@@Herosennin i've had scout reports giving a player a C rating yet when I look at them they have exactly the stats I want, all positive comments and some negative that don't matter. Yet they are cheaper too. Because in League 2 i'm really gonna spend £15m on a "Good backup player". Yet I spot a potential regular starter at £10k I'm going to experiment with filtering by attributes I want instead and use the scouts to spot them.
So true. I have a 19 year old player that my staff say that he had fulfilled his pa while in reality he kept on improving so I checked with the editor and he had 38(!) more pa to fulfill
interesting, what was your scout from the reports judging potential and their professionalism etd? If you have a save game file from the time it happened and could edit your scout to 20 on judging potential and made his hidden attributes good would it be the same or would they be more accurate? then i guess you could conclude that it's down to a bit of nuance in the abilities of coaches or whether it's a bug that clearly needs addressing. or maybe SI could claim well in real life no one truly knows the potential of players. i had a similar thing with a newgen from my youth intake, they had 5 stars potential and all of my scouts and head of youth are really good. then after about 1 month his potential went down to 2.5 stars so i looked in the game editor too, they report was accurately downgraded as he was at like 95 PA.
@@Writeous0ne the coach who judged him has a really high player ability and potential judging so I guess it’s about his hidden attributes and personality
Another HUGE factor even more important than scouts attributes is reputation. You can find 2.5 star guys with same CA as 4 star... and it's all because the 2.5 star has 2 star rep while the 4 star has 4 star rep. Its like real life reputation is everything. Its also the reason you sign a unknown youngster for 10mil and his transfer value instantly goes up by x 5 if your playing in a big league.
3:10 From memory, FM deliberately screws up the potentional star ratings of under 18s in order to stop people buying up all the 16 year old wonderkids early enough that they can qualify as "Home Grown at club". Not sure of the numbers but at 16 years old the star rating could be out by (say) 2 stars but as they get closer to being 18 years old, this "up to 2-stars out" variable shrinks so that the coach / scout starts to give judgement based upon their scouting ability. I think also narritvely there is also the Freddy Adu effect where everyone thought he was a potential ability of 190 as a 15 year old but he only actually turned into a 140 PA player in real life. Real scouts in real life can still seriously misjudge the potential of players when really, really young.
yeah, i've had 5star newgens before and they end up as 2.5 star. and yes it happens after about a month, basically it becomes accurate after the ability to poach them is gone.
also, lets be fair. This is the realistic way of doing it - the number of players IRL who come through and accurately fulfil what scouts say they should fulfil is likely very small - and that goes up as well as down.
For like the last 10 years I always did it like this: I never cared too much about the potantial that was shown, I cared more about the comment the scout/hoyd/whoever gave. Like "he can develop significant in the future" etc. . That in combination with personality, determination and work rate and I very rarely get blindsighted. Like I just found a left back from cap verde that was only shown as 2 1/2-3 star potential but the stuff i care more about all looked nice so I signed him for 2 million. Signed him at 17 and he started developing like mad so I caved in and checked him in the editor and boom - 192 PA.
@@TheDangermouse999there definitely is another step above “can improve a lot”. Don’t know what the saying exactly will be as I play in German. If translated that, it would say: „can improve by worlds“
yes i always looked at the text which said "Decent serie A" or whatever and have signed quite a few 2 and a half star serie A players who have gone on to be sold for mega big bucks value.
Nah what is shown in this video is the lower the CA the more the game believes they wont make it to the high end of the PA. So when he increased the CA then the PA star went up as it now believes he can reach it. So basically any 15-16-17 year old who looks good and has stats you like but you see 2-3 PA stars you just ignore and help them grow then decide at 18-19-20-21-22 sometime between these years you decide if you should cut or keep going. So instead of hiring and firing youth on the stars you do it based on the stats and if you like the look of the player.
@@xazarl3381 yes, that is what has been shown in the video but the fact that Ibrahimovic is fairly determined and Kusi Asare is Balanced (I am talking about Personalities) makes a lot of difference in terms of Player development. Fairly Determined is a pretty decent Personality with good Hidden Attributes but Balanced‘s Hidden Attributes can be very very bad. Balanced is used in FM‘s data banks to kind of hide a bad personality to not insult the real life player. Only regens can have a red or orange personality in their report which doesn‘t mean that every real life player has a good personality. That‘s most likely the reason for the different potential ability rating
Spotted a possible mistake in the video: When you change player/staff attributes, you also have to adjust his CA rating to match the RCA rating in the editor. Then you have to wait till the games ticks over(this can be few ingame days, it can also be a few ingame weeks) for teh changes to take effect. If you don't match the CA with the RCA, then the game will adjust the attributes of the players/staff to match the RCA in the editor.
@@marvinehre9770 These are the rules I know of in the editor both for players and staff: -CA/RCA can never higher then PA -RCA is a value the editor will give you based on attribute value, playable positions value and weaker foot value. -AFAIK hidden attributes don't play a role for CA/RCA. -If you only change the RCA, with the next tick, the game will spend these points(the difference between CA and RCA) towards every attribute that relates to CA. -If you change attributes, the editor will suggest a RCA in the editor. You then need to match the CA with the RCA. If you do not match the CA with RCA, with the next tick, the game will change attributes back to the CA value given in the editor. This will again be done with every attribute related to CA, not just the ones you changed. Forgot to mention that I'm still playing FM21 not 24.
So, what could be added: the younger the players the more the PA is distorted in the stars, as less is known about them and there are more outliers. As they get older, 18-19-20, the PA starts to adjust, in my experience and from 22 it is more reliable. And other things, like form, position (goalkeepers tend to be lower rated in general, for example), personality, etc. influence the star ratings as well. So these will always be subjective.
Was going to comment here. Most of your words are mine too. I dont peek at CA/PA, so I need the star ratings to play. The stars are mostly reliable to me, esp after 22yo like you said. A team of 3*-ers sprinkled with a few 4-5*-ers in the spine can win you the league if you are good. An longtime scout who knows your tactics and recommends a 5* after 22yo? A MUST SIGN. (After 30+ years and now the number one club in Europe maybe the world, trust me, the number of 5* players can be counted by just one hand sometimes.) Maybe it's just my biased opinion, but ... i like to think the coaches considered the TACTIC you used when "star-ing" the players too. However, most of the players must have good Personality. I swear by Professionalism, but this is proven by so many folks already. Moreover, I play FM20, so the devs may not have screwed with the star ratings to prevent wonderkids hoarding. *shrugs 🤷♂
I think not only is the position relevant but also the preferred role e.g. Mezzala, Ball Winning Mid, Deep Lying Playmaker etc. and there is probably something hidden in the code that affects the multiplier of PA based on those roles knowing what most players use in their tactics and probably has a lower multiplier for the lesser used roles and lower for the most commonly used so that "players" start using different tactics each version of the game and try to keep things from becoming meta. Make players think and adjust. That is what I would do if I was one of the SI programmers.
I agree with you in that I also like that it's a bit random. I like the fact that I might give a youngster a chance that isn't rated highly but has a chance to become great and then does. I've seen it happen multiple times where a player out ranks their predicted potential (in terms of star rating) and it's always an awesome surprise. Feels like I got a diamond in the rough. And yeah, you touched on the important part at the end and it's a big part of the reason why I don't use the editor to look up CA/PA: sign players with the attributes you want. When I'm building a team I usually have an idea of what sort of team I want: strong, tall, intelligent players combined with a couple incredibly technical forwards/wingers. I then scout looking for these types of players. I remember signing Lorenzo Lucca on FM22 for Milan even though he had 2.5 stars. Man scored like 20 goals every season for me because he fit directly in the play style I liked to use according to his attributes.
When looking for young players now I'm more interested in their 'team fit' on the reports, as well as the hidden stuff like big matches, professionalism, etc. And there are red flags for certain positions (never sign a full back who is 'poor in the air' for instance).
Have a 15yr goalie who is “2*PA” but checked genie scout has a PA of 160 because I was curious why my youth day intake said a very very good keeper. Interesting to see hear this though
Regarding the CA differentials between Coman and Neuer and such, is there a chance that positional strength is factored in, i.e Coman is a three star player for Bayern when compared with the forward/wing alternatives whereas Neuer is being compared with the goalkeeping alternatives who are, in Bayern's case, significantly weaker than the players Coman would be compared with?
Yeah this is what I thought. Star ratings aren't reflective of just the PA, but more the PA when compared to other players in that position in the club. I could be wrong though
@@willza0112 yeah. Obviously there is some weight on star rating across the entire team in terms of ability but if you put Harry Kane in central midfield, his star rating will drop massively cos he's being compared to actual central midfielders that are natural in that positions and have better attributes for that position/role.
Likewise with Kusi-Asare being compared with Kane so his PA stars will be much lower than Ibrahimovic v Coman. I've always viewed stars as "this is how good the player can be" whereas if the player is being compared to a Messi caliber player his PA stars are unlikely be above 3. Wonder if it's worth signing older players just to use as a gauge for your youth team
What I learnt: my beloved wonderkid from my FM24 save, Jonah Kusi-Asare has actually now signed for Bayern in real life, while I got him for 2 million euros before from AIK ... 😃
I enjoy the variance and mystery within the game - I don’t want to see exact values. You can optimise the fun out of it and the amount of times I see people in the community worrying about EXACT PA values just makes me long for the day where that player that’s being griped over would have been allowed to create his own story within that game world. However, the user doesn’t allow that these days because they’re always trying to optimise the shit out of everything for the sake of the highest integer.
Is it linked to position since star ratings reflect your squad? E.g Harry Kane is a 4.5* striker in the team with a potential of 180+. Kusi Asare will never get to that level so they can't say he will ever be a 5* striker. Ibrahimovic, meanwhile, may be 4.5* compared to the best winger which is Sane, who has a much closer PA to Kusi Asare than Kane does and is currently a 4* player. A decent experiment to test this correlation would be to change Neuer (and the other GKs) PA/CA to 100. And then change a youth GK's PA to 120 (who probably has 2* or something currently.) 120 should not be a 5* player generally but perhaps it may be a 5* player when compared to the GK options currently in the squad.
The star rating PA is still the best way to establish how good a player could get. I think the variables on the ratings are still not significant enough. I would say it's too precise. Don't ignore the stars, just make sure you use the best staff and scout many times and obviously look at the player attributes too...
Was going to comment here ... a cut-and-paste reply here - I dont peek at CA/PA, so I need the star ratings to play. The stars are mostly reliable to me, esp after 22yo. A team of 3*-ers sprinkled with a few 4-5*-ers in the spine can win you the league if you are good. An longtime scout who knows your tactics and recommends a 5* after 22yo? A MUST SIGN. (After 30+ years and now the number one club in Europe maybe the world, trust me, the number of 5* players can be counted by just one hand sometimes.) Maybe it's just my biased opinion, but ... i like to think the coaches considered the TACTIC you used when "star-ing" the players too. However, most of the players must have good Personality. I swear by Professionalism, but this is proven by so many folks already. Moreover, I play FM20, so the devs likely have not screwed with the star ratings to prevent wonderkids hoarding. *shrugs 🤷♂
@@Chengyuan79I wouldn't agree with that. There are a lot of players with attributes in the wrong places who aren't worth signing even with 5*. I've got rid of a player with 200PA. Also I think people obssess about personality too much. I massively overperform (made last 16 of champions league with a team with a weekly budget of 200k for example) and never look at personality.
