyone point to a character who has improved notably from training?

I can't think of a thread about a "well trained" player. My own experience is that highly capable players are identifiable pretty quickly. I can train players to keep up, but can a player go from average 6.5 to 8s? Lots of noise in that, many managers probably don't keep players long enough to develop, or don't have a plan for training or tactics.

[Toxcatl]

I can't think of a thread about a "well trained" player. My own experience is that highly capable players are identifiable pretty quickly. I can train players to keep up, but can a player go from average 6.5 to 8s? Lots of noise in that, many managers probably don't keep players long enough to develop, or don't have a plan for training or tactics.

Well, quality definitely matters.
If by "developed" player you mean a player with high difference between white and grey skill, I haven't noticed that. It seems the only way to improve rating of a player is to improve his overall quality. But I usually sell my players when they turn 22, maybe the improvement is slow and not very noticeable.

[LeManiaque]

I don't mean a big difference between grey and white skills, I think each player might have a best skill balance based on position, tactics, and opponent. For example, my DR had a great goal scoring rate for his first 5 seasons or more (would have to check screenshots of his stats and skill). While he's an effective enough defender, I couldn't maintain his skill balance, specifically the grey skills, and he scores rarely now.

My attackers are doing very well at near retirement, lowest Q ever, very unbalanced skills grey: white, but still I focus on individual skill balance. My philosophy - mixing unbalanced, older, low %Q players with higher %, younger players yields a team that is most effective at a lower team Q than your opponents. (My current season is proving that out).

I look it from a resource management perspective, I can fast train a few u-21 players each season, and save resources that won't go very far with older players anyways. I pick someone up at 18-19 and have a few seasons to see if theyre consistently effective in matches, and at 21 I can make sure they get to whatever %q I choose.

[LarryC]

My philosophy - mixing unbalanced, older, low %Q players with higher %, younger players yields a team that is most effective at a lower team Q than your opponents. (My current season is proving that out)

Interesting strategy.
How old and how low %Q are these older unbalanced players?
Like 24-25yo?
4* 70-80% - or rather 5* 80-90%?
When do you finally dump them?

[LeManiaque]

https://forum.topeleven.com/top-elev...tml#post447406
https://forum.topeleven.com/top-elev...tml#post447464
^^^ details for my old attackers

They're old and will almost certainly be starters until retirement. My 3rd old player is my DR, same range about 70q and 29 years. My attackers both do as well as ever (I have a second striker about 26 and 90%, also playing like always, but he is fielded less often, better off the bench). My DR has dropped off quite a bit, 1-2 MoM per season, down from a high of 14 in one season, about 1:3 matches played; and his goal scoring has dropped enormously. However, his ratings are equal or better whoever has played DL, usually with much higher quality (currently 100 left , 68 right). Here's a shot of current and many seasons ago.



Edit: his current stats. I approve of these ratings, they used to be more 9-10, but if you've read, I've taken 1st in CL group and QF cup both with mostly favorite teams from a level up.

[LarryC]

thanks for sharing.

It seems to give credit to my intuition that the global q%/ star rating can be misleading. When grey skills fall very low, they pull the player's quality% down. While It might well be that a player is still performant if his white skills are 100% or higher, regardless of the grey skills.

(Sometimes I also check the white skills of 4* players on the TM just in case it'd be such kind of player)