I'm currently on a 5year save and managing KV Kortrijk, Belgian top division mid table team. But this problem I have has been going on ever since I started playing FM (on and off every year). I never really got into a save on fm, but this year I have a little more time and this is probably the longest save I ever had... But the problem is that I never really had to buy players to strengthen the squad. So now I find it really hard to know what players will give my team that something extra, which players are just good to have, and which I just shouldn't buy. I mostly rely on my scojts and such vut when i think its a decent player my scojts say otherwise... I'm in the transfer period right now, and really strugling to determine what players are good to buy for my team...
Trouble knowing the difference between a good and key player
- Thread starter jessefm
- Start date
- Replies 8
- Views 3K
There is no easy answer to this because it depends on what you are trying to do. Buying fairly developed players who won't necessarily improve much versus younger players with potential makes a difference.
Your scouts can only tell you so much. They can give you background information that simply looking at the player won't - scouting reports hint at things like injury proneness, consistency, and adaptability. They can compare the player to a current player and give you an idea of who is better. They can let you know if the player is likely to develop. But they can't tell you how the player would fit into your current tactical vision, let alone what you want to evolve it into. So relying on the scouts entirely is basically giving away one of your roles as a manager.
Who should you target? Players that make your side better. Players that fit how you want to play. The "better" player is very subjective, because its all about how a player fits. You might sign a wonderful, creative mastermind but if you have a hard-working side that requires everyone contribute in all phases, they might not fit very well. A big, strong target man with great finishing might not be ideal for a side based around possession and movement. They can work, but they may not be what works best.
Look at the players you have. Consider how well they perform. Then ask why they perform that way. Are you using them to their strengths? Are they performing as well as they could? If someone doesn't perform, or doesn't do so consistently, why not? Is it an issue with the player, the tactic, or the opposition?
Your scouts can only tell you so much. They can give you background information that simply looking at the player won't - scouting reports hint at things like injury proneness, consistency, and adaptability. They can compare the player to a current player and give you an idea of who is better. They can let you know if the player is likely to develop. But they can't tell you how the player would fit into your current tactical vision, let alone what you want to evolve it into. So relying on the scouts entirely is basically giving away one of your roles as a manager.
Who should you target? Players that make your side better. Players that fit how you want to play. The "better" player is very subjective, because its all about how a player fits. You might sign a wonderful, creative mastermind but if you have a hard-working side that requires everyone contribute in all phases, they might not fit very well. A big, strong target man with great finishing might not be ideal for a side based around possession and movement. They can work, but they may not be what works best.
Look at the players you have. Consider how well they perform. Then ask why they perform that way. Are you using them to their strengths? Are they performing as well as they could? If someone doesn't perform, or doesn't do so consistently, why not? Is it an issue with the player, the tactic, or the opposition?
Another thing is that I find it really hard and overwhelming to look at player's attributes. I find it hard to take all the attributes into account to determine if a player is good or not, but I guess that just comes with more experience playing the game. I know you can highligt the needed attributes for a role, but in fm17 you can only highlight the players best 4roles? And there are also attributes wich are important but not highlighted, I thought...
It does come with time and experience. I would definitely recommend reading some guides. The in-game descriptions aren't bad for roles, but not necessarily that clear. And some in-game descriptions for stuff is downright misleading. But thankfully there are plenty of guides and blogs you can find that will help tons. Places like the Higher Tempo Press have tons, and you will find plenty of knowledge on here if you dig around some threads.
I think there is still a way to look at the key attributes for other roles than the top four, but I'm in front of the game right now. If nothing else, you can change training focus and see what training for that given role focuses on (though that doesn't specify the duty, just the role).
There are some skills which are helpful / useful / always good to have, even if they aren't highlighted for a given role. Determination, for example. Always great to have a determined squad, as higher determination makes a player more willing to fight for a result (doesn't really impact player development like some people think). Teamwork and Workrate are also great to have, even if its not "needed" for some positions and roles. Same thing with pace - if you don't play a style that requires it, its not "necessary", but players who have it can add extra dynamics.
WJ
Member
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2014
- Messages
- 4,472
- Reaction score
- 8
- Points
- 38
Actually, this has been a fairly recent revelation. Determination is on equal terms with Professionalism and Ambition as far as development goes. This came from SI themselves, posted in the tactics section on SI.
WJ
Member
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2014
- Messages
- 4,472
- Reaction score
- 8
- Points
- 38
The whole thread deals with it here. The posts by Seb are all worth reading : https://community.sigames.com/topic/405653-determination/?do=findComment&comment=10882123
WJ
Member
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2014
- Messages
- 4,472
- Reaction score
- 8
- Points
- 38
Yeah, don't worry. It took everyone by surprise.
Seb posted in the Stupid Question thread there that yes, Determination = Professional = Ambition.