@michaelh878 not denying what you said. But after seeing the Meta attributes, just get Pacy and Strong players. Those are the "right-er" attributes. My best SC was a 12 Finishing guy. And, of course he can Head a ball. 😅😅😅⚽️ The odd few players with a "bad" Personality is fine, if they have the freaking ability to back it up. I used to love to say this too - those Dislike-Big-Matches SCs are the ones who scored the CL winning goals for me. 😅😅😅 Over the years, their personality will mold very similar to the squads anyway too. But for winning and winning titles after titles, IMHumbleO you need a team of Professional players. They can have low-ish Determination, etc, but Professionals are, well, Professionals. 🤷♂️😅
@michaelh878 oops, maybe not have replied to your 200PA guy ... if he has like 18 Pace, he would still work as a SC, AF. I don't look at CA/PA, so I cannot answer if a 200 CA player is a 5* player actually. And, that's the point - they are not the exact same thing. 😌🙏㊗️🪷
@@Chengyuan79 Yeah he was definitely 5 star. A slowish deep lying playmaker with very high, meaningless mentals. Also had a very high CA striker who I sold to Hertha for 350mil who took them from being champions to being relegation candidates as he was also slow and the AI didn't know how to use him.
Everyone's been doing those videos about star ratings being unreliable for quite some time now. What I would really love to see instead is a proper video on how to analyse players according to their attributes (and I'm not talking wonderkids here, because most of us players don't have those constantly in our teams, especially while in the lower leagues)
What I got from comments: - Their stars might be lower than their PA because the coach thinks they won't reach their full potential. Even if their PA is 180, if they are still CA 80 then they have way too much to improve, probably even under the best circumstances they won't be able to reach it. - Stars depend on reputation. If the player hasn't accomplished much during their academy years and their reputation is very low, the coach will be inclined to think they aren't very good and will under value them. The same happens with over-accomplishers being overvalued. - Position could also influence the stars. If there are many good strikers in your team and league, the youth strikers may have less stars (correct me if I'm wrong). - Form also influences the stars. When a player is in very good form he will be valued higher both in CA and PA, so it's possible that hidden gems have low stars because they aren't playing well or playing at all. I guess we will just have to give everyone a chance to impress then!
Yeah I have Pickford using an old database and he is 1.5 stars CA and PA because he got no game time at Sunderland and Burton but I know he has pretty high PA.
The minute I stopped deciding the starters on star rating and learned how to analyze a players stats and determine who is better, I actually started winning consistently, it’s crazy how bad star rating can be once you get in to the weeds of a save.
Videos like this make it so much easier to understand the game. I don't like using editors to find ratings, I prefer vanilla, so this was a massive help. Thanks Zealand 👍👌
i really realy want next FM remove this rating. and just provide data and reports like true scouting. Also change potential to be floating overtime in some degree depending more on game events than predefined number, like experian, wins, with whom they play etc. Current system is not fun and feels boring being almost same for ~10 years
Is it not based on other factors if they'll hit the top potential? Things like professionalism and determination too. Ibrahimovic might have much higher hidden stats than the other lads.
I have a HSV save where "Glatzel" is like half a professional potential, and he had already reached that, when i played him he played like a worldclass player! 17 goals, 12 assists in one season (as a attacking midfield btw) and now i have the HSV team promoted to bundesliga 1, where he is still cooking!
Star rating also depends on how useful the players stats are for that position. Eg a CB with 14 shooting may have a higher CA but less stars than another player with better defending stats but lower overall CA
@5:30 it's cool yes, only issue is in real life you would get much more data, physical with your own eyes data to base opinions on. In FM you obviously don't see any of this, you get a taining score, you don't obviously see how they train, you get a personality type, you don't actually see how they are. In FM you go of raw numbers which makes the random aspect a little less rewarding. That said it's good that staff members can be wrong and human error is simulated. I didn't realise the range was quite as drastic as this demonstration though but it does explain why last night when searching for goalkeepers why I was getting so confused based upon various factors in the reports I was seeing
Reputation has a big input on the star ratings. If you revisit this in the future, alter the reputations and watch the stars change. The player who was down the list will likely not played much youth football. So he can't gain a reputation. A player CA88/PA132 would be starting youth football ahead of CA60/PA150. plus the gap between the CA and PA factors in. in the first player there's a difference of 44 ability and the 2nd player has a gap of 90. One player is going to be more likely to get to their full potential and that's also why your staff will rate them higher. Playing the odds.
Scout ratings and team report dont depend only on CA/PA, they also depend on key atributes and total sum of atributes For example, you might have a 155 defender with excellent technique but mediocre defending stats and compared to a 140 player with poor texhnoque but good defence report will likely show 140 is better for that position. Thats why looking at position-relevant atributes is also important, where DC , AF and W are the most specific positions in this regard
I've always ignored the stars for the most part. I learned this back in FM14. To pick my players, I simply highlighted the attributes for the role I was planning to play them in, add them together, and whoever was the highest was my guy. My all time best striker was a 3-star player and had a higher number in 8 of the 10 attributes for advanced forward than the 4-star guy.
It was my understanding(and this video pretty much confirms it) that the potential ability star rating doesn't equate to PA, but in fact to CA the player is calculated to reach under the current circumstances. That's why the game has always rated players who have a big difference between CA and PA quite poorly. Doesn't matter if a player has 200PA if all they're ever gonna reach is 140.
Unpopular Opinion - I still make my decisions based on star ratings because I feel like that's more realistic, not only to sign but to bench or sell players. It makes the game a tidy bit harder and that's how I like it. However it's still important to know things are even messier than I initially thought
Hi-five. It's (almost) the only thing we have if we do not peek at the CA/PA. After a while, you would figure out that the stars are just not that accurate for kids (it is 100% accurate for 5* peak players if you run the best club in Europe), and use other things. Just loan the kids out and see how they fare, 5* or 3* ones). Avg ratings is my other thing. I dont know how to measure 17 Pace in real life, so I never scouted with specific attributes. Instead, I change the Role of the player within the tactic, then see if it produces results. The one thing I wanna bring up is that my biased view is that the coaches look at your TACTIC while giving the star ratings as well.
Could it be that Jonah Kusi-Asare is being judged against the ability of the best player in the team in that position (Harry Kane) and that's why his star rating would be lower regardless of actual potential as well?
Yup. I ran a test on my game. A player in my U18's I hadn't really ever noticed. Not great stats, only 3 star. Checked the editor and he was 170 PA, with a good personality.
I remember in ye olde FMs couple of years ago attributes had a big impact on CA/PA. The rule of thumb was: if the key attributes are above or below 10. If below - no matter how high PA the player has, he won't be a star player in his role. So I always check player's attributes in my scouts' reports on A+ prospects to see for myself how many of their positional key attributes are above/below 10
I like the star system better tbh. CA and especially PA is something that we aren't really supposed to see, but rather a core mechanic to keep the players at appropriate levels and within certain ranges. Just like in real life potential estimates are often wrong. Players who are young and show exceptional skill ("high CA") are presumed to have a high potential, even though most of them flop. Or players who are well known, sons of football legends etc. tend to be overvalued. Then you have players who bloom a bit later. Think Chelsea rejects for example, Salah and de Bruyne among them. The club didn't think they had world class potential at the time. Point is we think way too mechanistically about these indicators in FM, like 180-200 PA at Bayern should be 5 stars, 170-180 4,5 and so on... The game wouldn't be half as fun, too much certainty is not a good thing. As Z said, trust your eyes, trust the development, observe how they perform. It's a whole new world once you start playing the game that way.
I think this just shows how realistic the game is. I try to go by how the players play. I've had low star guys become some of my best players in a save.
FM20 (still playing) - have a maybe 4.5* PA acad kid who I mistakenly retrained into all midfield positions. It all cost CA points, and he dropped into a 3* CA "average" player by 21yo. Still, because of the HGC ruling, he would always be around. Sadly, except for his Workrate 16 and Teamwork 18, his other attributes were just 13-ish ... But the thing is, he did really, really well. Maybe I mostly rotate him vs weaker teams (and he plays in the best club in Europe by then, so he doesnt have lousy teammates), but his avg ratings is showing that this is not a player been carried. At his 28-29yo peak, his CA went back to the 4.5* that they said he was 10+ years ago, and also with the exact same lousy attributes, he can start big matches if I so choose without much troubles. However, the most important indicator seems to be him been called up to the Italy setup despite never been a regular. And, he is reaping the benefit of his versatility at 32yo, where he plays in ML despite not playing any matches for 1 month. He is "just" 3*. But I would argue that a 3*-er for the best team in Europe is no rubbish guy as well. I swear by stars, because I understand that they are relative to a lot of factors. Once people accepts so, stars became a really good guide, and like you said, actually adds to the realism of the game instead of saying, I only buy players with 17 Pace. How does that translate into real life? The guy can run at 35km/hr? That's my take at least.
I think the thing that isn’t communicated well in the game is that the PA stars include an estimate of how likely the player is to develop fully. A younger player with a higher CA is obviously more likely to hit their ceiling than a player with a larger gap between current and potential. The stars reflect this. I think the star system is actually a lot better and more useful than most creators give it credit for. CA/PA are not the be all and end all of a player’s production/usefulness, as you touched on.
News! I found it not to be a lie. Simply hidden attributes have an influence. An 18 y.o. player with 200 PA but 1 in ambition, professionalism, pressure, etc, etc won't have more than 3 stars in a top team. On the other hand, a 150 PA with 20 in all good hidden attributes and 1 in all the bad ones will have at least 4 stars. Also, where attributes are placed regarding its role and position will affect too
It also involves the tactics and roles, since even on the first team, sometimes you might play with a regista, and the players on your team that are midfielders won't be too good at that role, thus dropping their CA . Role proficiency or multiple roles ability is important when doing new signings or cleaning house.
This is actually pretty realistic. In real life scouts get it wrong all the time who is a big talent and who is not. Obviously the better you get the more accurate they get, but nobody can tell exactly how good someone is gonna become. Some players mature early and some later
This is so true. My club normally has excellent recruitment, but we recently broke our transfer record to sign a guy who was a massive flop and now he's on loan with an option to buy at a club in the league below
@@SuperMickyChow that’s what I’m saying. Even the best get it wrong. I mean sure you can probably tell if someone could become good. But how good? UCL level? UEL level? PL level? It has to also be harder the younger a player is. Like how do you determine how good a 15 year old could become. They haven’t even finished growing yet 🤦♂️
@fredtholarp563 Plus, look at someone like Jamie Vardy - wasn't considered a good player until he was 25 and went from non-league Fleetwood to Championship Leicester, who then went on to win the Premier league thanks to his goalscoring. I've learned to ignore the star ratings and just look at the actual pros and cons from the scout reports. Additionally, if a player looks like he might be promising from the first full scout report, I'll ask another scout to check him out and see whether they give the same pros & cons or not.
As as decades long player of this game, I actually love the star ratings, but I think a bit of literacy of what they represent is very important in interpreting what they mean. I like star ratings as a guide for where the player sits within my team whether thats current or potential. I also have a feeling that the staff member giving you the report take other things into account, obvious one being form, but I think they look for the hidden stats too including personality - you can get a guage of this if you look at the coach report and see the pros and cons. For me the attributes have a similar importance as the star ratings because whilst on paper a player can look really good, you get them in the match engine and it just doesn't work. I like to think the best way to evaluate a player is look at the star rating/coach report, weigh up the attributes, but learn how the player is by playing them. Potential star ratings are constantly changing over the coarse of a long term save, and the only way to really learn how good a player is to develop them and play them, you will soon find out how far they can go. Thanks for vid Zealand! Great work as always.
As a relative newcomer to Football Manager, i'm now terrified and lost 🤣 my brain is swimming. Are the current ability and potential ability number scores something that should be switched on in general?
Not as intended by SI. But if you feel you want to, do it. If you follow the advice and your eyes (look at the actual attributes, look at how players develop), you can find good players. There will still be mistakes, but that's part of life. If a player looks good for his age. Also, ask different scouts to scout the player, to get several opinions. Scout them several times.
It requires buying the in-game editor (like £5 I think). Vast majority of players don't use it (or even know it exists) so it's not something that "should" be switched on, but if you think it'd improve your playing experience then go ahead. Play the game the way you want to play it.
My advice is play the game and enjoy it. Learn as you go and fail a couple times. When you start again you'll start getting use to what to look for. Everyone plays and learns differently, it takes time but you'll be a master in no time.
As a new player, I wouldn't worry about this. You can still use the ratings as a rough guide, and as you become more familiar with the game you will get better at noticing stuff like this. Also, if it matters to you, it's more realistic if you don't buy the editor.
I first started playing championship manager 3. So, as a super hardcore long term player, I have to say I didn't know that and you were right: it blew my mind. kuddos for your curiosity, zeeland. cheers!
For me this is a realistic feature of our beloved game. It is complicated to tell how good a player will be in the future. A lot of people believed that Dele Alli will be one of England's best players when he was 20 and now he has not played a game of football for more than a year after being loaned out to Besiktas. Haaland was a beast of a striker when he was still 19 and he showed how good he can be when he has still at Salzburg, a lot of big teams had their eyes on him but only Dortmund decided to snap him up. Real Madrid were also looking for a striker at that time but they signed Luka Jovic instead for three times the amount of money Dortmund payed for Haaland.
I always calculate the average rating for a role the player is playing by adding up all the highlighted attributes and dividing by the number of the said attributes. Wish I had an app for this stuff in game :)
CA and PA are staple numbers in fm for decades now. High potential does not equate to a good player as there are hidden attributes in the game too, and what you said too, a striker with 20 long throws is worse than one with 20 in heading. Hidden attributes are consistency, important matches, dirtiness, versatility and inury proness. These directly affect matches, while there are some hidden attributes thats come in play outside matches, adaptibility, loyalty, sportsmanship, ambition, pressure, temperament, controversy and professionalism. Through testing, I found out that: consistency - self explanatory, high values means good form thru the season, dirtiness - how many cards he gets, injury proness- self explanatory, important matches - form in cups and continental games, versatility - learning new positions, adaptability - how fast can he settle in a new club, loyalty - higher values means he will be mroe likely to stay in the current club, sportsmanship - ?, temperament-?, ambition - number of specific moves he can learn, pressure - prolly for penalties and transfer drama, controversy - ? professionalism - how fast he gains ability scores, a 20 here means the player wil ldeveop very fast. Aside from this, determination is a key attribute, a striker with 19 or 20 here will be a beast in most cases if he isn't some doofus in other attributes. Determination might seem insignificant but there are very few players with a 20 rating here. Young players under 21 will imporve in leaps and bounds as long as they get a taste of senior football, so if you want some 16 year old to gert good quick, give him 90 mins a season for the a team, and increase this slightly till he reaches 20. It is amazing how a single game a year can help out a kid. I've given up to 3 matches to kids who gained around 60 ability in 3 years compared to 30 if not played.
What I like to do is let my scouts identify players and I watch them grow in the scout reports on my shortlist, if they comeback with another positive report after 6+ months then I check their pa with the editor. I like to think with extended exposure we’ve gotten a better idea of their ceiling. It’s my game and that’s how I enjoy it.
I noticed this too a couple of years ago while playing FM15. I was managing my boyhood club in Belgium and I had made them the most dominant team in the league over the last 10-15 years. In the cup I had to play against one of my local rivals who played in 3th division. Because they were my local rivals, I wanted to know what their team looked like and if they were able to climb back to 2nd and maybe even 1st division with their squad. I noticed a Dutch striker who was 16 years old that was their main man in attack. I looked at his stats and they looked quite impressive for a young guy. Scouted him and the report said: potential ability 1.5 stars... So I took my eyes of him until we had to play our cup game. And despite them losing 4-0 to my reserves, there was 1 guy catching my eye yet again. I decided to give it a go an bought him for €75k. He joined me in january and was my 4th striker. The last day of the transfer market, Liverpool triggered the transfer clause of my main striker and paid €25m for the guy. I played in a system with 2 attackers and in the next game after the transfer window, my then 2nd striker picked up a season ending injury. So my 16 year old had to play, no matter what... He made a good first impression with an assist in his first game where he was subbed in. Next game he had to start and scored 2 goals right away. He ended the season with about 10 goals and 5 assists in half a season. Next season I gave him his time to shine and he scored 20+ goals. From then on it only got better and from his 4th season onwards he always had more goals than he played games. Won the European Golden Boot 4 times in a row, got called up for the Dutch national team at the age of 19, became their highest ever scorer. Won the World Cup topscorer title 3 WC's in a row. And won the Ballon d'Or 4 times. I kept him his entire career (until I lost my save file when he was 32 years old). I still miss this guy... RIP Hans de Graaf😢
I have a 23 years old player that came from my youth academy, he was 4* PA and by 20 the coaches said that he was already at his peak (unlikely to improve), but he kept improving, just out of curiosity I checked his PA with the editor and the kid was at 144 CA with 173 PA
I think it's also about hidden attributes. I guess players with high professionalism, important matches, consistency and versatility might be more valuable. I don't think the stars are that wrong, maybe they are just factoring other stuff we have no idea about.
My take as well. I am pretending that the coaches take our TACTIC (perhaps their biased tactic too) into account as well when giving out the stars. Because I dont peek at CA/PA, I have to use the stars. At the highest level, they work fine for me.
For me most important thing when i am scouting players is that they are not injury probe, and if they are not consistant i look for those who enjoy big matches
Great vids bro, really enjoy your content. Although, I was under the impression that the current ability of your best players effect the potential ability rating of youth. For example, on my save Shay Lacey was 18 with a 2 1/2* rating (clearly not true), but I had 3 4* ratings in the first team in the same position. In effect having Kane in your first team alters his chances of reaching that potential, hence the lower star, if Jonah moves clubs with a main striker with a lower rating, the staff would rate accordingly despite their ability to judge potential.
In my first save i had a winger in the 3liga. Two stars. This guy couldn't kick a ball to save his life but he was the fastest man in Germany and could run at that speed for days. I threw him on defensive winger and gave him a whole side of the pitch. That worked surprisingly well until the bundesliga.
I think the pros and cons may have an effect. Like for example one of players is said to be unmotivated and doesn't push himself at 15 and that could effect it
An UnAmbitious 5* kid would drop to 2 - 2.5* after 23yo. I can confirm this. Good personality is so important. Many tests were done and confirmed that Professionalism, then Ambition, then Determination, would determine if a player can hit full PA, with the usual development stuff like good training overall and playing suitable league level matches.
I had several players in my 'excellent' youth intake with PAs over 130. Hiding amongst them, rated as the star of my intake with 5 stars of potential, was a player with 55 PA that he had already almost filled out.
Hi Zealand. Great video! I would love to visualize these results to see how strong the relationships are with CA and PA by star level, and even see the correlation between judging potential and PA. Great wisdom re: using attributes. All the best! Stefan.
I think something which has a big impact on hitting that potential ability is Ambition and determination. Yes you cannot see the ambition stat but sometimes your scouts will allude to fact that a player is ambitious. So from my experience, the personality of the player matters. There are quite a few players in the world with amazing potential but just never hit it, they failed because of not being ambitious enough or determined. Then there are players who don't possess the amazing potential ability but more than make up for it in ambition and determination. Only my opinion.
It's a good video. But it basically states the obvious. Of course, potential ability must always be interconnected with current ability. And of course they should only be seen as indicators. And that’s a great thing to exist in the game. For player evolution to feel organic and realistic they cannot be inseparable. In addition, it makes the game immensely better when it maintains uncertainty regarding a player. I always evaluate based on performance. For example, I have strikers with 2 stars of current ability and potential ability who score 30 goals per season and others with 5 stars who score 6 or 7. This has more to do with the relationship between the tactical disposition of the team, what is asked of each player individually and their characteristics. A reflection of this is also the fact that a player on my team is fabulous and when he is sold, it doesn't happen on his new team. I think the game is well done in its consideration of all these criteria and I don't think there's anything to change. What they need to address is how the game becomes when it tries to increase the difficulty. What I mean by this is that to put obstacles in our way, breaking victory cycles or preventing us from having many clean sheets, AI often makes ridiculous decisions to force defeat. There are 4 or 5 balls on the post per game, the permeable defenses with incredible errors with players bumping into each other, the additional time above what is supposed always biased, the goalkeepers with surreal movements, etc... Those are things where the game still sucks.
nod nod. Repeated to death, but I dont peek at CA/PA, so I use the stars as a guide. And I swear by them. Maybe it is different in FM20, but my 5* SC (which are so few and far in between when you became the best club in Europe) would be the 20+ goal scorer with a Finishing of 12 compared to a 4* SC with Pace/Finishing/etc of 16+ who cannot score ... My biased theory is that my coaches consider my TACTIC when giving me the star ratings too. Avg ratings is another thing I swear by. It shows consistency, and it also shows that the player is ready to play well at that last league level he was in. Finally, agreeing with the fake difficulty (aka FM-ed). Hitting the post multiple times every few matches to write the story that the mighty Milan has fallen to a minnor at the 2nd round of CL (and always the 2nd round), multiple times shows a script at work. Having said that, it does feel well when the script is written for your victory. I cannot deny that.
Yes, completely agree the star ratings do have other factors than just raw ability. I have a young Spanish player (Alex Mena) who came through my youth intake with PA as 3*. He made his debut for Spain at the age of 19 and I was wondering what on earth I'd missed. Taking into account his attributes, though - he's awesome. Does make me wonder how many I've let slip through the net now...
from personal experience of messing around with the editor and also just taking punts on cheap players, this *especially* applies to scout reports of players playing for particularly small or poor clubs. if you see a 16 year old with promising attributes at an amateur club, take a punt regardless of your scout report. it's brought me genuine world class players.
Interesting experiment, kinda makes sense when thinking about your video where you explains how many attributes a player might develop over their career. If a 16 year old has the potential of Messi but is currently a 75 current ability, then there is a good chance he will never develop enough to fulfill all that potential.
IMHumbleO, in fact these are decent players who should be loaned out to play at the same league level as your club. While I swear by star ratings, I basically also understand that they in fact fluctuate (go up or down) like how a person is in real life ... still, 3* players are good enough players to win you the league. If they can hit 3.5*, actually they are very good squad players to keep around at their peak. DISCLAIMER - I use 20/20 scouts and 19/20 coaches. I assumed coaches consider your TACTIC when rating players too. And, like everyone is saying, look at your preferred attributes, and your players should mostly have good personality types too. Ultimately, the avg ratings are the true "ratings". If a player can keep performing most of the time, he is a keeper. As in, someone to keep. 😅
I don't know about the newer games but in FM22 the rate of player improvement was in large part determined by Determination, Ambition, and Professionalism. The latter two attributes only visible with the editor. The personality could be scouted, which helps, but it's not the full picture. So, even if you played that player a lot, he may never have developed anywhere near the PA if those scores were low. So you can have a 190 PA player that developed into a 145 because his improvement rate was low. It would make sense that the player's scores on those 3 attributes contributed to the star rating and maybe explain the strange differences.
I think it depends on a lot of things. If you have good coaches and facilities they will nearly always reach their potential (sometimes at crazy ages like 17) no matter what but for lower teams then personality will matter.
Great video! One thing I think gets missed on potential stars is that I think they also pertain to the best player(s) you have on your team in the position, just like current stars do.
I am one of the people that sometimes uses the FM Scout. And last years game, I had on my shortlist a guy with 195 PA, but during his entire career, his CA never was over 180. It was the first time that I saw that in a game. Apart of trainings, would be nice to know what makes some players full fill their potentials, and others (Like the guy I mentioned), not.
do you know the stars are normally related for your club right ? the stars also mean something like , for your club this guy is a 3 star , maybe because u have a lot players for that position or ssomething like that , i feel it that way
"third eye opening".-...ehm, did NOT expect that in a FM video, but aite xD Fantastic video though. Edit: I first I thought it might have something to do with what kinda position they play at, and maybe what kinda football club they are in general. As I'd imagine Porto would value a defensive player higher than an attacking player, whilst lets say old Lona would rate a guy that could pass for days higher than a counter-attack player. But alas, I guess.
This does make the game better Z, proves that CA and PA effect the overall star ratings but it can depend on so much *********************************** I conclude that real game time and/loan time earlier in a career would boost this up vs just sitting in the u-19s lots of spinning plates… throw in injuries and the players personality and it’s a tricky game man. Love the channel Big Dog. Love from Liverpool, England ❤
Kind of new to the game and watching you and other creators has helped alot I started a authentic save with Chelsea no cash and injury FC lol and managed to get somewhere and win a Europa league so far thanks for the great content
I have persist with 3 star 2 cb in my 10 year campaign with awsome stats. First one consistently pockets haland as he is one of the few cbs with a combination of high pace and str. This guy went on to become my captain and his stars eventually rise to 4
@@JackDFrost-mb7li the star rating provided in the players best position is also done based on who else is in the team and via whatever coach you have assigned. They can change as well depending on those. I’ve had a 4 star player 1 year suddenly become 2 stars because of all the better players and coaches I’ve brought in
Had the same issue. From what i can observe, most potential abilities don't get fulfilled. i.e. Someone with a 100 CA/150 PA ends up with 140 CA/150 PA meanwhile someone with a 100 CA and 145 CA ends up with 145 CA/145PA. Hence the reason for the star rating.(Which is varying as CA improves)
If your coaches and facilities are bad then sure. If not 99% of players you give reasonable game time to will reach their potential. Players can get to 140 CA by 17.
Many, Many years ago in the days of CM 01/02 it was discovered that there were metrics called 'Intrinsic Values' built into the attributes system so that the highest rating was not actually the '20' that you could see on the screen but a hidden number between 0 - 123 ( in the coding system 124 was actually worse than 0 - don't ask) which led to the 'freak' unknown players that everybody remembers. So for example Cheltenham Town's Mike Duff 's Tackling rating was actually a 66 and he was one of the greatest Full Backs of all time while Greek Third Division maestro Anastasios Skalidis had a 115 for finishing and would score a thousand goals at the highest levels of football if you could prise him away from his beloved Chania.....the best scouts in the game would never find those players or rate them very highly and I think some vestige of that is still in the star ratings today.
Is there a way to see historical scouting you have done on a player? Like last season this is where we had this player? Other than loading the save from back then?
Yeah I've noticed this. I've also noticed that it feels like players are developing a lot more in the youth teams than they used to. Bringing them up early as I used to doesn't seem to work. Now I let them stew in the U19s until they have 2,5 stars or so.
Yeah I used to track CA growth on my players in FM23 and some grew by 20+ points per season so reaching their potential by 17 if used in first team from 15/16. Does seem like they have a higher ceiling in youth teams now (perhaps they adjusted the way reputations of youth teams are calculated) so it is better to keep players there than loan them to 3rd/4th tier clubs but I'd need to test that.
@michaelh878 exactly. Most of my players used to reach their CAP at 19-21 in the last few years because I took them up straight from the youth intake. But this year it just feels like they grow better if I let them spend that first year in the youth team. Wish Z had done some experiments this year as well. But I'm guessing a LOT of videos are going to be made on next year's game.
I'm managing a team constantly in the CL and winning league titles yet whenever I see a 3 star potential dude, I discard without even looking at them. I really need to start looking at every player I scout but it just takes too long. What I do now is I do 3 recruitment focuses, team reports on the players who appear, scout all 5 star dudes for 1 week UNTIL extensive and then get my best scout to do a final 1 week scout. After that if they are 4 star or higher and have more pros than cons, I try to sign. Might start looking at the 3.5 star dudes now though as well.
I think that what your staff does is evaluate the player potential to evolve. Just one ex: Player 1 - CA 80 - PA 150 - Professionalism 8 - Ambition 9 - 3,5 Stars Player 2 - CA 80 - PA 140 - Professionalism 16 - Ambition 15 - 4 Stars And offcourse other skills might be involved too
I have been playing Manager (and Championship Manager) since 1992. And I have ALWAYS bought talent based on their stats/attributes. Don't even remember when the "star" system was added, but I have never used it. It has been clear for years that the system hasn't worked properly.
Started in CM99. Stats were not that important then, because the devs claimed a league 2 player with 20 Heading is not as good as a Beckham's Heading of 9 because of the league's standards or something nonsensical. The all important stat is the CA. It caused many old-time players to gravitate towards the CA/PA argument. My last FM before FM20 is FM06. It's more or less the same - a world-beater is a world beater (high CA). The thing is, in FM06, a world-beater's stats may not look fantastic, but hell, the avg ratings are at least 7s (no decimal still, i remembered. Would sub a player at 8, just to bump his avg ratings further) ... FM20, things have changed ... seems that stats are really more important, perhaps because of the match game engine. Still, it bugs the hell out of me when a Winger with 6 Heading and 9 Jumping can head in ~20 goals in a 40-match season. *shrugs🤷♂
It would be interesting if you compared the players "hidden attributes" (Professionalism, Pressure, Injury-Prone etc). As maybe that has a certain effect to the star ratings too? You can get players with 200 PA - but if their hidden stats are awful, they never reach their potential, and even if they do, they still do not play to the level of their ability.
I saw this effect a couple weeks back in my save when I bought a Finnish 17-year-old with five-star potential, only to arrive at my club with three-star potential. I said "Screw this BS", opened up the editor and bumped his PA up from 120 to 180 or something. Lo and behold, the three-star PA rating didn't change. No matter what I did.
this is so true, there was a striker i signed from mexico who was 2 stars but got 50 goals the season before i signed him, and 20 in the prem in his first season.
The personality of the player also plays a role in the potential ability. For example, if the player is a model citizen and a wonderkid, it is most likely to have a bigger potential ability and, therefore, to achive it due to his personality, and also thats why he might get more stars than a player that has more potential and a worst personality
So I always figured the 0-200 stat was their likelihood to improve. ie the swiftness of progression possible, not a cap they would reach and then stop improving. That would bias how the potential stars are reflected. So a 2 star player with 3 star potenial is equivalent to a 1 star player with 4 star potential, just the former has already developed that far, but that the later could develop faster and reach the same ultimate ability rating. But you've also missed out the phantom bias you're observing, is probably player reputation. I've seen kids grow 1+ stars just because they got covered in the media, and while I knew they didn't have such potential before, the clubs sniffing for a snap up didn't.
I started playing FM for the first time this year and was way too focused on star ratings at the beginning. I ended up with a 1,77cm Colombian GK with 3 Aerial Reach who was ironically called Niño. He actually did alright in terms of average match ratings so I was able to make a huge profit on him, now Arsenal is always missing out on CL due to him being behind the sticks there lmao
yearly star rating video
Yes but I feel they are even more inaccurate this year.
Scout ratings also seem to be quite inaccurate too
@@BawdyBadgerThey seem wildly inaccurate.
@@Herosennin i've had scout reports giving a player a C rating yet when I look at them they have exactly the stats I want, all positive comments and some negative that don't matter. Yet they are cheaper too.
Because in League 2 i'm really gonna spend £15m on a "Good backup player". Yet I spot a potential regular starter at £10k
I'm going to experiment with filtering by attributes I want instead and use the scouts to spot them.
It's a tradition
@@Herosennin I cannot find CA column in this game. Please help me someone
So true. I have a 19 year old player that my staff say that he had fulfilled his pa while in reality he kept on improving so I checked with the editor and he had 38(!) more pa to fulfill
interesting, what was your scout from the reports judging potential and their professionalism etd? If you have a save game file from the time it happened and could edit your scout to 20 on judging potential and made his hidden attributes good would it be the same or would they be more accurate?
then i guess you could conclude that it's down to a bit of nuance in the abilities of coaches or whether it's a bug that clearly needs addressing. or maybe SI could claim well in real life no one truly knows the potential of players.
i had a similar thing with a newgen from my youth intake, they had 5 stars potential and all of my scouts and head of youth are really good. then after about 1 month his potential went down to 2.5 stars so i looked in the game editor too, they report was accurately downgraded as he was at like 95 PA.
@@Writeous0ne the coach who judged him has a really high player ability and potential judging so I guess it’s about his hidden attributes and personality
It’s meant to be inaccurate tbh it’s just a staff member’s opinion just like in real life that’s why you hire the best staff
@@2tecci333 Exactly. The whole point of being a manager is the unknown.
Another HUGE factor even more important than scouts attributes is reputation. You can find 2.5 star guys with same CA as 4 star... and it's all because the 2.5 star has 2 star rep while the 4 star has 4 star rep. Its like real life reputation is everything.
Its also the reason you sign a unknown youngster for 10mil and his transfer value instantly goes up by x 5 if your playing in a big league.
3:10 From memory, FM deliberately screws up the potentional star ratings of under 18s in order to stop people buying up all the 16 year old wonderkids early enough that they can qualify as "Home Grown at club". Not sure of the numbers but at 16 years old the star rating could be out by (say) 2 stars but as they get closer to being 18 years old, this "up to 2-stars out" variable shrinks so that the coach / scout starts to give judgement based upon their scouting ability.
I think also narritvely there is also the Freddy Adu effect where everyone thought he was a potential ability of 190 as a 15 year old but he only actually turned into a 140 PA player in real life. Real scouts in real life can still seriously misjudge the potential of players when really, really young.
yeah, i've had 5star newgens before and they end up as 2.5 star. and yes it happens after about a month, basically it becomes accurate after the ability to poach them is gone.
also, lets be fair. This is the realistic way of doing it - the number of players IRL who come through and accurately fulfil what scouts say they should fulfil is likely very small - and that goes up as well as down.
For like the last 10 years I always did it like this:
I never cared too much about the potantial that was shown, I cared more about the comment the scout/hoyd/whoever gave. Like "he can develop significant in the future" etc. . That in combination with personality, determination and work rate and I very rarely get blindsighted.
Like I just found a left back from cap verde that was only shown as 2 1/2-3 star potential but the stuff i care more about all looked nice so I signed him for 2 million. Signed him at 17 and he started developing like mad so I caved in and checked him in the editor and boom - 192 PA.
I've never seen my Scout reports giving he can develop significantly I've seen can improve a lot, Maybe I've just not been lucky enough
@@TheDangermouse999there definitely is another step above “can improve a lot”. Don’t know what the saying exactly will be as I play in German. If translated that, it would say: „can improve by worlds“
@@DepriemiertesSchnitz very interesting. I will have to pay close attention a bit more See if I spot anything else .
yes i always looked at the text which said "Decent serie A" or whatever and have signed quite a few 2 and a half star serie A players who have gone on to be sold for mega big bucks value.
This is the way!
Looks like PA judged is CA plus age plus personality. Which is very realistic and logical.
Yeah but that doesn’t make a ‘shocking’ video
Which is why he deliberately left out personalities, wouldn't be a video then
💯🎯
Nah what is shown in this video is the lower the CA the more the game believes they wont make it to the high end of the PA. So when he increased the CA then the PA star went up as it now believes he can reach it. So basically any 15-16-17 year old who looks good and has stats you like but you see 2-3 PA stars you just ignore and help them grow then decide at 18-19-20-21-22 sometime between these years you decide if you should cut or keep going. So instead of hiring and firing youth on the stars you do it based on the stats and if you like the look of the player.
@@xazarl3381 yes, that is what has been shown in the video but the fact that Ibrahimovic is fairly determined and Kusi Asare is Balanced (I am talking about Personalities) makes a lot of difference in terms of Player development. Fairly Determined is a pretty decent Personality with good Hidden Attributes but Balanced‘s Hidden Attributes can be very very bad. Balanced is used in FM‘s data banks to kind of hide a bad personality to not insult the real life player. Only regens can have a red or orange personality in their report which doesn‘t mean that every real life player has a good personality. That‘s most likely the reason for the different potential ability rating
Spotted a possible mistake in the video:
When you change player/staff attributes, you also have to adjust his CA rating to match the RCA rating in the editor. Then you have to wait till the games ticks over(this can be few ingame days, it can also be a few ingame weeks) for teh changes to take effect. If you don't match the CA with the RCA, then the game will adjust the attributes of the players/staff to match the RCA in the editor.
Dont you also have to adjust the staffs rca, if you change them?
@@marvinehre9770
These are the rules I know of in the editor both for players and staff:
-CA/RCA can never higher then PA
-RCA is a value the editor will give you based on attribute value, playable positions value and weaker foot value.
-AFAIK hidden attributes don't play a role for CA/RCA.
-If you only change the RCA, with the next tick, the game will spend these points(the difference between CA and RCA) towards every attribute that relates to CA.
-If you change attributes, the editor will suggest a RCA in the editor. You then need to match the CA with the RCA. If you do not match the CA with RCA, with the next tick, the game will change attributes back to the CA value given in the editor. This will again be done with every attribute related to CA, not just the ones you changed.
Forgot to mention that I'm still playing FM21 not 24.
So, what could be added: the younger the players the more the PA is distorted in the stars, as less is known about them and there are more outliers. As they get older, 18-19-20, the PA starts to adjust, in my experience and from 22 it is more reliable.
And other things, like form, position (goalkeepers tend to be lower rated in general, for example), personality, etc. influence the star ratings as well.
So these will always be subjective.
Was going to comment here. Most of your words are mine too. I dont peek at CA/PA, so I need the star ratings to play. The stars are mostly reliable to me, esp after 22yo like you said. A team of 3*-ers sprinkled with a few 4-5*-ers in the spine can win you the league if you are good. An longtime scout who knows your tactics and recommends a 5* after 22yo? A MUST SIGN. (After 30+ years and now the number one club in Europe maybe the world, trust me, the number of 5* players can be counted by just one hand sometimes.) Maybe it's just my biased opinion, but ... i like to think the coaches considered the TACTIC you used when "star-ing" the players too.
However, most of the players must have good Personality. I swear by Professionalism, but this is proven by so many folks already. Moreover, I play FM20, so the devs may not have screwed with the star ratings to prevent wonderkids hoarding. *shrugs 🤷♂
I think not only is the position relevant but also the preferred role e.g. Mezzala, Ball Winning Mid, Deep Lying Playmaker etc. and there is probably something hidden in the code that affects the multiplier of PA based on those roles knowing what most players use in their tactics and probably has a lower multiplier for the lesser used roles and lower for the most commonly used so that "players" start using different tactics each version of the game and try to keep things from becoming meta. Make players think and adjust. That is what I would do if I was one of the SI programmers.
I agree with you in that I also like that it's a bit random. I like the fact that I might give a youngster a chance that isn't rated highly but has a chance to become great and then does. I've seen it happen multiple times where a player out ranks their predicted potential (in terms of star rating) and it's always an awesome surprise. Feels like I got a diamond in the rough.
And yeah, you touched on the important part at the end and it's a big part of the reason why I don't use the editor to look up CA/PA: sign players with the attributes you want. When I'm building a team I usually have an idea of what sort of team I want: strong, tall, intelligent players combined with a couple incredibly technical forwards/wingers. I then scout looking for these types of players. I remember signing Lorenzo Lucca on FM22 for Milan even though he had 2.5 stars. Man scored like 20 goals every season for me because he fit directly in the play style I liked to use according to his attributes.
When looking for young players now I'm more interested in their 'team fit' on the reports, as well as the hidden stuff like big matches, professionalism, etc. And there are red flags for certain positions (never sign a full back who is 'poor in the air' for instance).
True. Jumping is much more important for fullbacks than center backs in the current match engine which is crazy.
Have a 15yr goalie who is “2*PA” but checked genie scout has a PA of 160 because I was curious why my youth day intake said a very very good keeper.
Interesting to see hear this though
That is an interesting take on why youth intake seems to lie about a great intake class with a bunch of low star players
@@iambicpentakill971it gets even stranger I got a player with PA198 who is actually rated 5*PA and he’s a CAM/ST came through same youth intake
Regarding the CA differentials between Coman and Neuer and such, is there a chance that positional strength is factored in, i.e Coman is a three star player for Bayern when compared with the forward/wing alternatives whereas Neuer is being compared with the goalkeeping alternatives who are, in Bayern's case, significantly weaker than the players Coman would be compared with?
I believe this is true. Star ratings of a player do change if you change their position or role.
Yeah this is what I thought. Star ratings aren't reflective of just the PA, but more the PA when compared to other players in that position in the club. I could be wrong though
@@willza0112 yeah. Obviously there is some weight on star rating across the entire team in terms of ability but if you put Harry Kane in central midfield, his star rating will drop massively cos he's being compared to actual central midfielders that are natural in that positions and have better attributes for that position/role.
Likewise with Kusi-Asare being compared with Kane so his PA stars will be much lower than Ibrahimovic v Coman. I've always viewed stars as "this is how good the player can be" whereas if the player is being compared to a Messi caliber player his PA stars are unlikely be above 3. Wonder if it's worth signing older players just to use as a gauge for your youth team
That's true yes.
What I learnt: my beloved wonderkid from my FM24 save, Jonah Kusi-Asare has actually now signed for Bayern in real life, while I got him for 2 million euros before from AIK ... 😃
I enjoy the variance and mystery within the game - I don’t want to see exact values. You can optimise the fun out of it and the amount of times I see people in the community worrying about EXACT PA values just makes me long for the day where that player that’s being griped over would have been allowed to create his own story within that game world. However, the user doesn’t allow that these days because they’re always trying to optimise the shit out of everything for the sake of the highest integer.
Is it linked to position since star ratings reflect your squad? E.g Harry Kane is a 4.5* striker in the team with a potential of 180+. Kusi Asare will never get to that level so they can't say he will ever be a 5* striker. Ibrahimovic, meanwhile, may be 4.5* compared to the best winger which is Sane, who has a much closer PA to Kusi Asare than Kane does and is currently a 4* player.
A decent experiment to test this correlation would be to change Neuer (and the other GKs) PA/CA to 100. And then change a youth GK's PA to 120 (who probably has 2* or something currently.) 120 should not be a 5* player generally but perhaps it may be a 5* player when compared to the GK options currently in the squad.
Played it since I was 13 (champMan) to now 34 and starts still run my life. I can't help but go off them
The star rating PA is still the best way to establish how good a player could get. I think the variables on the ratings are still not significant enough. I would say it's too precise. Don't ignore the stars, just make sure you use the best staff and scout many times and obviously look at the player attributes too...
Was going to comment here ... a cut-and-paste reply here - I dont peek at CA/PA, so I need the star ratings to play. The stars are mostly reliable to me, esp after 22yo. A team of 3*-ers sprinkled with a few 4-5*-ers in the spine can win you the league if you are good. An longtime scout who knows your tactics and recommends a 5* after 22yo? A MUST SIGN. (After 30+ years and now the number one club in Europe maybe the world, trust me, the number of 5* players can be counted by just one hand sometimes.) Maybe it's just my biased opinion, but ... i like to think the coaches considered the TACTIC you used when "star-ing" the players too.
However, most of the players must have good Personality. I swear by Professionalism, but this is proven by so many folks already. Moreover, I play FM20, so the devs likely have not screwed with the star ratings to prevent wonderkids hoarding. *shrugs 🤷♂
@@Chengyuan79I wouldn't agree with that. There are a lot of players with attributes in the wrong places who aren't worth signing even with 5*. I've got rid of a player with 200PA. Also I think people obssess about personality too much. I massively overperform (made last 16 of champions league with a team with a weekly budget of 200k for example) and never look at personality.
@michaelh878 not denying what you said. But after seeing the Meta attributes, just get Pacy and Strong players. Those are the "right-er" attributes. My best SC was a 12 Finishing guy. And, of course he can Head a ball. 😅😅😅⚽️
The odd few players with a "bad" Personality is fine, if they have the freaking ability to back it up. I used to love to say this too - those Dislike-Big-Matches SCs are the ones who scored the CL winning goals for me. 😅😅😅 Over the years, their personality will mold very similar to the squads anyway too.
But for winning and winning titles after titles, IMHumbleO you need a team of Professional players. They can have low-ish Determination, etc, but Professionals are, well, Professionals. 🤷♂️😅
@michaelh878 oops, maybe not have replied to your 200PA guy ... if he has like 18 Pace, he would still work as a SC, AF. I don't look at CA/PA, so I cannot answer if a 200 CA player is a 5* player actually.
And, that's the point - they are not the exact same thing. 😌🙏㊗️🪷
@@Chengyuan79 Yeah he was definitely 5 star. A slowish deep lying playmaker with very high, meaningless mentals. Also had a very high CA striker who I sold to Hertha for 350mil who took them from being champions to being relegation candidates as he was also slow and the AI didn't know how to use him.
Everyone's been doing those videos about star ratings being unreliable for quite some time now. What I would really love to see instead is a proper video on how to analyse players according to their attributes (and I'm not talking wonderkids here, because most of us players don't have those constantly in our teams, especially while in the lower leagues)
I think the stars are pretty reliable 😂
What I got from comments:
- Their stars might be lower than their PA because the coach thinks they won't reach their full potential. Even if their PA is 180, if they are still CA 80 then they have way too much to improve, probably even under the best circumstances they won't be able to reach it.
- Stars depend on reputation. If the player hasn't accomplished much during their academy years and their reputation is very low, the coach will be inclined to think they aren't very good and will under value them. The same happens with over-accomplishers being overvalued.
- Position could also influence the stars. If there are many good strikers in your team and league, the youth strikers may have less stars (correct me if I'm wrong).
- Form also influences the stars. When a player is in very good form he will be valued higher both in CA and PA, so it's possible that hidden gems have low stars because they aren't playing well or playing at all.
I guess we will just have to give everyone a chance to impress then!
Yeah I have Pickford using an old database and he is 1.5 stars CA and PA because he got no game time at Sunderland and Burton but I know he has pretty high PA.
The minute I stopped deciding the starters on star rating and learned how to analyze a players stats and determine who is better, I actually started winning consistently, it’s crazy how bad star rating can be once you get in to the weeds of a save.
Videos like this make it so much easier to understand the game. I don't like using editors to find ratings, I prefer vanilla, so this was a massive help. Thanks Zealand 👍👌
I'm pretty sure the reputation of the player and versatility also affects how good the stars are.
i really realy want next FM remove this rating. and just provide data and reports like true scouting. Also change potential to be floating overtime in some degree depending more on game events than predefined number, like experian, wins, with whom they play etc.
Current system is not fun and feels boring being almost same for ~10 years
Is it not based on other factors if they'll hit the top potential? Things like professionalism and determination too. Ibrahimovic might have much higher hidden stats than the other lads.
I was thinking the same like maybe injury prone might affect it
I have a HSV save where "Glatzel" is like half a professional potential, and he had already reached that, when i played him he played like a worldclass player! 17 goals, 12 assists in one season (as a attacking midfield btw) and now i have the HSV team promoted to bundesliga 1, where he is still cooking!
Star rating also depends on how useful the players stats are for that position. Eg a CB with 14 shooting may have a higher CA but less stars than another player with better defending stats but lower overall CA
@5:30 it's cool yes, only issue is in real life you would get much more data, physical with your own eyes data to base opinions on. In FM you obviously don't see any of this, you get a taining score, you don't obviously see how they train, you get a personality type, you don't actually see how they are. In FM you go of raw numbers which makes the random aspect a little less rewarding.
That said it's good that staff members can be wrong and human error is simulated. I didn't realise the range was quite as drastic as this demonstration though but it does explain why last night when searching for goalkeepers why I was getting so confused based upon various factors in the reports I was seeing
In one of my saves, where my squad is completely 175+ PA a 148 PA youth player got a 5 star rating...
Reputation has a big input on the star ratings. If you revisit this in the future, alter the reputations and watch the stars change.
The player who was down the list will likely not played much youth football. So he can't gain a reputation. A player CA88/PA132 would be starting youth football ahead of CA60/PA150. plus the gap between the CA and PA factors in. in the first player there's a difference of 44 ability and the 2nd player has a gap of 90. One player is going to be more likely to get to their full potential and that's also why your staff will rate them higher. Playing the odds.
Scout ratings and team report dont depend only on CA/PA, they also depend on key atributes and total sum of atributes
For example, you might have a 155 defender with excellent technique but mediocre defending stats and compared to a 140 player with poor texhnoque but good defence report will likely show 140 is better for that position. Thats why looking at position-relevant atributes is also important, where DC , AF and W are the most specific positions in this regard
I've always ignored the stars for the most part. I learned this back in FM14. To pick my players, I simply highlighted the attributes for the role I was planning to play them in, add them together, and whoever was the highest was my guy. My all time best striker was a 3-star player and had a higher number in 8 of the 10 attributes for advanced forward than the 4-star guy.
It was my understanding(and this video pretty much confirms it) that the potential ability star rating doesn't equate to PA, but in fact to CA the player is calculated to reach under the current circumstances. That's why the game has always rated players who have a big difference between CA and PA quite poorly. Doesn't matter if a player has 200PA if all they're ever gonna reach is 140.
Unpopular Opinion - I still make my decisions based on star ratings because I feel like that's more realistic, not only to sign but to bench or sell players. It makes the game a tidy bit harder and that's how I like it.
However it's still important to know things are even messier than I initially thought
Hi-five. It's (almost) the only thing we have if we do not peek at the CA/PA. After a while, you would figure out that the stars are just not that accurate for kids (it is 100% accurate for 5* peak players if you run the best club in Europe), and use other things. Just loan the kids out and see how they fare, 5* or 3* ones). Avg ratings is my other thing. I dont know how to measure 17 Pace in real life, so I never scouted with specific attributes. Instead, I change the Role of the player within the tactic, then see if it produces results.
The one thing I wanna bring up is that my biased view is that the coaches look at your TACTIC while giving the star ratings as well.
Could it be that Jonah Kusi-Asare is being judged against the ability of the best player in the team in that position (Harry Kane) and that's why his star rating would be lower regardless of actual potential as well?
How do you show current ability stats in game?
not sure if this is a thing but a lot of my young players who go on to be world class seem to have different animations in the match sometimes
Yup. I ran a test on my game. A player in my U18's I hadn't really ever noticed. Not great stats, only 3 star. Checked the editor and he was 170 PA, with a good personality.
The posicion and role of the player is important too, thats why a 150 PA goalkeeper is 4 or 5 stars and a 150 PA striker is 3 or 4
I remember in ye olde FMs couple of years ago attributes had a big impact on CA/PA. The rule of thumb was: if the key attributes are above or below 10. If below - no matter how high PA the player has, he won't be a star player in his role. So I always check player's attributes in my scouts' reports on A+ prospects to see for myself how many of their positional key attributes are above/below 10
I like the star system better tbh. CA and especially PA is something that we aren't really supposed to see, but rather a core mechanic to keep the players at appropriate levels and within certain ranges.
Just like in real life potential estimates are often wrong. Players who are young and show exceptional skill ("high CA") are presumed to have a high potential, even though most of them flop. Or players who are well known, sons of football legends etc. tend to be overvalued. Then you have players who bloom a bit later. Think Chelsea rejects for example, Salah and de Bruyne among them. The club didn't think they had world class potential at the time.
Point is we think way too mechanistically about these indicators in FM, like 180-200 PA at Bayern should be 5 stars, 170-180 4,5 and so on... The game wouldn't be half as fun, too much certainty is not a good thing.
As Z said, trust your eyes, trust the development, observe how they perform. It's a whole new world once you start playing the game that way.
I think this just shows how realistic the game is. I try to go by how the players play. I've had low star guys become some of my best players in a save.
FM20 (still playing) - have a maybe 4.5* PA acad kid who I mistakenly retrained into all midfield positions. It all cost CA points, and he dropped into a 3* CA "average" player by 21yo. Still, because of the HGC ruling, he would always be around. Sadly, except for his Workrate 16 and Teamwork 18, his other attributes were just 13-ish ...
But the thing is, he did really, really well. Maybe I mostly rotate him vs weaker teams (and he plays in the best club in Europe by then, so he doesnt have lousy teammates), but his avg ratings is showing that this is not a player been carried. At his 28-29yo peak, his CA went back to the 4.5* that they said he was 10+ years ago, and also with the exact same lousy attributes, he can start big matches if I so choose without much troubles.
However, the most important indicator seems to be him been called up to the Italy setup despite never been a regular. And, he is reaping the benefit of his versatility at 32yo, where he plays in ML despite not playing any matches for 1 month. He is "just" 3*. But I would argue that a 3*-er for the best team in Europe is no rubbish guy as well.
I swear by stars, because I understand that they are relative to a lot of factors. Once people accepts so, stars became a really good guide, and like you said, actually adds to the realism of the game instead of saying, I only buy players with 17 Pace. How does that translate into real life? The guy can run at 35km/hr? That's my take at least.
I think the thing that isn’t communicated well in the game is that the PA stars include an estimate of how likely the player is to develop fully. A younger player with a higher CA is obviously more likely to hit their ceiling than a player with a larger gap between current and potential. The stars reflect this. I think the star system is actually a lot better and more useful than most creators give it credit for. CA/PA are not the be all and end all of a player’s production/usefulness, as you touched on.
News! I found it not to be a lie. Simply hidden attributes have an influence. An 18 y.o. player with 200 PA but 1 in ambition, professionalism, pressure, etc, etc won't have more than 3 stars in a top team. On the other hand, a 150 PA with 20 in all good hidden attributes and 1 in all the bad ones will have at least 4 stars. Also, where attributes are placed regarding its role and position will affect too
It also involves the tactics and roles, since even on the first team, sometimes you might play with a regista, and the players on your team that are midfielders won't be too good at that role, thus dropping their CA . Role proficiency or multiple roles ability is important when doing new signings or cleaning house.
This is actually pretty realistic. In real life scouts get it wrong all the time who is a big talent and who is not. Obviously the better you get the more accurate they get, but nobody can tell exactly how good someone is gonna become. Some players mature early and some later
This is so true. My club normally has excellent recruitment, but we recently broke our transfer record to sign a guy who was a massive flop and now he's on loan with an option to buy at a club in the league below
@@SuperMickyChow that’s what I’m saying. Even the best get it wrong. I mean sure you can probably tell if someone could become good. But how good? UCL level? UEL level? PL level? It has to also be harder the younger a player is. Like how do you determine how good a 15 year old could become. They haven’t even finished growing yet 🤦♂️
@fredtholarp563 Plus, look at someone like Jamie Vardy - wasn't considered a good player until he was 25 and went from non-league Fleetwood to Championship Leicester, who then went on to win the Premier league thanks to his goalscoring.
I've learned to ignore the star ratings and just look at the actual pros and cons from the scout reports. Additionally, if a player looks like he might be promising from the first full scout report, I'll ask another scout to check him out and see whether they give the same pros & cons or not.
As as decades long player of this game, I actually love the star ratings, but I think a bit of literacy of what they represent is very important in interpreting what they mean. I like star ratings as a guide for where the player sits within my team whether thats current or potential. I also have a feeling that the staff member giving you the report take other things into account, obvious one being form, but I think they look for the hidden stats too including personality - you can get a guage of this if you look at the coach report and see the pros and cons.
For me the attributes have a similar importance as the star ratings because whilst on paper a player can look really good, you get them in the match engine and it just doesn't work. I like to think the best way to evaluate a player is look at the star rating/coach report, weigh up the attributes, but learn how the player is by playing them.
Potential star ratings are constantly changing over the coarse of a long term save, and the only way to really learn how good a player is to develop them and play them, you will soon find out how far they can go.
Thanks for vid Zealand! Great work as always.
As a relative newcomer to Football Manager, i'm now terrified and lost 🤣 my brain is swimming. Are the current ability and potential ability number scores something that should be switched on in general?
In the vanilla base game these are hidden attributes.
You can see them if you buy and use the game editor, though.
Not as intended by SI. But if you feel you want to, do it. If you follow the advice and your eyes (look at the actual attributes, look at how players develop), you can find good players. There will still be mistakes, but that's part of life. If a player looks good for his age.
Also, ask different scouts to scout the player, to get several opinions. Scout them several times.
It requires buying the in-game editor (like £5 I think). Vast majority of players don't use it (or even know it exists) so it's not something that "should" be switched on, but if you think it'd improve your playing experience then go ahead. Play the game the way you want to play it.
My advice is play the game and enjoy it. Learn as you go and fail a couple times. When you start again you'll start getting use to what to look for. Everyone plays and learns differently, it takes time but you'll be a master in no time.
As a new player, I wouldn't worry about this. You can still use the ratings as a rough guide, and as you become more familiar with the game you will get better at noticing stuff like this.
Also, if it matters to you, it's more realistic if you don't buy the editor.
I first started playing championship manager 3. So, as a super hardcore long term player, I have to say I didn't know that and you were right: it blew my mind. kuddos for your curiosity, zeeland. cheers!
For me this is a realistic feature of our beloved game. It is complicated to tell how good a player will be in the future. A lot of people believed that Dele Alli will be one of England's best players when he was 20 and now he has not played a game of football for more than a year after being loaned out to Besiktas. Haaland was a beast of a striker when he was still 19 and he showed how good he can be when he has still at Salzburg, a lot of big teams had their eyes on him but only Dortmund decided to snap him up. Real Madrid were also looking for a striker at that time but they signed Luka Jovic instead for three times the amount of money Dortmund payed for Haaland.
I always calculate the average rating for a role the player is playing by adding up all the highlighted attributes and dividing by the number of the said attributes. Wish I had an app for this stuff in game :)
CA and PA are staple numbers in fm for decades now. High potential does not equate to a good player as there are hidden attributes in the game too, and what you said too, a striker with 20 long throws is worse than one with 20 in heading. Hidden attributes are consistency, important matches, dirtiness, versatility and inury proness. These directly affect matches, while there are some hidden attributes thats come in play outside matches, adaptibility, loyalty, sportsmanship, ambition, pressure, temperament, controversy and professionalism. Through testing, I found out that: consistency - self explanatory, high values means good form thru the season, dirtiness - how many cards he gets, injury proness- self explanatory, important matches - form in cups and continental games, versatility - learning new positions, adaptability - how fast can he settle in a new club, loyalty - higher values means he will be mroe likely to stay in the current club, sportsmanship - ?, temperament-?, ambition - number of specific moves he can learn, pressure - prolly for penalties and transfer drama, controversy - ? professionalism - how fast he gains ability scores, a 20 here means the player wil ldeveop very fast.
Aside from this, determination is a key attribute, a striker with 19 or 20 here will be a beast in most cases if he isn't some doofus in other attributes. Determination might seem insignificant but there are very few players with a 20 rating here. Young players under 21 will imporve in leaps and bounds as long as they get a taste of senior football, so if you want some 16 year old to gert good quick, give him 90 mins a season for the a team, and increase this slightly till he reaches 20. It is amazing how a single game a year can help out a kid. I've given up to 3 matches to kids who gained around 60 ability in 3 years compared to 30 if not played.
What I like to do is let my scouts identify players and I watch them grow in the scout reports on my shortlist, if they comeback with another positive report after 6+ months then I check their pa with the editor. I like to think with extended exposure we’ve gotten a better idea of their ceiling.
It’s my game and that’s how I enjoy it.
I noticed this too a couple of years ago while playing FM15. I was managing my boyhood club in Belgium and I had made them the most dominant team in the league over the last 10-15 years. In the cup I had to play against one of my local rivals who played in 3th division. Because they were my local rivals, I wanted to know what their team looked like and if they were able to climb back to 2nd and maybe even 1st division with their squad. I noticed a Dutch striker who was 16 years old that was their main man in attack. I looked at his stats and they looked quite impressive for a young guy. Scouted him and the report said: potential ability 1.5 stars... So I took my eyes of him until we had to play our cup game. And despite them losing 4-0 to my reserves, there was 1 guy catching my eye yet again. I decided to give it a go an bought him for €75k. He joined me in january and was my 4th striker. The last day of the transfer market, Liverpool triggered the transfer clause of my main striker and paid €25m for the guy. I played in a system with 2 attackers and in the next game after the transfer window, my then 2nd striker picked up a season ending injury. So my 16 year old had to play, no matter what... He made a good first impression with an assist in his first game where he was subbed in. Next game he had to start and scored 2 goals right away. He ended the season with about 10 goals and 5 assists in half a season. Next season I gave him his time to shine and he scored 20+ goals. From then on it only got better and from his 4th season onwards he always had more goals than he played games. Won the European Golden Boot 4 times in a row, got called up for the Dutch national team at the age of 19, became their highest ever scorer. Won the World Cup topscorer title 3 WC's in a row. And won the Ballon d'Or 4 times. I kept him his entire career (until I lost my save file when he was 32 years old). I still miss this guy... RIP Hans de Graaf😢
I have a 23 years old player that came from my youth academy, he was 4* PA and by 20 the coaches said that he was already at his peak (unlikely to improve), but he kept improving, just out of curiosity I checked his PA with the editor and the kid was at 144 CA with 173 PA
This is like wii play's pool reseting their 9 ball in a slightly random way every time to mimic real life
I think it's also about hidden attributes. I guess players with high professionalism, important matches, consistency and versatility might be more valuable. I don't think the stars are that wrong, maybe they are just factoring other stuff we have no idea about.
My take as well. I am pretending that the coaches take our TACTIC (perhaps their biased tactic too) into account as well when giving out the stars.
Because I dont peek at CA/PA, I have to use the stars. At the highest level, they work fine for me.
For me most important thing when i am scouting players is that they are not injury probe, and if they are not consistant i look for those who enjoy big matches
Great vids bro, really enjoy your content. Although, I was under the impression that the current ability of your best players effect the potential ability rating of youth. For example, on my save Shay Lacey was 18 with a 2 1/2* rating (clearly not true), but I had 3 4* ratings in the first team in the same position. In effect having Kane in your first team alters his chances of reaching that potential, hence the lower star, if Jonah moves clubs with a main striker with a lower rating, the staff would rate accordingly despite their ability to judge potential.
In my first save i had a winger in the 3liga. Two stars. This guy couldn't kick a ball to save his life but he was the fastest man in Germany and could run at that speed for days. I threw him on defensive winger and gave him a whole side of the pitch. That worked surprisingly well until the bundesliga.
I think the pros and cons may have an effect. Like for example one of players is said to be unmotivated and doesn't push himself at 15 and that could effect it
An UnAmbitious 5* kid would drop to 2 - 2.5* after 23yo. I can confirm this. Good personality is so important. Many tests were done and confirmed that Professionalism, then Ambition, then Determination, would determine if a player can hit full PA, with the usual development stuff like good training overall and playing suitable league level matches.
Me: fully scouts player and his c.a is 4.5 stars
Me: signs him and his c.a is 3.5 stars 💀💀
I had several players in my 'excellent' youth intake with PAs over 130. Hiding amongst them, rated as the star of my intake with 5 stars of potential, was a player with 55 PA that he had already almost filled out.
Hi Zealand. Great video! I would love to visualize these results to see how strong the relationships are with CA and PA by star level, and even see the correlation between judging potential and PA. Great wisdom re: using attributes. All the best! Stefan.
I think something which has a big impact on hitting that potential ability is Ambition and determination. Yes you cannot see the ambition stat but sometimes your scouts will allude to fact that a player is ambitious. So from my experience, the personality of the player matters. There are quite a few players in the world with amazing potential but just never hit it, they failed because of not being ambitious enough or determined. Then there are players who don't possess the amazing potential ability but more than make up for it in ambition and determination. Only my opinion.
Professionalism is even more important.
It's a good video. But it basically states the obvious. Of course, potential ability must always be interconnected with current ability. And of course they should only be seen as indicators. And that’s a great thing to exist in the game. For player evolution to feel organic and realistic they cannot be inseparable. In addition, it makes the game immensely better when it maintains uncertainty regarding a player.
I always evaluate based on performance. For example, I have strikers with 2 stars of current ability and potential ability who score 30 goals per season and others with 5 stars who score 6 or 7. This has more to do with the relationship between the tactical disposition of the team, what is asked of each player individually and their characteristics. A reflection of this is also the fact that a player on my team is fabulous and when he is sold, it doesn't happen on his new team.
I think the game is well done in its consideration of all these criteria and I don't think there's anything to change. What they need to address is how the game becomes when it tries to increase the difficulty. What I mean by this is that to put obstacles in our way, breaking victory cycles or preventing us from having many clean sheets, AI often makes ridiculous decisions to force defeat. There are 4 or 5 balls on the post per game, the permeable defenses with incredible errors with players bumping into each other, the additional time above what is supposed always biased, the goalkeepers with surreal movements, etc... Those are things where the game still sucks.
nod nod. Repeated to death, but I dont peek at CA/PA, so I use the stars as a guide. And I swear by them. Maybe it is different in FM20, but my 5* SC (which are so few and far in between when you became the best club in Europe) would be the 20+ goal scorer with a Finishing of 12 compared to a 4* SC with Pace/Finishing/etc of 16+ who cannot score ... My biased theory is that my coaches consider my TACTIC when giving me the star ratings too.
Avg ratings is another thing I swear by. It shows consistency, and it also shows that the player is ready to play well at that last league level he was in.
Finally, agreeing with the fake difficulty (aka FM-ed). Hitting the post multiple times every few matches to write the story that the mighty Milan has fallen to a minnor at the 2nd round of CL (and always the 2nd round), multiple times shows a script at work. Having said that, it does feel well when the script is written for your victory. I cannot deny that.
Yes, completely agree the star ratings do have other factors than just raw ability. I have a young Spanish player (Alex Mena) who came through my youth intake with PA as 3*. He made his debut for Spain at the age of 19 and I was wondering what on earth I'd missed. Taking into account his attributes, though - he's awesome. Does make me wonder how many I've let slip through the net now...
from personal experience of messing around with the editor and also just taking punts on cheap players, this *especially* applies to scout reports of players playing for particularly small or poor clubs. if you see a 16 year old with promising attributes at an amateur club, take a punt regardless of your scout report. it's brought me genuine world class players.
Dont be like a real life Man United, whose scouts veto-ed Ole's multiple attempts to bring a certain Haaland in ...
Interesting experiment, kinda makes sense when thinking about your video where you explains how many attributes a player might develop over their career. If a 16 year old has the potential of Messi but is currently a 75 current ability, then there is a good chance he will never develop enough to fulfill all that potential.
What’s really a mystery are the 18 year olds with 2.5 star current ability and 3.5 star potential. I always assumed those were wrong
IMHumbleO, in fact these are decent players who should be loaned out to play at the same league level as your club. While I swear by star ratings, I basically also understand that they in fact fluctuate (go up or down) like how a person is in real life ... still, 3* players are good enough players to win you the league. If they can hit 3.5*, actually they are very good squad players to keep around at their peak.
DISCLAIMER - I use 20/20 scouts and 19/20 coaches. I assumed coaches consider your TACTIC when rating players too. And, like everyone is saying, look at your preferred attributes, and your players should mostly have good personality types too. Ultimately, the avg ratings are the true "ratings". If a player can keep performing most of the time, he is a keeper. As in, someone to keep. 😅
I don't know about the newer games but in FM22 the rate of player improvement was in large part determined by Determination, Ambition, and Professionalism. The latter two attributes only visible with the editor. The personality could be scouted, which helps, but it's not the full picture. So, even if you played that player a lot, he may never have developed anywhere near the PA if those scores were low. So you can have a 190 PA player that developed into a 145 because his improvement rate was low. It would make sense that the player's scores on those 3 attributes contributed to the star rating and maybe explain the strange differences.
I think it depends on a lot of things. If you have good coaches and facilities they will nearly always reach their potential (sometimes at crazy ages like 17) no matter what but for lower teams then personality will matter.
Great video! One thing I think gets missed on potential stars is that I think they also pertain to the best player(s) you have on your team in the position, just like current stars do.
I am one of the people that sometimes uses the FM Scout. And last years game, I had on my shortlist a guy with 195 PA, but during his entire career, his CA never was over 180. It was the first time that I saw that in a game. Apart of trainings, would be nice to know what makes some players full fill their potentials, and others (Like the guy I mentioned), not.
do you know the stars are normally related for your club right ? the stars also mean something like , for your club this guy is a 3 star , maybe because u have a lot players for that position or ssomething like that , i feel it that way
very new to football manager, how did you manage to get the actual CA and PA number values? i can only seem to just find the star ratings
I think you need to purchase the in game editor to see these values
"third eye opening".-...ehm, did NOT expect that in a FM video, but aite xD
Fantastic video though.
Edit: I first I thought it might have something to do with what kinda position they play at, and maybe what kinda football club they are in general. As I'd imagine Porto would value a defensive player higher than an attacking player, whilst lets say old Lona would rate a guy that could pass for days higher than a counter-attack player. But alas, I guess.
This does make the game better Z,
proves that CA and PA effect the overall star ratings but it can depend on so much
***********************************
I conclude that real game time and/loan time earlier in a career would boost this up vs just sitting in the u-19s
lots of spinning plates…
throw in injuries and the players personality and it’s a tricky game man.
Love the channel Big Dog. Love from Liverpool, England ❤
Kind of new to the game and watching you and other creators has helped alot I started a authentic save with Chelsea no cash and injury FC lol and managed to get somewhere and win a Europa league so far thanks for the great content
I have persist with 3 star 2 cb in my 10 year campaign with awsome stats. First one consistently pockets haland as he is one of the few cbs with a combination of high pace and str. This guy went on to become my captain and his stars eventually rise to 4
Isn’t star rating also dependent on the position you play players? Star ratings do change when you change a players position or role
Yeah, but in this video what's being shown is the rating on regards to their best role, same when you go to a player's profile.
@@JackDFrost-mb7li the star rating provided in the players best position is also done based on who else is in the team and via whatever coach you have assigned. They can change as well depending on those. I’ve had a 4 star player 1 year suddenly become 2 stars because of all the better players and coaches I’ve brought in
How do you see CA/PA on a list like this? I have the in game editor but I cannot figure out how to show it quickly for all players
YOU‘RE TELLING ME I SOLD MY BELOVED YOUNGSTERS WITH GOOD CA FOR NO REASON
Had the same issue. From what i can observe, most potential abilities don't get fulfilled. i.e. Someone with a 100 CA/150 PA ends up with 140 CA/150 PA meanwhile someone with a 100 CA and 145 CA ends up with 145 CA/145PA.
Hence the reason for the star rating.(Which is varying as CA improves)
If your coaches and facilities are bad then sure. If not 99% of players you give reasonable game time to will reach their potential. Players can get to 140 CA by 17.
This is why I rely on the player attribute octagon to gauge overall ability before star ratings. It’s a summary of attributes.
It would seem that the potential star rating increases not only if their CA is high but also closer to their PA
Many, Many years ago in the days of CM 01/02 it was discovered that there were metrics called 'Intrinsic Values' built into the attributes system so that the highest rating was not actually the '20' that you could see on the screen but a hidden number between 0 - 123 ( in the coding system 124 was actually worse than 0 - don't ask) which led to the 'freak' unknown players that everybody remembers. So for example Cheltenham Town's Mike Duff 's Tackling rating was actually a 66 and he was one of the greatest Full Backs of all time while Greek Third Division maestro Anastasios Skalidis had a 115 for finishing and would score a thousand goals at the highest levels of football if you could prise him away from his beloved Chania.....the best scouts in the game would never find those players or rate them very highly and I think some vestige of that is still in the star ratings today.
In my save, a scout marked a player with 198 PA with two-star potential. The best player in my team had CA 155.
Is there a way to see historical scouting you have done on a player? Like last season this is where we had this player? Other than loading the save from back then?
Yeah I've noticed this. I've also noticed that it feels like players are developing a lot more in the youth teams than they used to. Bringing them up early as I used to doesn't seem to work. Now I let them stew in the U19s until they have 2,5 stars or so.
Yeah I used to track CA growth on my players in FM23 and some grew by 20+ points per season so reaching their potential by 17 if used in first team from 15/16. Does seem like they have a higher ceiling in youth teams now (perhaps they adjusted the way reputations of youth teams are calculated) so it is better to keep players there than loan them to 3rd/4th tier clubs but I'd need to test that.
@michaelh878 exactly. Most of my players used to reach their CAP at 19-21 in the last few years because I took them up straight from the youth intake. But this year it just feels like they grow better if I let them spend that first year in the youth team. Wish Z had done some experiments this year as well. But I'm guessing a LOT of videos are going to be made on next year's game.
I'm managing a team constantly in the CL and winning league titles yet whenever I see a 3 star potential dude, I discard without even looking at them. I really need to start looking at every player I scout but it just takes too long.
What I do now is I do 3 recruitment focuses, team reports on the players who appear, scout all 5 star dudes for 1 week UNTIL extensive and then get my best scout to do a final 1 week scout. After that if they are 4 star or higher and have more pros than cons, I try to sign.
Might start looking at the 3.5 star dudes now though as well.
would be a fun challenge to try and manage a team with staff that had zero ability to judge player ratings and potential.
I think that what your staff does is evaluate the player potential to evolve. Just one ex:
Player 1 - CA 80 - PA 150 - Professionalism 8 - Ambition 9 - 3,5 Stars
Player 2 - CA 80 - PA 140 - Professionalism 16 - Ambition 15 - 4 Stars
And offcourse other skills might be involved too
I have been playing Manager (and Championship Manager) since 1992. And I have ALWAYS bought talent based on their stats/attributes. Don't even remember when the "star" system was added, but I have never used it. It has been clear for years that the system hasn't worked properly.
Started in CM99. Stats were not that important then, because the devs claimed a league 2 player with 20 Heading is not as good as a Beckham's Heading of 9 because of the league's standards or something nonsensical. The all important stat is the CA. It caused many old-time players to gravitate towards the CA/PA argument. My last FM before FM20 is FM06. It's more or less the same - a world-beater is a world beater (high CA). The thing is, in FM06, a world-beater's stats may not look fantastic, but hell, the avg ratings are at least 7s (no decimal still, i remembered. Would sub a player at 8, just to bump his avg ratings further) ...
FM20, things have changed ... seems that stats are really more important, perhaps because of the match game engine. Still, it bugs the hell out of me when a Winger with 6 Heading and 9 Jumping can head in ~20 goals in a 40-match season. *shrugs🤷♂
It would be interesting if you compared the players "hidden attributes" (Professionalism, Pressure, Injury-Prone etc). As maybe that has a certain effect to the star ratings too?
You can get players with 200 PA - but if their hidden stats are awful, they never reach their potential, and even if they do, they still do not play to the level of their ability.
I saw this effect a couple weeks back in my save when I bought a Finnish 17-year-old with five-star potential, only to arrive at my club with three-star potential. I said "Screw this BS", opened up the editor and bumped his PA up from 120 to 180 or something. Lo and behold, the three-star PA rating didn't change. No matter what I did.
this is so true, there was a striker i signed from mexico who was 2 stars but got 50 goals the season before i signed him, and 20 in the prem in his first season.
I really like that Current ability affects the potential star ratings quite a bit. Makes a lot of sense to me.
The personality of the player also plays a role in the potential ability. For example, if the player is a model citizen and a wonderkid, it is most likely to have a bigger potential ability and, therefore, to achive it due to his personality, and also thats why he might get more stars than a player that has more potential and a worst personality
So I always figured the 0-200 stat was their likelihood to improve. ie the swiftness of progression possible, not a cap they would reach and then stop improving. That would bias how the potential stars are reflected. So a 2 star player with 3 star potenial is equivalent to a 1 star player with 4 star potential, just the former has already developed that far, but that the later could develop faster and reach the same ultimate ability rating.
But you've also missed out the phantom bias you're observing, is probably player reputation. I've seen kids grow 1+ stars just because they got covered in the media, and while I knew they didn't have such potential before, the clubs sniffing for a snap up didn't.
Can you make a video, about how to read the current attributes. Like, I can’t immediately tell, at what level a player is.
I started playing FM for the first time this year and was way too focused on star ratings at the beginning.
I ended up with a 1,77cm Colombian GK with 3 Aerial Reach who was ironically called Niño. He actually did alright in terms of average match ratings so I was able to make a huge profit on him, now Arsenal is always missing out on CL due to him being behind the sticks there lmao
I always use determination as a helping stat. High determination makes the potential able to go higher/get fulfilled
Just when I thought I’m getting the hang of this complicated game… this spanner in the works comes